Faculty 2.0
The article opens by explaining that Net Generation people, ages 12-25, make up a large portion of the student bodies found today. Net Generation persons have a higher visual literacy than Gen X and previous generations, and are more technologically savvy. Net Generation youth have grown up in a world based on social networks, online interactions, and IM’s; in other words, they are digital natives. Digital Immigrants are those not born in a world where technology is considered an environment more than a tool, but are making the transition into using technology more and more in their daily lives. Today’s teachers are digital immigrants, teaching digital natives. This presents a power-shift and is causing change in pedagogical theories.
The current role of the instructor is no longer that of a lecturing, teacher-centered approach, but rather a constructivist, learner-centered approach, according to the authors. The use of multi-media and multiple online technologies have created opportunities for teachers to address multiple learning styles. The focus role is off the instructor and onto the student; lessons are designed to promote discovery instead of simple ‘knowledge transfer’ from staff to student. The instructor also becomes the designer of a learning environment, rather than a lecturer. The focus also shifts from quality of teaching to quality of learning, with much of that learning taking place in cooperative rather than individual methods.
The article also notes a shift in faculty time consumption. In previous years, faculty may have focused on teaching, research, or publishing, where as today teachers are spending more time communicating via email and working with the CMS (course management system). The authors also point out that in the past teachers were typically individualistic, working within their department, not necessarily with their department. Due to the need for increased IT assistance and other issues, today’s faculty are noting higher dependency on others including IT helpers, librarians, instructional designers, and even students.
The author did introduce an interesting perspective on the ‘how and when’ institutions integrate technology into their courses. According to the article, there are five different perspectives within the staff on the appropriate time to integrate technology – and each perspective has varying motivational ideals. Those 5 perspectives are: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. The article displays these categories on a bell curve, which helps depict the transition from a few staff members utilizing the technology to nearly everyone using it. The innovators are usually ‘gun-hoe’ about the new technology, while the laggards may feel ‘forced’ to use it, rather than actually desire to use it. All of this plays a role in how the instructor’s role shifts in the classroom.
Review
The author breaks down the havoc technology is playing on instructors in a very clear, specific manner. The claims are supported through research and simplified into visual displays when appropriate. The ‘havoc’ the technology is playing is creating a shift for instructors, and that shift is also clearly outlined in this article.
The author uses relevant current social networks such as Ratemyprofessors.com to bring up questions involving the perspective of teaching excellence today, something I have not seen done throughout my other research. Are we placing too much emphasis on the outdated style of ‘knowledge transfer’ and not giving enough credit to community synthesis of knowledge? I don’t have an answer to that, but its certainly relevant to the role of the instructor discussion, and an interesting topic!
As stated in the summary, the break down of technology application by professors into a timeline is another unique perspective taken by this article. As a digital native, Net Gen myself, I sometimes forget to think of the transition into technology use and only focus on the ‘gun-hoe’ anticipation of the newest-latest-greatest and what it can do for me. I think a majority of this class is older than I am, so their perspective would be interesting here.
After reading this article, a quote comes to mind from a professor during my undergrad studies “The only constant is change.” The technology is driving a change in the student body, calling for a change in pedagogy, which, guessing by how fast technology increases, will only be a cyclic motion. Even the ‘laggards’ as the author calls them, should not fear this change, but rather embrace it and morph with it.
Hartman, J, Dziuban, C, & Brophy-Ellison, J Faculty 2.0. EDUCAUSE Review, 42, Retrieved 10/6/08, from http://connect.educause.edu/Library/EDUCAUSE+Review/Faculty20/44995.