How do we best learn? I asked this question to myself, my family and my peers (all in all just over 150 people replied) and the overwhelming response that I received was that they (and I) learn best by doing something themselves. The general consensus was that someone could be very articulate and explain something very well but unless we completed the task ourselves that no deep, meaningful learning took place. Within the English syllabi films have to be studied and as such technical features such camera movements, lighting and sound effects have to be understood by the students in order to fully understand how meaning is created within this particular textual framework. When studying poetry or prose commonly the teacher will have the students complete a creative task utilising the skills that they have analysed in order to have a deeper understanding of the text itself. However, this is not done with films and it is shame. Many teachers note that even if they did have the resources that it would be too long of a process to have the students create and edit their own films (this is something that I have heard far too often!). This is a gross misunderstanding on their behalf though. As detailed by Douglas Eagle the programs out now are very easy to use, and in some cases all is needed is to drag and drop in order to complete editing tasks. The films do not have to long or beautiful works of art but what they can afford is students the opportunity to express themselves in a different form and in doing so learn a little more about how meaning can be created in a film. The use of ICT should never be deemed too hard, as like in this case they can have some very positive effects for students’ learning.

Have you ever lost all your work that you were doing on the computer? Everyone has and everyone has felt that same sense of dread followed by the desire to sit there and just cry. What would happen if something liked this happened in a school in which all the computers were linked to one another? Wesley Fryer addresses this very question in his blog concerning back up procedures. If an entire school was to crash with all the computers networked (during my second practicum all the library computers, computer rooms and laptops that were available to each faculty were networked) the results could be catastrophic, especially if the internal server was to crash. Wesley highlights the Amazon Simple Storage Service that is available in America and Europe. Basically it is an external server that for a small cost can be accessed by any school, to which they can send all their files to in order to have a back up that cannot be corrupted by an internal system crash. As we theorise and argue about the place of ICT in education realities such as this need to be planned for in order to create an environment in which ICT can be used without fear of losing any accumulated information.  

Before using ICT in the classroom the teacher should always ask, how is this going to facilitate learning within the given subject area? If the answer is that the learning can be still as meaningful without the ICT than its use cannot be justified and this is true of any pedagogical or equipment usage. For instance when preparing board notes for students the teacher should always be asking is this going to meaningful and relevant for the students or is there a better way to transfer the knowledge. This same approach should be used for the inclusion of ICT. Is using the smart board going to provide more engagement and more meaningful learning than say a group discussion? It may or may not, depending on the class. Is a wiki necessary for the project to be completed with the best possible results possible? Maybe.

ICT is not always the best possible facilitator and this became clear for when I was teaching poetry. The most meaningful learning I witnessed in my students (a low ability streamed class) was when I borrowed some art supplies from the art department and had the students simply draw the images described within the poem, as they saw them. The results were fantastic as students, who had been unable to express their views either through verbal or written expression produced very detailed images of what they saw when the read the poem. In this case ICT was needed in order for meaningful learning to occur. However, English is a very large subject area with many different areas of study and thus opportunities for the use of ICT to occur as a facilitator.

Cognitive tools are very important for the study of English, as English is primarily concerned with the representation, design and composition of texts. For instance media is now a very large component of the subject. In order to understand how media creates meaning the students need to be actively engaged with their own compositions in order to develop deeper understanding of how meaning can be manipulated. Photography has long been the domain of the art department but there is now a very RELEVANT and MEANINGFUL use for it within English. For instance one can provide extensive notes on how light and shadow can be manipulated in order to produce a certain emotive response, but as most people are experiential learners the students can learn how this happens and a deeper, more personal level by interacting with the media themselves and producing their own images. For example students can take a simple photograph such as the one below and then play with the image in order to create different emotive responses. Through this usage the implementation of the ICT acts as a facilitator for more meaningful learning, as students can better understand how an advertisement can manipulate the responder in order to illicit specific emotive responses (the image below for instance could be used by a bed and breakfast advertising relaxation based holidays) . It is through interaction such as this one that the best possible outcomes can occur through the use of ICT.

Image: ‘And I Saw Your Hand With a+Loose+Grip+on+a+Very+Tight+Ship‘
www.flickr.com/photos/51035555243@N01/85441961

The study of English can become very introspective for students as commonly (if the text is written) they have to imagine the world that has been created or recreated by the composer. More often than not the teachers spend far too much class time describing what the world of the composer was like, how this impacted the text’s composition and also what the world depicted in the text was like. Teachers and students alike a left pawing over book after book in libraries in what can only be called a painstaking process. This is valuable time that could have been spent exploring the actual text itself rather than assumed factors (this is very much the case with the study of Shakespeare). ICT can provide a very good way in which the desired information can be still delivered without intruding on the class time.

Within his speech Seymour Papert raises some very interesting points for discussion but none more so than his idea of the school as a production line. Papert argues that schools represent a production line, similar to that of a factory, in which children are processed and ultimately released according to a regimented schedule. This process is, according to Papert outdated and irrelevant with the capabilities that ICT presents for education. The power is rather with the child and as such it is the child that should have the ability to choose the path of their education in order to control their learning. Thus for Papert the old constructions of the school must be changed in order to stop constricting the opportunities that ICT can present education.

However, I have some very large concerns regarding this new step of the child controlling their own learning paths by using ICT. My main concern is that Papert argues that children should control their own learning through the use of ICT. In theory this sounds like a very worthwhile idea that could allow for some very positive outcomes. However there is still the concern of the syllabus. Justifiably if the education system took the path that Papert suggests than there would be no need for subject syllabi, however, what Papert seemingly glosses over is that cognitively, humans have not changed only the technology that is available has. Syllabi serve a very important purpose in that they provide a very clear link to where a child should be within their cognitive development. For instance within the secondary English Syllabi outcome four changes from stage four through stage six (with stage six it also changes in complexity from standard to advanced level English), according to where the child’s cognitive development should be. Through this change there is a clear link between the development of the student and the syllabi in order to meet a specific developmental need. If the child is given complete control over their learning (as is suggested by Papert) than it would be much harder to ascertain the developmental progress of each child. There has to be definable path, a stair case as such that the child can climb in order to reach the next level.

Image: ‘Murano Storm‘
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9147703@N03/2054509168

So that all the children are progressing along the same path, that path has to be very clearly defined in order to progress accordingly. For example students could use a wiki in order to study poetry. Through the wiki students could explore and annotate specific poems and also provide links to help one another. However, there would have to be specific instructions and expected outcomes outlined to the students so that the learning that is taking place would have some kind of meaningful and also assessable outcome. The cognitive development of the child is very important and in order to meet EACH child’s needs there does need to be some kind of direction. Student centred learning is where the future in education lies, however complete control cannot be given to the child. Rather the teacher, whilst allowing the child freedom, must still have some sort of directive control in order to maintain that the child is progressing along the correct path. If there is no path it is very foreseeable that students could wander off course and thus not meet expectations of where they should be developmentally. It is a fine line between too much control and not enough for both the teacher and the student and it is the walking of this fine line where the future of education lies.  

t12

I completely understand where Mac is coming from on this. Whilst I was on my first prac I did not even have a working overhead projector let alone any ICT equipment. This could lead to a very major problem for the coming generation as with a distinct unevenness of funding many students could be very disadvantaged which may in turn lead to some students not being able to maximise their potential. If this happens than it could prove to be more than a problem but rather a large and widening gap between social classes.