Home

Embryo holding phone in womb
This was a short reading, about 16 pages when you count the biblography. But, this was thoroughly enjoyable if for no other reason that it basically just asks people to think before assuming a stance.

…Instead of having education professionals focus on the technology aspect of the debate and in certain digital native behaviors, which “common sense” has told us, are immutable, we ought to be focusing on proper pedagogy and exposing our students to information retrieval and critical information analysis skills that are in both the digital and the analog realms. We out to teach our students to actually change their approaches to learning when what they are trying out is not working for them, instead of assuming that they possess this “Nintendo over logic” which enables them to modify their learning plans when things aren‟t working out.

Finally, we need to move away from this fetish of insisting in naming this generation the Digital/Net/Google Generation because those terms don‟t describe them, and have the potential of keeping this group of students from realizing personal growth by assuming that they‟ve already grown in areas that they so clearly have not. Learners don‟t know what they don‟t know (Christensen, 2006), but if they come to the table from a position of superiority, like they are better than the so-called digital immigrants (Roberts, 2005; Windham, 2005) they lose an opportunity to learn something that they don‟t know that they don‟t know, something that may be beneficial to them. Let‟s resist “common sense” because common sense isn‟t all that common.

Read the rest of Digital Natives: Ten Years Later by Apostolos Koutropoulos and the MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching (PDF).

About these ads