No one would even think of allowing a child to use a car in hazardous city traffic, without ensuring that this child has sufficient knowledge of the rules of the road and experience in navigating the vehicle.
Why is it, then, that access to the internet is given to our children, without providing them with adequate preparation? An extract from an article that appeared in The Wall Street Journal on 18 July 2007 provides some food for thought:
Open up The Britannica at random and you're far more likely to find reliable knowledge than if you were to open up the Web at random. That's why we don't open up the Web at random. Instead, we rely upon a wide range of trust mechanisms, appropriate to their domain, to guide us. Amazon gives you ways of checking to see if a particular reviewer is trustworthy, but the mechanisms are not particularly rigorous because not all that much is at stake when considering the 6,001st review of a Harry Potter book. At eBay, where your money is at risk, the trust mechanisms are more reliable. On a blog, the persistence of previous posts means you can read further to see if you trust the blogger. More important, the recommendation of other bloggers you already trust is a good indicator. At Wikipedia, the rather sophisticated governance processes help establish trust, as does the complete transparency of the discussions behind the articles. On mailing lists, we learn over time who's a blowhard and who's a source of knowledge even if we don't know what her real name is. These examples are not exceptions. They are the rule and they have been from the beginning, because from the beginning the Web has been about inventing ways to make its own massness -- its miscellaneousness -- useful.
Wow! Quite a mouthful! But it makes one think.
You can read the entire article (quite a long, interesting one) at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118460229729267677.html
It is clear that the role of the teacher must change: from that of a knowledge dispenser, to one of equipping learners to find accurate information themselves.
| related link
In the previous posting the question was posed what level of certification is required when teachers are taught computer skills; in fact the necessity of any certification at all was questioned. Interesting comments arguing both sides of the issue were made and I suspect that the debate is not over.
Another question, however, is being raised: How much IT training is indeed required for educators? If IT is to be used as a teaching and learning tool in schools, one would expect teachers to be comfortable in its use. But how much technical knowledge do they require?
A person learning to drive a car must know the various controls and what they do; but is it necessary to know the technical details of the operations of the gear box, or how internal combustion turns wheels?
Our goal is to make curriculum delivery through computer and related technologies a reality. The important issue that we must come to grips with is how much technical training is required. If we go for an over-kill, we are wasting time and resources; at present all teachers are burdened by many activities and one wants to avoid placing any unnecessary loads on them. On the other hand, there are also dangers in under-training.
How much IT training is enough, yet adequate, for educators?
| related link
A certificate was issued when I was born; when I graduated a certificate was handed to me; I received a marriage certificate after my wedding; I am sure that one day, when I die, a certificate would be issued (posthumously) to verify this achievement.
Over the years I have also received certificates of attendance for enduring boring seminars; I even have a certificate to prove that I have been to the Cango Caves.
There are, however, other important things that happened to me real mile stones for which I have no documentary proof: my first tooth; my first step; all the other "firsts" in my life; and the fact that I managed to learn to use a computer (which is quite an achievement for one who is technically challenged). But the absence of certificates for these things is no real disadvantage to me: the fact that I have teeth, can walk and can use a computer for basic operations that is enough for me.
We are busy with the titanic task of helping all our educators to gain basic computer skills. Why? We want them to use computers for curriculum delivery, but they must know the basics first. To some extent we are traveling in uncharted waters and there are some unexpected obstacles that could sink our efforts.
When informed about prospective IT training, one of the first questions that some teachers ask, is: "Will I get a certificate?" The implication of the question often is: no certificate, no participation in the training.
This raises a number of questions: To what level of IT competency should we train teachers? Should we train them to the level where they can be "certified"? Should teachers be willing to acquire the necessary skills to enhance their teaching without insisting on a piece of paper to prove it? Should we settle for a certificate of attendance?
Please be the judge: what are the pros and cons of these different approaches?
| related link
Two donkeys had to go on a long journey and were given a choice as to the load they had to carry. In front of them were two huge bags of equal size: one of them contained cotton and the other one sugar. The donkeys pondered the matter for a while: one of the donkeys chose the bag of cotton and the other one was satisfied to take the bag of sugar.
After trekking for a couple of hours over a steep hill, the donkey carrying the sugar was near collapse, while the one with the cotton load still had a spring in his step. Then they came to a river that they had to wade through. On the other side of the river, the donkey with the sugar load suddenly discovered that his load virtually disappeared. The other donkey was dismayed at the volume of water that was absorbed by the cotton and was later even more surprised at how reluctant the fibres were to release the water. One can imagine the ecstasy and agony of the rest of the journey.
The moral of the story: it is not always the course of wisdom to choose the easy start.
This principle can surely be applied to teachers who find it a daunting task to start out on the IT road. The load of training, and coming to grips with technology as a teaching tool, could at times feel unbearable; some teachers may even contemplate giving up. The lesson from the donkey with the sugar is that the load gets lighter if one endures. Eventually the use of technology will make the teaching task a breeze.
Those that insist on a light load will get bogged down with old-style teaching methods and paradigms.
Perhaps we must spend more time showing our educators the sugar (and allow them to taste it) when we start them off on the IT journey.
| related link
The internet has been promoted by some as a panacea for increased student achievement. Some believe that when a school is connected, then, miraculously, the light bulbs will go on in the minds of learners and achievement will rise. School management teams are proud to herald the fact that "our school is connected".
When one examines the seven hundred Khanya schools that have been provided with internet connectivity one finds that improved teaching and learning does not necessarily take place in all of them.
The internet is neither inherently good nor bad. But by itself the internet can never be a substitute for a relevant curriculum and good teaching.
There are, however, effective and ineffective ways to integrate the internet. First, a teacher must implement a thoughtful and comprehensive plan. This implies that the teacher will know how to use the internet to the greatest advantage of the learners. They should also know relevant teaching and learning techniques and understand where the internet can play a role.
One cannot expect a teacher who has never been exposed to computer technology to have these skills, or to acquire it overnight. It is only with careful teaching, training and grooming that the necessary aptitude will be developed.
This is the challenge that is facing facilitators. Are we making sure that every teacher in the school has a clear understanding of the value of the internet? Are we helping them to understand how to use it themselves? Have we given them sufficient training in the techniques of integrating the rich information source in the curriculum delivery process? And do not forget the many different free training courses that are available that will further enhance the teacher's ability to become a master in the use of the internet.
Raising student achievement through the use of the internet holds much promise, if implemented properly. It is our duty to ensure that teachers gain the relevant skills to do justice to the fact that the school is connected.
| related link
Back Next
Kobus van Wyk - Blog
|
      Copyright © Kobus van Wyk 2008
|
|
Calendar