Why Schools Have the Responsibility to Bring Online Learning Environments into Classrooms

       In my past blogs, I have discussed 1) the importance of integrating new technological practices with traditional ones and 2) the barriers involved in doing so. As a firm believer of incorporating technology in the classroom, I believe it is now my job to explore why educators need to incorporate technology into everyday lessons and how that can be done. Outside of the classroom, students are using technology to seek out answers to questions, collaborate with others, create media projects, and network with people all over the world. Yet even though technology has clearly become a significant tool within the lives of today’s students, schools have not been successful at capturing the full potential technology offers for pedagogical purposes in the classroom. I believe the use of online learning environments must be implemented in every Ontario classroom (the how). These include social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, chat rooms, or online games in which participants interact with other people. In doing so, schools will begin to bridge the gap between students and the education system, promote constructivist learning, and foster just-in-time knowledge (the why).

                                                            Bridging the Gap Between Students and Schools 

           Because today’s students are gathering much of their knowledge and experience from participation in online environments, the majority of their learning comes from the digital world or the Internet. If our schools are going to engage students during the time they spend in the classroom each day, they must begin to recognize and incorporate students’ interests into the curriculum, which includes using online environments. Technology guru Henry Jenkins (2009) suggests that children and youth know more about online environments than parents and teachers; therefore schools do not need to protect students from being online, but engage them in critical discussions that assist students with articulating their understandings of the experiences they have in the digital world.

Wartella, O’Keefe, and Scantlin (as cited in Jenkins 2009) suggest students who have developed comfort with the online world will be the ones who dominate the classroom computers, as the experiences students have in the online world outside of school shape the skills and knowledge they bring with them into the classroom. Incidentally, Castells (as cited in Jenkins 2009) states the “inability to use computers or find information on the web is a matter of stigma, of social exclusion, revealing not only changing social norms, but also the growing centrality of computers to work, education and politics” (p. 19). Thus, integrating online learning environments within the curriculum is crucial for ensuring no student is left behind in terms of the skills and knowledge they need to become successful members of society. By not teaching students to interact in online learning environments, schools are not fulfilling their primary role of preparing students for the future. 

Constructivist Learning

With a focus on collaboration and the sharing of knowledge, online learning environments are often described as being participatory cultures (Jenkins, 2009). Within these environments, participants generate media creations as a collective group instead of individuals, each contributing their own expertise to the final creation. In online learning environments, there are many experts and each member of the group has a voice. The intelligence is distributed among many people instead of one person being viewed as the sole knowledge holder. Through constructivist learning, the members of online learning environments dictate the topic of discussion and the learning that takes place. In this sense, active participation occurs as all members are engaged in the learning process.

Researchers Asselin & Moayeri (2011) highlight that traditional approaches to communicating and presenting knowledge are usually done through student presentations in which the teacher is the main audience and evaluator of student learning. In this case, students are essentially consumers of both knowledge and learning. However, when students are given the role as knowledge producer, as in online environments, they are able to develop new ways of doing things and new ways of being. The possibilities created by online learning environments are endless and students are able to construct their learning in any format they wish.

In the workforce, rarely are employees asked to work on their own, instead collaboration is encouraged. The most successful employees are the ones that can work with others to develop innovative and efficient ways of doing things. In turn, Jenkins (2009) suggests students need “skills for working within social networks, for pooling knowledge within a collective intelligence, for negotiating across cultural differences that shape the governing assumptions in different communities” (p. 33).  The winners will be the ones who know how to work together, to use the expertise of others in order to construct a final project encompassing each individual’s strengths. Hence, students must learn how to  work in collaborative environments.   

Myself and fellow students working with Habitat for Humanity
in Laredo, Tx (May 2012).

Just-in-Time Knowledge

When students learn knowledge that is separate from its context of application the value for learning is strongly diminished. Online learning environments are unique in that they allow knowledge and skills to be learned within the context they are used. In contrast, our current schools teach students to master content and skills in anticipation of a payoff down the line such as acceptance to post-secondary education or a job. The problem with this is that the motivation for learning is unclear. Students do not understand why there are learning what they are learning. This is evident by students constantly asking, “when am I ever going to have to know this.”

           In online learning environments the application for knowledge is clear because information is transferred on demand, when and where it is needed. An example of this is through online gaming, which is popular in online learning environments. During games, participants apply skills they have just learned to move to new levels within the game. Motivation for learning is clear, as individuals are able to see the purpose and meaning behind new knowledge. Games create creative and compelling worlds for students and allow them to feel apart of those worlds because of the active nature of the game. On the other hand, students feel locked out and separated from textbooks because of their depersonalized nature and lack of application (Jenkins, 2009). In online environments, players are encouraged to take risks all the time by making decisions and following through with them. If a wrong choice is made, participants are given the option of starting over and learning from their mistakes immediately.  By restarting, students are able to apply what they have learned to make new choices. Meanwhile, our current schools do not normally offer second chances. Instead, they force students to repeat the entire grade even if they only struggled in one area. In this sense, we are teaching individuals to fear failure. Making a mistake means you must be punished by being held back from your friends. Instead of creating a culture of leaders who take risks we’re creating followers afraid to step out of line. 

Paul Arden taken from wwww. flickr.com

       We can be sure technology is challenging the integrity of schooling. Online learning environments provide endless possibilities and encourage student exploration. Society has embraced the 21^st century in many aspects, yet schools are still built upon a traditional model. In order for today’s students to become successful future citizens, schools need to adapt to the new digital society and provide students with the knowledge and expertise to function in a technological driven world. 

References

Asselin, M. & Moayeri, M. (2011). The participatory classroom: Web 2.0 in the classroom.

Literacy Learning: the Middle Years, 19(2):1-8. 

Castells, M. (2002). The Internet galaxy: Reflections of the Internet, business, and society. In

H. Jenkins (2009) Confronting the challenges of a participatory culture: Media education for the 21^st century. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.  

Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of a participatory culture: Media education

for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Wartella, E., O’Keefe, B., Scantlin, R. (2000). Children and interactive media: A compendium

of current research and directions for the future. In H. Jenkins (2009) Confronting the challenges of a participatory culture: Media education for the 21^st century.

Barriers to Integrating Technology

After reading Chapter 4 in Michael Fullan’s (2013) book Stratosphere: Integrating Technology, Pedagogy, and Change Knowledge and the article by Drake & Reid (2010) Integrated Curriculum I can without a doubt say I am a firm believer in the power of technology in education. However, what I still need convincing on is how do we go about integrating technology in Ontario schools.

            In his chapter titled Digital Disappointments and Dreams, Fullan (2013, p. 52) included an accelerated learning framework detailing how one particular school within Ontario, Park Manor Public School, is incorporating the use of technology and 21^st century learning in their classrooms. There is no doubt that this school places pedagogy and student-centered-learning at the forefront of education. (But isn’t that what most schools strive to do? Is the purpose of schooling not to cater to the needs of its consumers, the students?) As I read about this particular school and examined the accelerated learning framework, I couldn’t help but ask myself what does this school have that others do not? How has this one school surpassed so many others on the front lines of student engagement and use of new technologies? According to Fullan (2013) this school was no exception, just one with ordinary teachers, students, and resources. Thus, what is the key to its success? In my opinion it is overcoming the three biggest barriers affecting the integration of technology in today’s schools. These include: current assessment models, teacher training, and fear of change.     

Assessment Models

In my last post, I touched upon the battle between conformity (standardization) versus innovation. In addition to that, there is the issue of collaboration versus individualization. Technology encourages the development of a participatory culture in which users collaborate and interact with others in real time. This can occur between students in the same classroom or between students in classrooms all over the world. Students use social networking sites to connect with peers and work collectively to solve problems. Consequently, this poses a challenge to teachers as it becomes difficult to determine and summatively assess individual student work from group collaboration. Ontario’s assessment model is designed to provide grades to students based on their individual knowledge of curricular material. However, technology breaks down the notion of isolated achievement and accomplishment and focuses on group collaboration. Therefore, how does a teacher involve students in collaborative practices (a 21^st century skill) while at the same time adequately assign students individual grades?

An interesting study performed by Moayeri (2010) demonstrated the problems two English teachers faced when it came time for marking individual students summatively. As a result, Moayeri (2010) warns teachers that it becomes problematic and time consuming to segregate each student’s individual contribution to a class designed website or collaborative media project. Moayeri’s (2010) research findings suggest that assessment strategies teachers have been taught to use in the past no longer fit within technology’s collaborative model.

Teacher Training

The tools for a 21st century teacher

Another challenge with integrating new technologies in schools is the disconnect between teacher training and 21^st century tools (i.e. computers, ipads, iphones, SMART boards, document cameras). Technology by itself cannot improve instruction. Teachers must have the knowledge to effectively use technology for enhancing instructional practices. However, pre-service teacher education programs place little emphasis on training future teachers to use technology in meaningful ways to support curriculum instruction. From my personal experiences, pre-service education students are taught simply how to create power-point presentations, use Microsoft Publishing software and construct a classroom website. Pre-service teacher education fails to provide explicit instruction for new teachers on how to engage future students and incorporate technology within the school curriculum. Accordingly, many teachers feel uncomfortable using technology and avoid integrating it into their instructional practices. Technology represents an area of constant change and uncertainty for many teachers. Consequently, pre-service teacher education should focus on encouraging risk-taking behaviour among new teachers (as is a common theme in my M.Ed class).  

Fear of Change

For most of us, there is nothing worse than uncertainty and technology brings about an abundance of uncertainty. As a result, many school staff fear the inclusion of technology within the school curriculum will create a dynamic and negative shift in the traditional teacher-to-student relationship. Therefore, feelings of apprehension and fear represent a barrier for integrating technology within Ontario schools. Schools were initially designed around the notion that the teacher was the expert whose job was to pass on their knowledge to students. As technology continues to become a more prominent tool for gathering information, some teachers fear they will no longer be viewed as the expert. In addition, other teachers worry students will challenge their authority by asking questions outside their area of expertise that they cannot answer. There is a sense of panic over the loss of power that may occur in the classroom, as teachers fear what will happen when the power structure within the classroom transfers from teacher to student.

       Now let’s go back to the beginning of our conversation on the school Fullan (2013) describes as embracing a 21^st century education. I highly doubt this school did not struggle with the above challenges when it came to the decision of whether or not to embrace 21^st century learning. However, what this school did do was take action. Schools can talk all they want about the challenges and hardships facing the inclusion of technology, but discussion is useless without action. Personally I believe the key to success, was not only in Park Manor’s well-crafted accelerated learning framework, but the support teachers and students likely received from one another during the integration process . By jumping into the 21^st century pool as a team, both the staff and students gave this school the chance to be successful because they were able to rely on each other to work through mistakes in order to figure out what works and what doesn’t.

I believe the key to surpassing the barriers related to the integration of technology truly lie in the words of Ms. Frizzle: (The teacher on the popular 1990s television show The Magic School Bus) “Take chances, make mistakes, get messy!”

References

Fullan, M. (2013). Stratosphere: Integrating Technology, Pedagogy, and Change Knowledge. Toronto: Pearson Canada Inc.  

Drake, S. & Reid, J. (2010). Integrated Curriculum. The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat, 28, 1-4. 

Moayeri, M. (2010). Classroom uses of social network sites: Traditional practices or new literacies? Digital Culture and Education, 2(1): 25-43.