I am drowning in a sea of education theory. Normally I’m a solid swimmer. Hell, I was the captain of my college swim team. But these last four weeks have been a monsoon of educational theory; it’s been raining constructivism, I’m choking on the salty waves of substantive conversation, a monster named Pygmalion is pulling me to the bottom of the ocean, and apparently, it’s all going to be recorded for my own good.
However, as I cling to the life-preserver that is the self reminded reassurance that the worst that can happen is complete failure and a move south to be a professional lifeguard, I’m beginning to put some things together. Or at least I think I am. Either way, it’s going on this page.
Basically, in my mind, (which tends to take an axe and chop things down to the simplest possible notion,) I’ve come to the conclusion that we’re trying to teach knowledge and understanding. It’s not what the book says, but rather the methods with which we utilize texts for further understanding and the creation of knowledge. If this is true though, if understanding what knowledge is and how it’s formed and created is the goal of education, perhaps there is a better way to do it. Perhaps understanding the blog is the key to wisdom.
Here’s how my mind justifies that bold statement: Technology dictates communication. Communication creates the culture. Culture defines the knowledge. Therefore, is it fair to deduce that the best way to help students understand the nature of knowledge in today’s world is to ensure that they have a strong basis in and understanding of technology?
Hmmm… maybe we should try to apply my layman pop-theory. To be a good citizen in a democracy a person should vote. A good voter is educated in the matters of the day. To be educated in the matters of the day, one must understand the culture in its broadest sense – what’s going on in the country. To understand the dilly yo, (beyond the personal sphere,) one must communicate with others. To communicate with others, in the personal or broad sense, we rely on communications technology. However, to best understand communication technology, one must understand all of its facets. Communications technology is much more complex than most take it for; from framing, to corporate ownership, to the impossibilities of objectivity, there is much to be considered. Thus, to best set up a student to understand the nature of knowledge, wouldn’t a firm grounding in technology be essential? I think so.
The bottom line is that communication, (which is driven by technological advancement,) dictates much of the knowledge of the day. When the telegram first became popular, it changed the very nature of the English language. Sentences had to become shorter and more meaningful, concise wording became the most valued form of language. How will the Internet change language? How has it already? To ground students in an understanding in technology is to hopefully set them up with the best ability to understand the nature of knowledge in today’s world.
6 comments:
I really liked the way you have described the way many of us have been feeling, but still show how we are putting the things we are learning together. Thanks for reading my mind.
hey jon,
it sure is raining constructivism. and you pose an interesting theory for sure -- i think that literacy has been changed forever by the massive reliance and culture-dictation that technology has shaped, and i agree, in order to be able to be active and present in a society, people do need to understand ways to communicate.
everything is getting faster and while i see the need to slow down to take a breath, i also realize that i need to keep pace... the blog is a great vehicle for tryin to keep my finger on the pulse and see how communities are shaped and change so quickly these days...
i'll throw you a life preserver from the substantive deluge if you need!! ha.
xo
lo
Very insightful as usual. Technology is a very real part of our culture and arguing whether its a good thing or not is irrelevant because it is here. Instead the focus should be on how best to utilize it. I am amazed at the multitude of technologies that I am not comfortable with and feel it is part of my job as a future educator to understand these different forms in order to effectively communicate with my students. While it will be an ongoing challenge to keep up with constantly changing technologies, it should be a priority of every teacher to disseminate these to their students to properly prepare them for the world they will face as adults.
Jon, in commenting on your posting I also want to be sure to touch upon something suggested by Leah's post as well. First, however, I appreciated this effort to articulate the connection between knowledge and the means of communication. It was helpful to have your framing for purposes of our conversation on Friday, and to me it makes palpable the idea that "knowledge" is a social creation. Even though it might make our jobs somewhat easier, we just can't take the knowledge jug off the shelf and pour a little bit in everyone's mug each day. I think that you're on to a pretty central idea of Postman's...that the way in which we process information and try to make sense of it is idiosyncratic and requires time and human interaction/mediation. Maybe this also comes back to Postman's advocacy for (in my simple language) developing a kind of critical media literacy in our kids, and making a topic for conversation out of the ways in which we get our information.
To Leah's point...you guys can only do what you can do, and even heightened consciousness will not mean that you'll be prepared for every contingency or issue. I would submit that the kind of awareness that I see in so many of you is the big thing. So long as you keep yourself open (and allow the students to teach you) you'll be fine.
hey jon,
i like how you compared all the theory to the sinking/drowning sensation. I also agree with stanzler's comment about how we need to let the students teach us. i am excited for that to begin in the fall/ winter.
Post a Comment