[...]A Whole New Mind Book Study Part 1.07.08 « Fits & Fugues[...]…

[...]Possibility vs Scarcity Thinking with Ben and Roz Zander « Fits & Fugues[...]…

[...]A Whole New Mind Book Study Part 1.07.08 « Fits & Fugues[...]…

[...]Replacement Theory and New Ideas « Fits & Fugues[...]…

I am lucky in that I have a 2:1 ratio of laptops to students in my classroom. I even had most of my math tests online (from the textbook company) which cut down on my grading time and provided me with reports of each student’s progress (or lack thereof) so that I could differentiate my instruction.

My motto this year is “Back away from the copier.” By putting together a class wiki and blog, I will be able to have my students keep their work online and hosted somewhere. We might even find that we will have no use for the flash drives. I say to the teachers who say they have no time to learn about Web 2.0 tools and technology, yes you will if you spend less time at the copier.

Thank you for your post. I hope many people will read it and add to the conversation. I hope your son’s teachers are innovative educators and that he has a great year.

rick – brilliant post. i read the art of possibility a few years back – and just this year was directed to ben’s ted talk. most incredible.

thank you for your insight.

In my school they have “fired” one of our regular parent volunteers because all she did was print worksheets all day. I find that embarrassing, shameful, and a lot like malpractice if our teachers are truly using that many copies. Maybe, as Paul mentioned above, the budget will mean people are accountable for paper use and will change their wicked ways. LOL (Not that there isn’t the occasional appropriate use for a worksheet or two.)

At least at my school we have computer classes which do 21st Century activities (that’s my class!). I sure wish other teachers would move forward but they are dragging their feet in my building. I sure wish you boy would get the chance to do more as well. Hope he has an excellent year.

I hope all is well.

I’ve written a book called “Anatevka” which is a fictionalised memoir of three generations of a Russian Jewish family and which is a sequel to Fiddler on the Roof. You can get more information on the book from the following amazon site:

best wishes

Jake Gomilny
(“Anatevka” is written under a pen name)

Prensky, in “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” and “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II:Do They Really Think Differently? ” from On the Horizon (NCB University Press, Vol. 9 No. 5, October 2001), uses words such as “Today’s students…represent the first generations to grow up with this new technology;” and “[for Natives] school often feels pretty much as if we’ve brought in a population of heavily accented, unintelligible foreigners to lecture them;” and the very terms “Native” and “Immigrant” elicit the sickening racist connotations influenced by the conversations in our culture today.

I agree with you that racism is more than discrimination and its use here may not exactly fit the current historical definition. But, Prensky’s (and those who have summarily adopted this) language that sorts and classifies human beings has already begun to build educational, cultural, and social structures that divide and exclude (or include depending on the perspective). Look especially at his emphasis on “accent.” Does the Immigrant/Native distinction approach the racial atrocities of recent and ancient history? No, but when societies adopt ideas that discriminate, segregate, and obviate we must take serious note to avoid the mistakes of our past however they may evolve.

http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/publications_reports_articles/web_articles/Web_Article561
This does not deny the idea that there is a profound change in the ways that we as humans mediate ourselves in the world. There is a lot of serious thinking going on about this that does not rely on sloganising. Ultimately hanging on to slogans like ‘digital native’ can lead to bad decision making. It is worth looking at serious literature on socio-cultural uses of information technology, e.g. JS Brown and Paul Duguid’s Social Life of Information (Harvard Business School Press, February 2000). In this study Brown and Duguid’s central theme is that access to information does not equate to knowledge. Brown and Duguid note, much of what we recognise as learning comes from informal social interactions between learners and mentors. These social interactions are difficult to achieve in mediated instruction. They recognise that technology can enhance instruction in remarkable ways; however, it cannot replace the insights that students receive by struggling to make sense of information with both peers and mentors. They contend that the gung-ho tunnel vision of commentators like Prensky – seeing only one way ahead (if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail!), has led to erroneously simplified and unrealistic expectations of what our future in the information age will be like.

Prensky does admit that his approach has a flaw –
One key area that appears to have been affected is reflection. Reflection is what enables us, according to many theorists, to generalize, as we create ―mental models‖ from our experience. It is, in many ways, the process of ―learning from experience.‖ In our twitch-speed world, there is less and less time and opportunity for reflection, and this development concerns many people. One of the most interesting challenges and opportunities in teaching Digital Natives is to figure out and invent ways to include reflection and critical thinking in the learning (either built into the instruction or through a process of instructor-led debriefing) but still do it in the Digital Native language. We can and must do more in this area.

And as constructivists say , asking questions, reflection, dialog and discussion , exploring and reaching deaper levels of understanding is what education is about.

In one of his articles Prensky says
In geography – which is all but ignored these days – there is no reason that a generation that can memorize over 100 Pokémon characters with all their characteristics, history and evolution can‟t learn the names, populations, capitals and relationships of all the 101 nations in the world. It just depends on how it is presented – this piece shows a rather different understanding of what education is all about .

‘They thrive on instant gratification and frequent rewards ‘ – if this is the effect of technology , the games , TV, instant messaging , it explains why kids are using the technology in a rather superficial way.

Prensky says,
Children raised with the computer ―think differently from the rest of us. They develop hypertext minds. They leap around. It’s as though their cognitive structures were parallel, not sequential.‖ ―Linear thought processes that dominate educational systems now can actually retard learning for brains developed through game and Web-surfing processes on the computer.‖

Prensky in a sense is moving towards a constructivist approach by talking about Parallel learning. , but until he finds an answer to the flaw in the system , the lack of reflecetion and deaper thinking , his computer games are not the answer.

My humble opinion.

Now before, everyone blasts me for my opinion please know that I came to BLC08 to listen to a wide variety of practitioners in this field such as Ewan McIngtosh, Pedro Noguero, and yes even Prensky because knowing the full spectrum of theories and beliefs on this very important topic is, in my opinion, important to developing meaningful solutions and goals. Therefore, whether or not I personally prescribe to what Prensky, or any of the speakers have to say, it is still important to know what they are saying. Isn’t the fact that the dialog present here about his offensiveness is enacting change in people’s viewpoints and opinions (even though there mostly about him) worth it. And doesn’t this mere fact alone make what he has to say important on at least some level?

Change can happen in many different forms, perhaps he is meant to be a warning to what not to be and do? Aren’t such cautionary lessons important too?

I seriously debated about even publishing this post (I have several I’ve written but not published -mostly for my own thinking). Even more, I seriously considered whether or not to use the word “racism” at all. I finally decided to after much consideration.

Tim (and others who may have a similar thought), the Dictionary.com definition of racism, provides several connections for my use of the term especially in the context Prensky presents his classifications. Notice, especially, the first part of definition 1.

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Prensky’s immigrant/native writings and presentations step up to and sometimes over many of the lines above. His explicit use of these politically and emotionally charged terms and his assertion about the near-superiority of the connected-kid culture could fuel some latent hostility that has its foundations in our concerns about the nature of technology and those who use it. Simply, those who have a fear, aversion, or uninformed perspective of technology and its users may begin to resent (hate?) those who do. In fact, I would say we see those attitudes manifest in the school and district policies that ban electronic devices in schools, that block educationally useful sites, that insist technology be locked up and available only for special projects and times. Classifications like his give fuel to the justifications of the narrow-minded hand wringers that influence our restrictive tech policies.

I believe now that we must actively campaign to eliminate these divisive and discriminatory terms as well as the policies they inform.

I, too, am offended by his arguments, lack of recent research (that he shares, anyway) and simplistic (non-existent?) views of pedagogy. Above all, though, I find it curious that I’ve not seen him around, at other sessions or the keynotes. More of a digital holidaymaker than anything else, maybe?

I also highly recommend Mark Cuban’s blog on a similar topic in which he takes issue with the baseless intergenerational warfare – Never Friend Anyone Over 29 – http://www.blogmaverick.com/2007/11/06/never-friend-anyone-over-29/

Besides cheap populism, Prensky’s prism reeks of an unhealthy and unwarranted worship of teen culture on the part of gullible adults.

Want a real laugh, look at the 2nd-rate MathBlaster that are Prensky’s attempts at educational “game” design.

A post I wrote about a year ago Digital natives/immigrants – how much do we love this slogan?. There are more links to other critiques in my post.

Henry Jenkins Reconsidering Digital Immigrants

An early piece from 2004 by Steve Ransom The myth of the digital native

So, while I don’t have the same visceral reaction–I’ve only heard him in podcasts, not seen him present–as others do, I’m not that enthused about listening to him much anymore.

Warm regards,
Miguel Guhlin
Around the Corner-MGuhlin.net
http://mguhlin.net

Of course, I’m sure it was my fault, because I am too old to be worth anything to these kids today. They can figure anything out on their own, right?

The next couple of times I saw Prensky, I started listening with a critical ear, and started really disliking his conclusions. He actually said that mp3 format is dying, to be replaced by wma. WMA? Who ever used that unless they had to? Side tangent note there, but just an example of craziness. Anyway – I was also shocked at the standing ovations he got. I myself can’t even figure out why I was so fooled by what he had to say the first time.

You’re also right about his presentation. I’ve seen it several times now (last at our state tech conference) and am amazed that someone who keynotes at dozens of conferences a year could get away with the kind of annoying animation, random sounds and generally crappy layout we would tell any of our students to fix.

Now if we can just convince a large number of people that not all high school students will need Algebra II, we might reduce the drop-out rate. When was the last time you dealt with an imaginery number (other than in your checkbook!)or solved a polynomial?