Introduction
The current generation of students in Australian schools has never known a world without computers. Prensky (2001) calls such students Digital Natives. They differ from previous generations in how they work, play, learn and socialise (Healey & Honan, 2004). In Australia, 79% of students aged 5 to 14 use the internet (ABS, 2010). As they acclimatise to non-linear and non-hierarchical learning, school educators must reassess how they present knowledge to students and how knowledge is assessed.
In this synopsis, I explore four technological tools – Skype, Blogs, Wikis and Powerpoint, chosen because of their ability to serve the purposes of aiding students in acquiring and integrating knowledge, extending and refining knowledge and presenting products to an audience. I will also discuss how these tools align with learning frameworks and theories, and can encourage higher order thinking.
Knowledge Acquisition: Skype
To acquire knowledge, the brain needs information to be presented using both the ‘known’ and ‘novel stimuli’ (Caine & Caine, 1990). Information must apply to students’ own lives by having an outside, real-life, “authentic” focus (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998), whilst being presented in an original way. Authentic experiences can be created through technological tools which encourage the ‘relate’ component of Engagement Theory, where students are able to collaborate, find and develop information as a collective (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998).
My investigations of Skype showed the tool’s potential to offer an affordable option for students to access both visual and aural information, to enable schools in city, country and even remote locations to host guest speakers, and to encourage collaboration with experts outside the classroom. The Skype programme is free to download and run which means students in all socio-economic areas can access information, and peers in both higher and lower socio-economic circumstances around the world can be reached, eliminating social barriers and accessibility issues, encouraging diversity.
Vygotsky’s suggestion that the process of acquiring knowledge is a social activity aligns with the ‘relate’ component of the Engagement theory. It is through interactions with others that one comes to understand and construct meaning (Lambert, 2002) The ‘net generation’ likes face to face interactions with peers (Roberts, 2005). “While they may use technology in their daily lives, relationships are a driving force in the learning process” (Roberts, 2005). For schools unable to access guest speakers in person, Skype provides a viable alternative. Interviews can be conducted and information gained, using the familiar framework of an in-school interview but with the novelty of contacting someone immediately using technology. Skype allows students to go straight to the source of knowledge, which allows them to “work smarter, not faster” (Eisenberg, 2001). Through Skype, students gain declarative knowledge that is key to their current tasks and interests, and contributes to their success. “It is declarative knowledge that often is the primary factor in students’ succesfully completing tasks and obtaining useful results” (Marzano & Pickering, 2006).
Students may effectively use Skype as an information-seeking tool once they have identified what information needs to be gained. At this stage of learning, students may use the Dimension Two strategy, ‘using a KWL chart’ as a framework (Marzano & Pickering, 2006). Planning and constructing questions of peers and experts engages students in higher order thinking, and enables teams to develop their understandings of the task goal. “Meaningful material is encoded and stored more efficiently than non-meaningful material.” (McInerney & McInerney, p. 102) Undertaking the thought process where students decide on questions aligns with the second component of the Engagement Theory, ‘create’, and ensures the information extracted from the speaker is meaningful to the students and the project being undertaken. Using Skype in the classroom can shift the focus from the teacher to student. Students are able to “discover or figure out new information for themselves” (Marzano & Pickering, 2006), ensuring student ownership of tasks and the ability to construct their own meaning at their own pace. Being able to design questions directly related to tasks make this tool very effective for students.
Knowledge Integration: Blog Journal
Organising and sequencing information enables students to store information (Marzano & Pickering, 2006). My investigations of using a blog shows blogs can encourage students to reflect on and order their learning using text and images. The medium employs all three Engagement Theory components – relate, create and donate (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998).
As new knowledge is acquired, reflection on experiences is required for information to be stored (Lambert, 2002) and “downloaded”. Students can state what they have learned, and engage their meta-cognitive skills to explain the thinking processes behind their understandings (Hill, 1996). The creation of a Blog differs from traditional reflective journals in that blogs provide platforms for students to participate in collaborative learning through comments posted by peers. The blogs can act as a reflective tool to document students’ information gaining process, with students presenting understandings in sequenced entries through video, graphics, words and music.
Blogs provide spaces for students to participate in individual as well as collaborative learning with fellow on-line bloggers (Huffaker, 2005). Through shared ideas, questions and back-and-forth dialogue, students are able to compare understandings to their own, identify patterns in information and students become aware of multiple perspectives on the one issue, on both a local and global scale. Collaborative learning forces students to clarify and verbalise problems, and find solutions through on-line participation in comment postings (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998). This is the idea behind the third component of the Engagement Theory, ‘donate’, where student projects are given a ‘customer’ or outside audience (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998). Interacting with on-line communities enables students to become aware of other ways to think about problems, and examine the multiple perspectives on an issue. The public nature of blogs can motivate students to explore understandings more deeply, and to produce higher quality work (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998). Extending the audience from classmates to a global community, students take more pride in their work. Ultimately, collaborative learning through the use of blogs enables student understandings of topics become deeper and more refined than if the student was to work on their own. This is clear in one of my discussions with a peer on line, where a fellow blogger helped me to see the range of ways Powerpoints can be used in the classroom. Other posts that show constructivist approaches to learning include those with fellow bloggers, 'Two Hours, twice a week...' and ‘Jess’.
Another positive aspect of using blogs for knowledge integration is the non-threatening environment it offers students. As students can maintain some degree of anonymity, shyer students can feel more confident to ask and explore questions that they may not have been able to do in the classroom. Students may choose to blog in class, at home or other locations, and at any time best suits them. Learning managers can aid students in gaining deeper understandings, encouraging students to explore the topic more deeply by answering students’ questions and commenting on students’ posts. Teachers may pose questions for students to consider or encourage them to undertake more research in a particular area.
While blogs can be beneficial to students, security risks and ethics must be taught explicitly to ensure the students’ safety.
Extend and Refine Knowledge: Wiki
Once information has been acquired and integrated into students’ schema, technological tools can help students extend and refine these understandings (Marzano & Pickering, 2006). One tool that has the capacity to serve this need is the Wiki.
Wikis provide a medium for the ‘relate’ and ‘create’ components of the Engagement Theory, where students are given opportunities to construct knowledge as a collective group, and work on an authentic task, which is student-centred (Kearsley & Shneiderman, 1998). Ras & Rech (2009) point out that students enjoy building social networks and working in teams. Technological tools such as the Wiki enable sharing of information, instant access to information and the ability to deepen knowledge through collaborative work, which is the way they enjoy and work best.
The Wiki offers students a space to exercise Dimension 4 processes such as making decisions, investigating issues and inventing new products and processes (Marzano & Pickering, 2006). The Wiki in itself is just a platform in which students can ‘knowledge dump’ and share information, but when utilised to its full potential students will arrange information, edit information and develop project goals in ways that are unique to the group. At all times, technological tools require students to make the decision about what is credible as a source and what isn’t, which engages higher order thinking.
Among the benefits of a Wiki is the ability for teachers to see who and when people have accessed the site. Unlike traditional collaborative tasks where inferences are made about the effectiveness of the teamwork based on the end product, Wikis open up the potential for teachers to assess on input, as well as the end product. The collaborative nature of the Wiki is combined with students being able to work on research and ideas on their own. This can benefit students who are often overshadowed by ‘bossier’ students. The Wiki takes away a lot of the group dynamic problems that can arise from traditional collaborative work. Students can reflect other’s research, continually building on the collective knowledge, deepening and refining their understandings of the content.
Wikis do not require significant technology skills to operate, and the pages are able to ‘hold’ all information students find on the net throughout their research. Unlike traditional note-taking methods then, Wikis allow sharing of movies, podcasts, text and images, all with a cut and paste click. This corresponds to the main idea behind the Big6 theory of working “smarter, not faster” (Eisenberg, 2001).
Investigating the Wiki this term by using the Wiki for group assignments I found further positives to using this tools within the classroom, including time management and accessibility. As outlined in my blog, Wikis offers a merging of the oral and industrialised learning models, enabling students to learn current information through text in an instant (Ferris & Wilder, 2008).
Presentation of Learning: Powerpoint
The process of presenting understandings should encourage higher order thinking and the use of Dimension Four strategies such as ‘Invention’, and ‘Decision Making’ (Marzano & Pickering, 2006).
Powerpoints offer students a platform in which they can present visuals, texts, colours, audio, quotes, links to simulations and URL addresses simultaneously (Voss, 2004). Students must make decisions about what information is important to add as distinct from what is just ‘pretty’, using their higher order thinking as they decide how to best present what they know, and what mediums they will incorporate. PowerPoint offers students of all preferred learning styles to be catered for as information can be presented in a variety of ways so students can individualise their products, choosing the best way to present what they know.
Many people have become disinterested in Powerpoint presentations due to its overuse (Keller, 2003). Before I undertook this course, I must admit, I thought Powerpoints were mundane too. However, through on-line discussions on my blog, I was urged by peers to look deeper into its applications. I went and experimented with its uses, and found that its uses were only limited by one’s imagination.
PowerPoint allows students with different learning styles to present information, showing off their ability to consolidate and sequence information they have learned. The Powerpoint is a vehicle to express understandings in both linear or non-linear narratives, and the timed animation function enables students to create stop-start animations. This may be why it is “one of the most widely used software applications” (Keller, 2003).
Conclusion
Studies have shown that students in an environment where learning is done through technology are more co-operative and less competitive (Matusevich, 1995). “Digital activities popular with youth may appear to be child’s play, but research indicates that these digitized toys and pursuits help young people develop a wide range of aptitudes and skills that are needed in a digital economy” (Lankshear and Knobel, 2003). Instruction and exploration of content through technological tools enables learning to be tailored to student interests and abilities. But technology alone will not ensure learning takes place. “The key to success lies in finding the appropriate points for integrating technology into a new pedagogical practice, so that it supports the deeper, more reflective self-directed activity children must use if they are to be competent adults in the future” (Matusevich, 1995). Using technology alongside sound pedagogical frameworks such as Dimensions of Learning and the Big6, Learning Managers can ensure technology is used to enhance learning, rather than simply as a ‘filler’. Technology provides “tools which are an integral part of a child’s learning experience” (Matusevich, 1995). Technological tools such as Skype, Blogs, PowerPoint and Wikis are four of many options that Learning Managers have to ensure knowledge is acquired, integrated, extended and refined and presented whilst ensuring students build connections in the community, creating meaningful projects and present understandings through authentic contexts (Kearsley & Schneiderman, 1998). “By fostering digital literacy in subject teaching, practitioners are not only acknowledging and reflecting young peoples’ lived experiences of digital media cultures, they are supporting their students to extend their knowledge and become critical and discerning participants in their own in-school learning’’ (Hague & Payton 2010).
Reference List
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Household Use of information technology, Australia. Retrieved August 23, 2010, from http://abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8146.0/
Caine, R. & Caine G. (1990). Understanding a brain-based approach to learning and teaching. Educational Leadership, October 1990. P. 66-70
Diana Voss (2004), Powerpoint in the classroom, Is it really necessary? The American Society for Cell Biology. V3 p.155-161 Fall 2004.
Eisenberg, M. & Berkowitz, B. (2001). Big6 Skills Overview. Retrieved August 10, 2010 from www.big6.com
Ferris, S. & Wilder, H. (2008). Uses and potentials of Wikis in the classroom. Retrieved July 10, 2010, from www. qub.ac.uk/directorates/AcademicStudentAffairs/CentreforEducationalDevelopment/e-Learning/E-LearningFileStore/Filetoupload,134940,en.pdf
Healey, A., & Honan, E. (2004). Text Next: New Resources for Literacy Learning. NSW: Peta Publications.
Hague, C. & Payton, S. (2010). Digital literacy across the curriculum: A Futurelab handbook. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from www.futurelab.org.uk
Hill, S. (1996). Cooperative learning: turning obstacles into opportunities. Pen103. Newtown, NSW: Primary English Teaching Association.
Huffaker, D. (2005). Association for the advancement of computing in education journal. 13(2).
Kearsley, G. & Schneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement Theory: A Framework for technology-based teaching and learning. V38 n5 p.20-23 Sept/Oct 1998.
Keller, J. (2003). Killing me Microsoftly with PowerPoint. Chicago Tribune. January 5.
Lambert, L., Et al. (2002) The Constructivist Leader (2nd Ed). New York, USA: Teachers College Press.
Marzano, R., & Pickering, D. (2006). Dimensions of learning teacher’s manual (2nd Ed). Heatherston, Vic, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.
Matusevich, M. (1995). School Reform: What role can technology play in a constructivist setting?Retrieved April 1, 2010, from http://delta.cs.vt.edu/edu/fis/techcons.html.
McInerney, D. & McInerney, V. (2006). Educational psychology: Constructing learning (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW, Australia: Pearson.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).
Ras, E. & Rech, J. (2009). The journal of systems and software. Retrieved August 15, 2010 from http://paper.joerg-rech.com/JSS_ras_rech_PRINT.pdf
Roberts, G. (2005). Technology and learning expectations of the net generation. Educating the net generation. Retrieved August 20, 2010 from www.educause.edu/EducatingtheNetGeneration/5989.
