Trey Ratcliff, Flickr (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
(note: version of this post was published in my BSU Edtech learning log 2/4/14)
Today’s learners are fundamentally different than their parents because of the technological environment in which they have been raised. Their expectations are different. Their skill sets are different. Their brains are different.
I have structured this post around some of the common criticisms leveled against this new era of digital learners and their implications for instruction.
The digital generation’s childhood media experiences have trained them to believe that this is possible. They’ve learned the alphabet from Baby Einstein videos and iPad apps. They’ve learned vocabulary and puzzle solving skills from Dora and Blue. They’ve learned foreign languages from narratives involving a fuzzy, clock eating alien named Muzzy. So why wouldn’t they expect that school could or should be entertaining too?
Neil Postman of Amusing Ourselves to Death fame argued that Sesame Street taught kids to love TV and not school. But what Sesame Street (and Dora, Blue, Muzzy, et al.) really teaches kids is that learning can be entertaining. And what’s wrong with that? As Don Tapscott points out in his writings about the “NetGeneration”, one definition of entertain is “to keep, hold or maintain in the mind”. By that definition, one could argue the best teachers have always been the best entertainers.
Older generations have been conditioned to believe entertainment is only the reward you get after you work. We need to get past that. Just because we were bored in school, it doesn’t mean kids today should be. To paraphrase Don Marinelli (co-founder of Carnegie Mellon’s Entertainment Technology Center), it’s time for the day to day experience to be more like the reward. Call it edugagement, rather than edutainment if it makes you feel more comfortable. No, engagement should not be a goal unto itself. But it should be viewed as a necessary ingredient to achieve deeper learning objectives.
Digital era learners have grown up in a media environment that does revolve around them. They live in an on-demand world. Viewing content anytime and anywhere. Playing video games that adjust to their skill levels. Listening to radio stations that adjust to their tastes and moods. Receiving custom news feeds. One size has never fit all for this generation.
Well, until they hit the traditional classroom and are subjected to one size and speed fits all, broadcast instruction. It’s not about this digital generation being spoiled, it’s about what their media environment has conditioned them to expect and believe is possible. And it’s about how the traditional schooling experience has failed to sufficiently evolve to keep pace.
A flipped classroom where instructional resources can be consumed on one’s own schedule and pacing aligns with how the digital generation has been trained to consume media. And while allowing everyone to personally curate their own learning resources is unrealistic, students can certainly participate in the process by “guest curating” a lesson or contributing to an additional resource area. Personal expression can also be encouraged by providing choice of medium or technology in project work. In relevant subjects, narrowcasting and extreme personalization can be leveraged through the use of smart tutoring type systems (like Knewton) or Khan Academy type resources.
When Michael Wesch took an informal poll of his Kansas State Cultural Anthropology undergraduates, half admitted to not liking school. But when asked who didn’t like learning, nary a single hand was raised. So where is the disconnect?
Video games are the primary form of entertainment for what Gabe Zichermann refers to as “Generation G” and thus represents a defining frame of reference. One of the basic rules in a video game is you don’t progress until you have achieved the necessary competency. You don’t just move on after a certain amount of time. If you did, you’d probably come to hate the game pretty quickly. If you weren’t succeeding, you’d become increasingly overwhelmed on subsequent levels and likely decide “you just weren’t good at this kind of thing”. And if you were succeeding, you would get equally frustrated at not being able to progress faster and your interest would wane. Yet, that’s how a typical math class works.
As for the content they are being taught, students have always questioned “how am I going to ever use this in life?” But the “imbibe and regurgitate” model has never seemed less meaningful than it has today in a world where the internet has commoditized factual knowledge.
Students can largely teach themselves. We just need to help create structure, facilitate resources, and provide sufficient opportunities and challenges to apply and utilize this knowledge. Which is what a good video game does.
For certain subjects, like math, we need to take advantage of technology to allow personalized pacing and instruction and not be afraid to incorporate the use of games and gamification. As Zichermann discusses, a new to the industry teacher, Annanth Pi, took a third grade class who was testing below average on math and reading and with a video game based curriculum, improved performance by a grade and a half within four and a half months.
It’s true. This generation was basically born with a Game Boy (or smartphone) in their hands. They are what Prensky aptly describes as “digital natives” and these devices are an integral part of their world.
Rather than fighting it, we need to figure out to put these devices into action in behalf of desired learning outcomes. Cell phone based polling. Live tweeting classes as a form of note taking and wiki creation. Student based digital resource creation.
Instructors too often hesitate to implement innovative uses because of the perceived learning curve and not wanting to sacrifice class time to “teach tech”. But the reality is that the tech learning curve for this generation of this digital natives is almost non-existent. You don’t need to teach them tech. Just outline the task and point them in the right direction.
The concept of digital community and connection is both important and second nature to the digital generation. Social media is a means by which they collectively construct meaning of happenings in their world and is a vital outlet for personal expression.
Student engagement is inevitably tied to feeling connected to others and part of something. Modern day educators have the ability to foster community in a variety of ways. Twitter and RSS are excellent ways to indoctrinate students into a particular world, particular if they are encouraged to be active participants. Learning management systems, Facebook and Google+ pages, and virtual worlds can all be leveraged to create communities of practice. Flipping the classroom frees up time for group work and discussion. By helping students “inhabit the community” we provide context for key concepts and why they matter and as John Seeley Brown asserts, this is where deep learning happens.
To create (or preserve) a love of learning with the digital generation we need to evolve the concept of school and teaching to better align with the technology, media and social environments in which they live their lives. We need to adjust to their reality — as it is in fact — the new reality.
Start with Michael Wesch’s Vision of (college) Students Today video
Then move into visions for the reinvention of school:
And dig into games and gamification:
Gabe Zichermann’s Ted talk about gamification and Generation G
How Ananth Pi succeeded with a video game curriculum (and analytics)
Its like you read my mind! You seem to know so much about this, like you wrote the book in it or something. I think that you could do with a few pics to drive the message home a little bit, but other than that, this is great blog. An excellent read. I will certainly be back. efgkgfebegeccbed
Categories
Comments