I have come to realize the gap that cuts between today's students and teachers. In "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants," Marc Prensky argues that growing up in a world of instantaneous technology has altered students' brains, causing them to "think and process information fundamentally differently." You would think that growing up in the technological age would have made me a staunch believer in the good of digital media, but, shockingly, I found myself identifying with both groups. Like the Natives, I prefer multitasking (music is a studying necessity for me) when I work, and enjoy education situations where the content is presented in dynamic, exciting ways. However, like the Immigrants, I often question when students claim they can't focus to a simple lecture and prefer what Prensky calls legacy content. As I read the article, I caught myself rolling my eyes at some of his claims.
Of course students can learn the traditional way. Don't be ridiculous! He's just making excuses for their poor attention span and weak work ethic. When I was their age...
And then I realized something (other than the horrific realization that I am a stubborn baby boomer stuck inside the body of a 20 year old). Education is about the student, not the teacher. I've spent countless hours practicing presenting content in engaging, relevant ways, making it practical and applicable to their lives and the world they live in. This world is technology-centered. No matter how hard teachers like myself may try, technology cannot be removed from the classroom, or learning in general. By refusing to accept the inevitable changes that technology has already caused and will continue to cause, I am just as bad as the stubborn immigrant parent who insists that their child cling on to the old ways that no longer have relevance in the place they are at now. Understanding this, for me, was the key to finally grasping concepts like TPACKS, which Matthew J. Koehler and Punya Mishra flesh out in their article, "What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge?" Technology is central to teaching. As it grows and evolves, it affects everything it touches, especially the content we teach and the pedagogy that we use to present that knowledge. Finding that sweet spot is the key to making what we teach in the classroom relevant to today's students.
As a English teacher, I am the go-to promoter of literacy among people. Though I had a small idea of the importance of being digitally literal, I never gave it much thought. I assumed it was extremely similar to reading literacy: you need to be able to know how to work with the material, collaborate with others to create, think critically, make your work acceptable to a larger community, etc. But, while all of that does apply, an even more important, and much more difficult, aspect is understanding and following the ethical and moral guidelines of technology. One of the most obvious ethical issues involves plagiarism. We know what it is–taking another person's ideas and passing them off as our own without offering proper citation. It's something we've had every teacher and professor lecture about on the first day of class for practically our entire school careers. Don't do it. You will fail the class. Read the syllabus. Follow the school's guidelines. And after that, we almost never hear about it again. As a student, I lived (as still live) in constant fear of plagiarism. The threats of failed classes and expulsion from school gave me panic attacks as I frantically checked citation guidelines to ensure I wouldn't be accused of siphoning ideas from others. I had acquaintances from other schools who would talk about having to submit their work to plagiarism checking platforms before receiving grades. The threats, the mandatory checking, the fear, all of this happens in schools across the country.
Looking at it from the outside, this is a terrible way to confront the plagiarism. This method puts students on the defensive from the beginning. It says to them, "We don't trust you. Even accidents are bad." In their article, "Technology and Academic Virtue: Student Plagiarism Through the Looking Glass," Cynthia Townley and Mitch Parsell point out that this process does nothing to prevent plagiarism; it simply attacks where problems arise. In an environment where trusting relationships are key, it creates a distrustful display of power between teachers and students. In "Write from Wrong," Barry Gilmore questions whether reduced levels of plagiarism because of these tactics is a result of genuine understanding of why plagiarism is harmful, or if it's because students simply "are afraid of getting caught." I've always questioned these types of plagiarism policies, especially in the secondary education setting. How can we expect and accept children making mistakes when it comes to learning new information, yet give them a one-strike policy when it comes to citations and accreditation? Moreover, if we automatically expect that our students will resort to plagiarism to complete their work, wouldn't that be a failure on our part as teachers? Teachers and administrators need to be proactive, rather than reactive. What I found most powerful was Gilmore's observation regarding learning versus completion. He felt that students who didn't understand the value or purpose of their writing assignments were more likely to cheat or plagiarize their work. This is a topic we've been focusing on in my Teaching Writing class. Writing assignments need to be relevant, meaningful, and engaging, not time wasting. Students need to be made aware of how a particular paper will help them in their overall understanding of the content as a whole. Even more important, I've realized, is leading by example. If I want my students to be ethical, cognizant writers, I have to show them how, all the time. Even if it means citing my sources and crediting ideas in presentations, even though I don't **have to**.
Technology will never stop changing. There will always be a new program, an updated software, and a whole new slew of ethical issues to research and attempt to clarify. I am never going to fully understand technology, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't try. In order to teach my students, I need to make sense their world, and that world is centered on advancing technology. I am not going to be that stubborn old teacher who is stuck in her archaic ways, not if I can help it, and I see this class as being the first step on my journey.
No comments:
Post a Comment