I am very interested in the ways in which hyper-exposure to technology may affect cognition. Pursuing this idea, I found an article about technology as a learning tool:
which linked me to a TED talk by Sir Ken Robinson :
In the talk, Robinson explains how current Western education models (he focuses on elementary and middle school) "stigmatize mistakes" (where mistakes are, in fact, one of the many agents of creativity) to an extent that "mistakes are the worst thing you can make" in a system, and more importantly in a society, which ascribe to arcane models of intelligence, hierarchically designed for office workers to have more job opportunities and financial success than, say, a dancer. He states that schools are "educating people out of their creative capacities" and that we need to "radically rethink our view of intelligence" to foster, rather than suppress, creative individuals. To do this, intelligence needs to be viewed as interactive, diverse, related to our sensory perceptions, our kinetics (he states, "some people need to move to think") rather than concentrated in textbook, 'heady' learning.
Relative to the article, Robinson's ideas are valid in that incorporating interactive technology, such as video games and, say, Ipads, into the classroom will cater to more kinetic learners, but when I thought about this in terms of my question, Robinson's model seems to suggest two things: 1) for less creative individuals, exposure to interactive technology and learning, especially at this early age, may implant more interactive modes of learning into these individuals, diversifying their intelligence and enhancing their creativity, and 2) for creative individuals, technology may not change the way that they think and process information rather than finally provide them with a suitable agent in which to learn: creativity, in a sense, surpassing technology.
6 comments:
After visiting the first link, I read the section about concerning laptop immersion program and its effect on learning. While the study the suggest from 2005 tells a story of a overall positive effect on learning, after searching more I found that this is not true in the majority of the studies. While there is a possibility in the laptop programs fostering more engaged learning and better technology skills that could be used for learning, "...most large-scale evaluations have found mixed or no results for one-to-one initiatives." This could be placed on the laptop program alone, but it is more likely that the when the laptop programs are utilized, the schools that adopt these programs cannot implement them properly. There seems to still be hope for laptop immersion programs since they are relatively new in school systems.
Link:
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/feb11/vol68/num05/One-to-One_Laptop_Programs_Are_No_Silver_Bullet.aspx
In his TED talk, Ken Robinson stressed the diverse, dynamic and distinct nature of human intelligence. People each have different strengths, talents and learning styles. Robinson believes that the current educational system only provides tools to access and develop talents that are valued by our job seeking society. Math and language are seen as more valuable than art or dance because they are areas of study that generally lead to a steady profession. Not everyone has a strength in a subject that the educational system sees as valuable. A person’s creative or alternative talent or way of learning could be undiscovered because they have not had access to the right tools or experiences.
In an interview with Lisa Guernsey (link: http://www.parents-choice.org/article.cfm?art_id=358&the_page=consider_this ), Ken Robinson discussed how digital technologies and online tools could help some people access their talent. He stated that technology is a neutral tool that neither inhibits or allows creativity and talent. The access is what’s important. Schools should provide students with as much access and exposure to as many different tools as possible.
"There isn't an education system on the planet that teaches dance every day to children the way we teach them mathematics," says Ken Robinson in his TED Talk about creativity in education. It's a sad but true fact that our society does not value creativity. What it does value, is logic and rational. As Robinson states, "the whole purpose of public education throughout the world is to produce university professors."
According to Dave Gray in his article "Creativity in the Classroom", there is a "covert curriculum" hidden within modern education. It specializes in teaching its students punctuality, obedience, and mindless repetition. Both Gray and Robinson agree that the lack of creative outlets in the educational system all harken back to the Industrial Revolution. The late 18th and early 19th centuries praised workers who could solve problems, which, according to Gray, is a "repair activity". Education since then has sought to serve these functions. But Gray adds that "creativity is not about fixing things that are broken but about bringing new things into being". We need to recognize that humans are innately visual creatures and create systems, both educational and otherwise, that cater to those processes.
This is an interesting article and post. In particular it is of interest in the difference between collaborative and individual work.
Although traditionally educators, particularly in schools, have been very concerned about copying, plagiarism and students not doing their own work I think that if some students do not do their share of group work, it will catch up with them later, probably out there in the ‘real world’. Being able to work collaboratively is important as we have more and more complex world problems. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be able to work on our own, but we need a combination of these styles.
Given that there has been so much change in the world and as Ken Robinson says we have no idea what it will be like in even 5 years’ time we need the opportunity to have our children concentrate on more creative ways of learning and working, so they are able to take on these new challenged
This is an interesting article and post. In particular it is of interest in the difference between collaborative and individual work.
Although traditionally educators, particularly in schools, have been very concerned about copying, plagiarism and students not doing their own work I think that if some students do not do their share of group work, it will catch up with them later, probably out there in the ‘real world’. Being able to work collaboratively is important as we have more and more complex world problems. This doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be able to work on our own, but we need a combination of these styles.
Given that there has been so much change in the world and as Ken Robinson says we have no idea what it will be like in even 5 years’ time we need the opportunity to have our children concentrate on more creative ways of learning and working, so they are able to take on these new challenged
I was reading the 1st article and what I found really interested was with the study which the professor used "Twitter" to communicate with the students. After the evaluation the students who used "Twitter" had higher grades. Also the students who are involved in the "Social Media" movement have better technical skills.
I wouldnt say that social Media is actually changing the way we think, it is more of a "The way we live". Technology is making our lifes easier and easier every single day.Sure they're are "cons" but if I had a choice to hand write a letter to someone or simply "hit them up" on facebook, I would definitely use facebook.
Post a Comment