"I remember things better when I get to wrestle with it and have to figure it out for myself " I hear a colleague saying. I can totally get how this is true and why it works, but is this really new? Is this something that only developed along with the technological boom?
Self-mediated distance learning (SMDL) is a very intriguing topic that shows a lot of potential, but an equal amount of danger and otherwise negative aspects.
On the one hand, it gets the students interested and invested in what they are learning. I recall one of the most frequently asked questions in school being "How is this relevant? Where will I ever use this outside of the classroom?" If the learners get to research and investigate their passion, they have an internal motivation second to none. They connect a sense of responsibility and pride to their work. They want to learn more and get better at whatever it is that they are doing and are open to input. On the other hand, these learners will need some form of guidance. This would mostly be to ensure that what they are learning is correct and relevant, as well as making sure that any misunderstandings and misconceptions are addressed. But would this mean we need to shift our titles from teachers to mentors? You tell me…
Quite often I hear the argument that teaching should be more digital/technological because the students get bored with the teacher in front just talking and writing on the board. This argument is flawed in that, believe it or not, technology can be boring. BOOM! I said it. "So, if it’s not the teacher, why are the kids bored?" Simple. It’s not about having technology or not, it’s about accommodating as many as possible of the learner's learning styles regardless of the tools used to accomplish that. Whether you look your teacher in the eye or watch a recording of the class your friend shared on YouTube, if it’s boring, it’s boring. Period. If you don’t like reading, it’s not going to matter if you read it off a laptop screen or a printed copy, its READING that you don’t like. The difference with SMDL is that the learner inherently knows how they will learn best and how to best convey what and that they have indeed learnt. In a sense, they get to tailor their course to whatever gets them to their goal in the most effective way possible.
There is very tongue in cheek quote that I remember from my first year, saying: “Change is inevitable … except from a vending machine!” I can’t help but giggle every time I am reminded of it, but it definitely holds some truth. I just thing that in this ever changing world, it is important not to just change for the sake of changing, but to keep the goal in mind. As the Law task we had to hand in today very clearly reminded us, as educators, we have the duty to always consider the best interest of the learners is whatever we do. Also, every now and then, technology WILL fail you.
So, where am I getting at with all this?
I think it’s important to remember that there is a time and a place for everything. SMDL can be a good medium for a child to learn, if it suits the child’s personality, learning style and the area that the child wants to study in. A person who wants to become a surgeon, for instance, would benefit much more from a “proper academic education” than from SMDL. On the other hand, a writer or animation artist would be a much more practical self-study field.
Therefore, I think we need to be open minded about how we teach and how the future students will learn best. We need to look at the broader picture as well as the individual and be very careful of generalizations. Isn’t that what got us in trouble in the first place?
Which character are you?
No comments:
Post a Comment