My name is Celeste and I am an Intermediate/Senior teacher. My teachables are Religion and Geography. I rely on many forms of technology in my classroom while I teach these subjects – from showing videos of different traditions to using pencils and rulers for maps.
Although I have had significant events in my career thus far when it comes to technology, the first significant event/"power-up moment" that I have had was after my first ever lesson. I was teaching a grade 9 Geography class about volcanoes. Everything that could go wrong with technology this lesson, went wrong. While setting up my PowerPoint presentation that I spent all week preparing, the outlets in the classroom were not working. I decided to forget about the PowerPoint and do the lesson through class discussion and coming up with the answers as a group. For students working at a different pace, I wanted to write the answers on the board. As I reached for the whiteboard marker and began to write the first answer on the board, I realized the marker was fading. Even technology that was not connected to power was failing on me this day.
Although I was the teacher in this scenario, I was also the student. I left the school that day feeling disappointed in myself. I realized that I was not prepared and my audience knew that. This experience taught me to always be prepared and never rely on anything, especially technology, to be on your side. Things will always go wrong and it is so important to have a back-up plan. Technology is great – phones do things that people wouldn’t have even imaged ten years ago and healthcare has become so much more advanced – but unfortunately, I learned that it can be very unreliable. After this lesson, every time I prepare a lesson I make sure I have a backup plan so that when technology fails me, I wont be in a panic but I will reach for my next plan.
PRODUCTION 2: EDUCATIONAL PARADIGMS PROJECT
PAULO FREIRE PARADIGM CHART: Philosophy - Education as liberation. Freire believed there were two people in society - the oppressed and the oppressor. He wanted to free the oppressed of the oppressors and wanted them to be able to regain their freedom and humanity. Psychology - Learning how to critically think and see how that changes perspectives and how it frees oneself from the oppressed. Sociology - Having a system (education) that just deposits information (the banking method) creates a “culture of silence.” A “culture of silence” means that people are told things and are not allowed or comfortable to question it and think of it critically. People cannot grow and learn if they are silenced. Conception of Literacy - Literacy does not lead a person to read or write but it leads them to critical consciousness. It should lead them to greater awareness of oppressive forces in life and to realize their own freedom. Believed literacy was important and was student centred. When studying literacy, students used words that they knew, not what the teacher knew. He then introduced “generative” words which led from known words to new words. Attitude to education - Education as liberation. Believed that the banking method no longer worked - proposed the “problem posing method” which allowed students to think critically and free themselves and their thoughts. Curriculum - Believed that students should be critical thinkers to free themselves from being tied down to expectations and limitations set on them by others Pedagogy - Allow students to think critically and form their own opinions which frees them from the banking method (depositing information on to students and expecting them to accept it with no inquiries or proposals) Evaluation - Critical thinking, self-growth, liberation, connections Outcome - Socialization, independence
To a certain extent, Freire can be considered to fit into the classical paradigm. His theories fit into the classical paradigm because they both believe that literacy is important to development and to social culture. What differs between the classical paradigm and Freire's theories is that those in the classical paradigm has students grow at a stagnant pace - same content, focusing more on detail as the years go on, etc. Freire's theory wants students to critically think which encourages growth - the opposite of the classical paradigm.
Production 4: IMPACTS: MULTILITERACIES (20 YEARS LATER) & MULTIMODAL LITERACIES
In the New London Group’sMultiliteracies: Designing Social Futures, a new paradigm is arguably established to challenge traditional models of education. The New London Group approaches this new paradigm by discussing the “what” and “how” ofmultiliteracies. This is done by attempting to overcome the limitations of traditional approaches, discussing cultural differences in our society and discussing the four components of pedagogy - situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing and transformed practice (The New London Group 1996). In this week’s readings by Mills and Buckingham, the ideas discussed by The New London Group are rearticulated and discussed. Some connections between The New London Group, Mills and Buckingham will be discussed in this essay.
The first obvious connection found within these readings is how technology is the newest form of literacy in the world. Mills states that, “Language functions as a tool for shaping, controlling, and interacting with one’s social and physical environment.” Technology has now become a literacy that is unavoidable. For people, it will come to a point at which employment and promotion opportunities come to an abrupt stop if one does not take part in this mainstream culture (The New London Group 1996). Also mentioned in The New London Group (1996),
"If one is not comfortably a part of the culture and discourses of the mainstream [technology], it is even harder to get into networks that operate informally than it was to enter into the old discourses of formality. This can deeply affect people’s private, social and public lives along with their day to day experiences."
People are left with very little choice. People need jobs to be able to support themselves and their families and most of these jobs include interacting with technology. People either have to adapt to the new language or as The New London Group states, their opportunities will come to an abrupt stop - and some people cannot afford for this to happen. If one is not comfortable with this new paradigm, they must find a way to adapt to it.
When it comes to this new literacy, we must question access. Buckingham (2007) states that, “The term ‘literacy’ clearly carries a degree of social status.” Having literacy be redefined over the past twenty years, it can be a challenge for students and some schools to catch up with the most recent “literacy.” What heavily impacts this newest literacy is access. Mills (2010) states that, “While online forms of communication are becoming globalized, the New Literacy Studies has demonstrated how access to digital literacies is continually increasing but is still unevenly distributed across communities.” With this uneven distribution of digital literacies and technologies, this creates gaps within the system that can be traced all the way down to the personal life of the student. For example, how many computers does the student have in their household? If there is only one at home and they live with four other people, their chances of learning how to use it and experiment with it are slim compared to a student who has four computers in their home and has four people living in it. This challenge to access then begs a few questions - How can we close these gaps? Does society need these gaps?
Another connection found between The New London Group, Mills and Buckingham articles is that, “We are, indeed, designers of our social futures (The New London Group 1996).” The New London Group states that, “Literacy educators and students must see themselves as active participants in social change, as learners and students who can be active designers - makers - of social futures.” How can one see themselves as active participants in this social change if they are not involved in it? What can help develop active designers of our social futures learn is educating them on how to be truly literate. “A truly literate individual is able not only to use language, but also to understand how it works… This means using analytical skills (Buckingham 2007).”
While Buckingham mentions using analytical skills, The New London Group (1996) also mentions analytical skills in their critical framing portion of the article. Critical framing is a component of pedagogy and is very important for students because they will be able to form their own opinions and analyze something for themselves. We all have had previous experiences or encounters with something that helps us form an opinion. It is the educator’s job to teach the students how to analyze something critically. Essentially, educators are to, “Help learners to denaturalize and make strange again what they have learned and mastered (The New London Group 1996).” Without setting aside our bias, we will not be able to look at something and critically analyze it truthfully because we will always be influenced by something, one way or another. To be truly literate, one must be able to evaluate and use information critically if they are to transform it into knowledge (Mills 2010). Analytical skills are not only attached to analyzing data, but also are important for everyday life. It is important to be able to analyze or observe how someone is feeling, what they are doing and why they are doing it.
When Buckingham (2007) discusses access to this new form of literacy, he focuses on the fact that, “Access thus includes the skills and competencies needed to locate media content, using the available technologies and associated software.” Of course, when using technology, its purpose goes beyond this and students are taught this. Another important purpose is to teach students to, “Be aware of potential risks, and using regulatory mechanisms and systems of guidance.” How are students supposed to know about these potential risks? They are to be familiar with the technology and software and use their analytical skills that they have been taught by the educator and through their experiences and truly observe everything and discuss with others or by themselves what a risk may look like.
When it comes to the “how” of a pedagogy of multiliteracies, there are four components proposed by the New London Group, one of which has already been discussed, critical framing/critically analyzing. These components occur simultaneously and can be revisited (The New London Group 1996). Although all four components are important, another one that was found in Mills and Buckingham was overt instruction. During this component, the teacher teaches the “rules of the game” and is giving the students more agency. This is a collaboration between the student and the teacher. Mills (2010) states,
"Experienced peers or “co-conspirators,” rather than traditional authority figures such as teachers, play an important role in establishing communal norms of the interest-driven media practices of youth. In these settings, youth have significant ownership of their self-presentation, learning, and evaluation of others."
Giving ownership to students gives them power. As students complete these activities and assignments individually or communally, they are learning how to listen to instruction and content and put their learning into action. Students are given a lot of free space when it comes to instruction and this allows them to take control of their learning and of their future.
This new paradigm discussed by The New London Group, Mills and Buckingham will hopefully help both educators and students understand the shift in pedagogy that has occurred over the past 20 years. Students are now designing their own social futures, allowed to discuss their cultural differences and experiment with a new language, technology. Although some challenges may be faced during present educational forms, policies and practices today, such as access, these challenges can be overcome by being open to learning the new literacy.
People of the 21st century, especially those who are within the current education system, will soon be given no choice but to learn about this new literacy because they will have to interact with it every day. When it came to Victoria and Christina’s presentation using the iZi.Travels app, this showed us that the challenges of access can be present, but it also showed us that it is possible to allow students to design their own content, present it how they choose and still learn something valuable from it - even without the teacher in complete control but rather providing tools and critically engaging with the content. Buckingham (2007) states that, “Literacy in this broader sense involves analysis, evaluation and critical reflection.” These three actions are so important to carry on in one’s life no matter what stage you are at or what you are experiencing. As these students grow up, they will have to create content and perform at their jobs, no matter what their jobs may be. If students are exposed to designing and creating their own social futures, they will be prepared to succeed in their future since they did create it after all.
Works Cited A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Features (1996) by the New London Group Buckingham, D. (2007). Digital Media Literacies: rethinking media education in the age of the Internet. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(1), 43-55. Mills, K. A. (2010). A Review of the Digital Turn in the New Literacy Studies. Review of Education Research, 80(2), 246-271.
PRODUCTION 3: POSTMODERNITY
In “The Postmodern Condition,” which was written in the 1970s, mentions many statements that are still applicable to today’s world of educational institutions and the process of learning. For example, Lyotard states that, “Higher learning will have to continue to supply the social system with the skills fulfilling society’s own needs, which center on maintaining its internal cohesion (Lyotard, 48).” In this sentence, Lyotard emphasizes the importance that we must teach the skills that society needs rather than what the education curriculum is guiding teachers to teach. Although education was first believed to be for the youth of the “liberal elite,” it is important now that social progress is understood and that society as a whole is educated on the most recent social demands (Lyotard, 49).
Lyotard also mentions that knowledge will no longer be served “en bloc” but rather “a la carte (Lyotard, 49).” This meant that students will not learn the entirety of knowledge related to the field in a certain period of time but rather will continue to learn as they are in the profession and have different experiences. This is important because research and society are constantly changing. What was relevant 10 years ago has changed drastically today. Having higher education provide continuing education will keep people updated with the most recent information which can then help people create informed decisions with accurate information that impacts them individually and possibly society as a whole. The “a la carte” approach also allows people to improve their skills and increase their chances to widen occupational growth (Lyotard, 49).
Also discussed was those who would receive priority education through these educational institutions. These people would be computer scientists, cyberneticists, linguists and mathematicians (Lyotard, 48). The reason why these people would receive priority education is because higher education will have to continue to supply the social system with the skills fulfilling society’s own needs. Lyotard’s prediction was correct in this profession because as we can see today, just in the world of education, those who are trained in computer technology, math and sciences receive jobs much quicker than those trained in humanities. The reason for this can be not only the shortage of those trained within this profession, but also the growth of technology within the world that requires these professionals to help lead everyone else.
Following those who would receive priority education, Lyotard also mentions that students would outnumber job openings (Lyotard, 49). In the “democratic university,” many students are being educated because there are no entrance requirements, little cost to the student and high enrolment rates. This is a drastic change from the previous small “elite” group that would be educated. Although these students are being taught current knowledge on certain issues within their fields, there is still a large difference between those who are trained within the field and positions available. The reason why there is such a large gap between jobs available and those who are educated is possibly because it has become easily accessible - that there are little to no entrance requirements and somewhat financially achievable. With a large group being educated, this means that there needs to be a large pool of jobs available or else the gap will only become wider as the years go on.
Lyotard mentions the partial replacement of teachers by machines. He states that this may seem inadequate or even intolerable (Lyotard, 50). In today’s world, technology and machines play a large role in education at all levels - from primary education to higher education. Depending how these machines or technology are developed, they may or may not be adequate or intolerable. To this day, a teacher is still present in classrooms to guide discussion and learning for students. Teachers do face challenges trying to engage students with content without technology because they are surrounded by it so often. Teachers need to incorporate technology in their lessons because not only is it one of the new forms of literacy, you cannot escape it in the world today.
Lyotard states that, “It does not seem absolutely necessary that the medium be a lecture delivered in person by a teacher in front of silent students, with questions reserved for sections or “practical work” sessions run by an assistant (Lyotard, 50).” As Lyotard discusses this method of teaching, Paulo Freire’s “banking method” comes to mind. Teachers are depositing information to students to this day and not allowing any critical thinking to occur. As we can see in classrooms today, the banking method is still used at times but does not show to be as effective as allowing students to take control of their own learning, as discussed in The New London Groups “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures.”
Based on all of the connections I have made with Lyotard’s “The Postmodern Condition” and today’s world of education, I believe that we are still within the condition Lyotard describes. Although the landscape for education has changed, there are still gaps of employment to be filled, a need for technology trained professionals, the challenge with technology in education and the need for continuing higher education for professionals to expand their careers. Lyotard mentions that we need skills that are indispensable to the system (Lyotard, 48). In today’s world, for an administrative position, the company is not concerned if you know the main characters found in Shakesphere’s “Hamlet” that a teacher stressed to teach her students about but rather if you have the skills to use Excel, Word and PowerPoint. Education is slowly moving towards teaching skills rather than ideals but it is still in the process of transitioning. From my own experience and from what other teachers have discussed, teachers have a hard time accepting the fact that teaching skills is much more important than completing the curriculum requirements. We can only move forward with education if people realize that skills are more valuable than a checklist.