Secondary Education in Visual Arts
comments and observations by Renata Stadler
We can debate the pros and cons of having computers in the classroom (and we should) but at the end of the day the real message that needs to get out there is that technology in classrooms is so behind the times and we are dawning on an age where we will see them being implemented very quickly in the very near future. As teachers entering the workforce at the brink of a technological revolution we need to keep a completely open mind to the possibilities of what this will bring.
Already we can see that classrooms in one suburb look different to those in another and what we need to be prepared for is the very real possibility that in the next five or ten years our classrooms may be almost unrecognisable to what they look like today. Oliver (2002 pg. 1-2) notes that
“In recent times, factors have emerged which have strengthened and encouraged moves to adopt ICTs into classrooms and learning settings. These have included a growing need to explore efficiencies in terms of program delivery, the opportunities for flexible delivery provided by ICTs (eg. Oliver & Short, 1997); the capacity of technology to provide support for customized educational programs to meet the needs of individual learners (eg. Kennedy & McNaught, 1997); and the growing use of the Internet and WWW as tools for information access and communication (eg. Oliver & Towers, 1999).”
All of these needs will eventually out-way the obstacles such as lack of funding and lack of teacher training. Already new scheme teachers are either familiar with or have been trained in the use of computers to be used in an educational setting. Established teachers need to accept and take responsibility for any short comings they may have in this arena if nothing else but for the sake of their own survival.
The future is coming fast….learn how to swim or you may just drown.
Reference:
Oliver, R. (2002). The role of ICT in higher education for the 21st Century: ICT as a change agent for education. Paper presented at the HE21Conference, Curtin University, Miri, Sarawak.
Monkey Scribbles poses a question in her blog: “Are libraries obsolete?” I think the real question should be, “What will libraries look like in the future?”
Libraries have always been more than a place to check out books. They have also been a place to study, to work together with peers, and to read or work in a controlled and quiet environment. Even with the current generation’s emersion into the digital world they still have all these needs.
Perhaps libraries of the future will be filled with computers and a myriad of other technologies instead of books but the true nature of the library will remain for many years to come. As Dr Byrne notes, “Libraries bring people together; they stand for truth and reconciliation. Transcending time and place, libraries are houses of knowledge.”
Much of the focus in this blog has been on the use of computers within the classroom but I think and equally effective means of encouraging student learning is by using the computer to communicate with students and parents outside of schools hours.
As we know this generation of learners like to have the freedom to learn anywhere and anytime. By using tools such as blogs, wikis and online forums we can provide students with the tools to extend on their learning or catch up on missed classes by providing the work in a way that can be accessed remotely.
Additionally, it is also a very useful tool in getting busy parents involved in their students careers without taxing too much of their time or asking them to reschedule other commitments in order to arrange a meeting to discuss matters with them. It also means that we can communicate with them more often that the occasional parent-teacher meeting, or more individually than the random newsletter sent home.
For teachers this is a very useful way of not only communicating with parents and students but also in keeping track of what information has been distributed with the ability to recall it very easily.
Another advantage for teachers is that apart from the initial set up, it can use very little effort to maintain this flow of information above planning the resources that would already be used in the classroom.
This link: http://www.gecdsb.on.ca/d&g/ICT/Communicating%20With%20Parents.htm is a good site which shows ways that teachers can you ICT to communicate with parents.
There are many myths about what it takes to get students using technology in schools. Evidently the Rudd government thought that all it took was to buy each child a computer and we’d have one of the most technologically advanced school systems in the world! Obviously what he forgot (or neglected to think about) was the myriad of considerations that need to be though of after you buy all those shiny new computers. What about the need to install hundreds of new power points? How do the schools account for paying for all the extra electricity they use? Who will run around all day, every day fixing computer glitches? And what happens in a couple of years once the software becomes outdated? Will the government pay for all the upgrades? I’m not trying to be a cynic here because I think computers in schools are pretty much essential. I’m just a realist.
Glen M. Kleiman (2000) writes about the myths and realities about using technology in schools. The reason I decided to summarise this chapter for the purposes of this blog is because I tend to agree with everything the author has written and echos many of the sentiments of my other blogs. It is a valuable article and deserves to be focused on in this forum. Feel free to skim…
Myth # 1 is “Putting computers into schools will directly improve learning; more computers will result in greater improvements.” (200, pg.8) To surmise, the reason why Kleiman believes this is a myth is the teachers do not have adequate training, they don’t have the software to support the curriculum outcomes, technical support is insufficient, the availability of the computers are inconsistent with teaching needs, and schools are not sufficiently stocked with computers to make changes to the curriculum.
Myth # 2 is “There are agreed-upon goals and “best practices” that define how computers should be used in K-12 classrooms.” (pg. 9) Kleiman notes that the goals for using computers in classrooms is to improve students basic knowledge to produce higher scores in standardised tests, motivate students, broaden curriculum objectives, strengthen teaching approaches, prepare students for the workplace, and update education. The argument is that these goals place demands on resources and cannot be all met at once so resources need to be acquired with specific goals in mind.
Myth # 3 states that “Once teachers learn the basics of using a computer, they are ready to put the technology to effective use” (pg. 11). A study from the Apple Classroom of Tomorrow (ACOT) identifies “five stages of ‘instructional evolution’ for using technology” so teachers go from being uneasy about fitting computers into their day to day classes to wondering how they ever did without them. The issue is that a lot of teacher training and development is need to ensure that the computers are used effectively and states that, “these changes take place over years, not weeks or months.”
Myth 4 is “The typical district technology plan is sufficient for putting technology to effective use.” The argument is that the educational plan to use computers needs to be devised first before implementing a technology plan whose purpose is to specify what technology needs to be acquired for the school. If the educational plan isn’t created initially, schools may end up with insufficient or incorrect equipment for their needs.
Finally, Myth # 5 is that “Equity can be achieved by ensuring that schools in poor communities have the same student-to-computer ratios as schools in wealthier communities.” Although having the computers is a good start, studies have shown that teachers in lower-economic areas are generally less trained to be able to use & teach with the computers so the computers end up being mis-used or neglected. For true equality all teachers need to be trained to use computers effectively in the classroom.
http://www.smartdesks.com/images/Piclass1.jpg
References:
Kleiman. G.M., Gordon, D.T.(Ed). (2000). The Digital Classroom. Cambridge: The Harvard Education Letter.
I was very interested to read Mia’s blog about the gender divide in the use of technology (http://asdjklkk.edublogs.org/). It’s so easy to get caught up in seeing our students as a collective body when trying to organise lessons and in devising ways to use ICT in the classroom and to overlook the fact that even though every student is different, a collective of girls can learn differently than a collective of boys.
It goes above what the content we teach is into how they actually learn. Exceptions to the rule aside, it has been noted that boys are generally better at science, maths and computer studies, while girls are better at the humanities subjects.
My question for reflection is, how far do we need to go into tailoring lessons to students needs? We need to consider every individual students age, academic level, literacy level, gender, socio-economic status, life experience, cultural origin, current culture, and so forth. Obviously there are not enough hours in a day or years in a child’s education to tailor learning that precisely.
Open ended learning is certainly one answer where students can interpret the task at hand to be relevant to themselves but we must be careful not to leave the tasks so open that the students have the opportunity to misinterpret the task.
I suggest that the use of computers in the classroom can open up many new avenues to students to explore learning from many different viewpoints through the use of the Internet and web quests.
What is happening to kids these day? They come home from school and bury themselves in their computers playing games, writing blogs, playing on facebook, or IM-ing. But what if we could harness the energy these kids put into playing on their computers and put it into education? Surely we’d have a nation of very bright kids?
This is the idea as I understand it behind incorporating computer games into the classroom. If this is how our students learn then it stands to reason that we use this technology instead of fighting it in engaging with them. The important thing is to make sure that the time they spend in schools using technology is well used and meets the outcomes we need them to achieve to pass (and excel in) the subject. Van Eck (2006, pg 17-18) notes that, “If we continue to preach only that games can be effective, we run the risk of creating the impression that all games are good for all learners and for all learning outcomes, which is categorically not the case.”
The problem we face at the moment as Van Eck suggests is that the more advance games available currently do not meet educational outcomes and the educational games available are lacking in visual quality or gaming playability. The need at this crucial time in educational history is more R&D in the development of learning technologies to engage and educate students in the 21st century.
Here are some screenshots and links to some games that address learning needs in Visual Arts:
Reference:
Van Eck, Richard. 2006. Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. Educause Review 41 (2): 16-30
Embedded in this post is “a short video summarizing some of the most important characteristics of students today – how they learn, what they need to learn, their goals, hopes, dreams, what their lives will be like, and what kinds of changes they will experience in their lifetime”. It was created by Michael Wesch in collaboration with 200 students at Kansas State University. (http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o)
As someone who is on the brink of starting their teaching career its really interesting to note that there are so many people out there who believe that the way the students are learning right now in classrooms all around Australia & the USA is no longer relevant, is disengaging with our students, and is in dire need of a restructure in the way we teach our students. And what is at the forefront of this change that is required is the use of ICT in classrooms.
Students want instant responses to their questions. They want to see the relevance of what they are learning immediately. They want to see cohesion between their school life and the rest of their lives. For that, I can’t really blame them.
Essentially, our students are our clients. 100 years ago this might not have been the case but it is now, if for no other reason than that’s the way society has been shaped. “Market principles have become embraced so strongly by many governments, that schools (like many other public institutions) have been rationalized, cut-back, made more economically efficient, less of a tax burden and set in competition against one another for `clients’” (Hargreaves, 2000, pg.168). As our clients, we need to make sure that they get what they bargained for, a relevant education.
References:
Hargreaves, A. (2000). Four Ages of Professionalism and Professional Learning. Teachers and Teaching: History and Practice, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2000. Retrieved November 4, 2008 from http://educar.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/4idadesprof.pdf
Wesch, M. (2008) A Vision of Students Today. Retreived 11th October, 2008 from You Tube. http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o
In Reaction to Alex’s post Blame Something So It Makes It Easier, I have to say that there are two very valid sides to this argument.
One one hand the Internet is just a tool, something that we all use on a daily basis for work, study, and leisure. Its a means of communication like like the phone, or yes, even the old pen and paper. As it is just a tool it is not the Internet that corrupts or educates our students, its the people who use it.
But its not just that though, is it? Its also the way we use the Internet that needs to be taken into consideration. It is way too easy too sit alone with the computer as a barrier while we socially “network” with friends and family. Its amazing what one has the courage to do or say when the immediacy of the reaction of your peers is removed.
Somehow the world has stumbled onto this exciting, wonderful, interesting resource called the internet but its all still so new that we haven’t figured out what the rules should be yet. Its like we’ve invented the car but haven’t put up the speed signs yet.
References:
Miller, A. (2008) Blame Something So It Makes It Easier. You Silly Cabbage You… Retrieved October 6, 2008 from http://sillycabbage.edublogs.org/
The article, “The kiss and tell of social networks” at smh.com.au talks about how teenagers are using software such as Twitter and Facebook to publish information about the most intimate parts of their lives and the consequences that come from that.
For the most part I don’t think children understand the consequences of allowing all this personal information to float out there in cyberspace because there is no precedence for it. The tales of “back in my day” of our parents and grandparents don’t seem relevant anymore because there was no software like this or even computers in their day.
Children experiment, as is a natural part of growing up, but they need someone to be their moral compass, to let them know when they’re crossing the line. Like it or not teachers fill that role, but in order to know how to do that effectively, we need to be aware of what technology they are using so we can relate to them.
Gone are the days when teachers only had to teach the syllabus. The role of a teacher now encompasses mentor, caretaker and therapist. We don’t just have to know our subject and how to teach it, we also need to know our students and how they learn – not just in the classroom, but outside as well.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Kompas_Sofia.JPG
Reference:
Galvin, N. (2008) The kiss and tell of social networks. The Sydney Morning Herald, retreived October 6, 2008 from http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/the-kiss-and-tell-of-social-networks/2008/09/27/1222217581404.html?page=3
In “Reaction to Fisch” Learning Conversations comments in relation to the observation that some believe that its OK for some teachers to remain technologically illiterate that “my guess is that other professions possibly have a similar attitude & this situation is possibly just a symptom of the ‘digital revolution’ we’re living in right now. No doubt it will change over time.”
I’m not so optimistic that this will change over time. As we all know technology moves along at lighting speeds so by the time the current generation of students grow up to be teachers the knowledge they have of technology will likely be surpassed by what their students know or are learning. Its not enough any more to know how to navigate around a computer and use Word, Excel, and Outlook. These days we have blogs, podcasts, myspace, and a myriad of other new emerging applications. Who knows what will be created in the next 20 years.
I think for teachers its going to be a hard line to walk between being ‘computer literate’ and ‘keeping up with technology’.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Computerkids.jpg
References:
Kearney, M. (2008). Reaction to Fisch. Learning Conversations. Retreived October 6th, 2008 from http://learningconversations.edublogs.org/
