Educational Technology and Pedagogic Encounters Review
Heather Sanderson
Eastern Connecticut State University
Dr. David Stoloff
February 5, 2019
After reading Educational Technology and Pedagogic Encounters, I found Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5 to be the most influential on my professional development. These chapters discuss the impact of various new technology platforms which are being used in education, how Facebook can be a platform for an engaging, expansive learning experience, how democratizing the classroom, as well as encouraging rhizomatic thinking is possible with educational technology, and the new roles of the student and teacher in educational technology.
Chapter 2 in Educational Technology and Pedagogic Encounters discusses how the use of the mobile phone, Facebook, videoconferencing, and YouTube can “democratise pedagogic practices” (Waghid, Waghid, & Waghid, 2016, p.34). I appreciated the author’s acknowledgement that even though students may feel positive about using technology, not every student has the ability to use technology effectively to improve their individual learning (Waghid et al., 2016, p. 15). I have found that many of my students are very adept at using online resources to answer questions I have given them but, as the authors discussed, many students have a difficult time weeding through the sheer volume of information and determining what is important or which resources are trusted and valid. I usually have to direct my 7th grade students to a list of reputable online resources, otherwise I end up with projects or reports that include information that is not correct.
McHaney states that the use of mobile phones “has become the main learning tool for the generation of millennial students” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.17). In the past five years it has gone from a little more than half of my students having their own iPhone to almost every one of my students possessing an iPhone or similar device. My students are now instantaneously connected to everything that is going on in the world, they are able to google any question they may have, and they are in constant contact with their friends. While phone use is not permitted in our school, each one of our students has an iPad and we use them on an almost daily basis. Chapter 2 discusses how Apple developed applications “apps” for the purpose of “teaching and learning” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.18). The apps on my student’s iPads have been a great asset to my science classroom. There are apps specifically designed to allow students to build atoms, visually show them what atoms and molecules look like while being heated through their phases, and apps that allow for a student to start an earthquake and measure the seismic waves in order to locate the epicenter. These apps have made science class much more tangible to my students and has improved their understanding of the content.
A more controversial topic of using Facebook in the classroom is also discussed in Chapter 2. Our district has advised us to not be on Facebook at all. They have scared us by showing us examples of things other teachers have posted across the U.S. that have gotten them fired. Mazer, Murphy, and Simonds believe “that teachers with a rich self-disclosure on Facebook increase students’ motivation and affective learning, as well as their own credibility” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.21). I strongly believe it is important for your students to get to know you and trust you, but I believe those relationships can be built within the classroom without Facebook. I feel certain boundaries need to be maintained between student and teacher that Facebook can blur.
Chapter 2 discusses how Videoconferencing can be of great use in the classroom. It is a way students can connect to discuss solutions or work on projects. It can connect a student with another student in a different country for a foreign language class. Students can even connect with professors outside of their school to go on virtual field trips or perform virtual experiments.
Chapter 2 also discusses the use of YouTube which I often use in my science classroom. The authors suggest using YouTube to upload pre-recorded lessons or have the students “upload videos of educational issues that they have recorded in class” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.27). The authors also point out the benefit of being able to pause YouTube videos, and I would add the benefit to replay the video as many times as needed, so “the pace of a lesson can be dictated by a teacher or by a student’s level of understanding”(Waghid et al., 2016, p.27). This is a great way to provide differention in the classroom. There is amazing science content on YouTube, such as experiments and videos describing different content I teach that are very useful for my visual learners and I use them quite often.
I found Chapter 3 in Educational Technology and Pedagogic Encounters to be very informative and inspirational as a science teacher. The Chapter begins with a little bit of background of South Africa under apartheid and the effort to use education to promote a more “democratic, free, equal, just, and peaceful society” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.36). Chapter 3 discusses how Facebook can be used in a science class when covering controversial topics that may include quite a bit of discourse. The teacher discussed in this chapter implemented three lessons using Facebook, one was cloning, the other was global warming, and the third was evolution. The first lesson started off with a video posted to the Facebook group to explain what cloning was to the students followed by discussion. There were many students who were unable to participate fully in this first cycle because of technological issues such as an inability to log on, their password was forgotten, or they owned a BlackBerry which did not display the information. I find the first time I implement an assignment with new technology glitches always happen and a smooth rollout should never be the expectation. But once the kinks are worked out technology is a great tool to enhance the learning outcomes and increase the level of engagement of students. As the teacher went on to implement his lesson through Facebook on cloning he had resolved the technological issues and “the students were more adept at and confident in their use of Facebook for learning” (Waghid et al., 2016, p. 54). The teacher found that the students needed “to be taught skills of deliberation during the third cycle, thus allowing them to be open, willing to listen to others, and even change their viewpoint” (Waghid et al., 2016, p. 55). During the third cycle on Evolution the teacher wanted to “reduce his role to that of ‘ignorant master’” (Waghid et al., 2016, p. 57). All teachers have a goal for their students to intrinsically want to learn and search for answers to clarify their questions. Teachers do not want to just shovel information to their students but want to introduce them to topics that make them want to think independently and deeply. This Facebook case study showed how the students evolved into self-learners that explored the controversial topics in depth and brought the discussion to a myriad of places any teacher would be proud of. While a Facebook lesson could not be implemented in my classroom because of our districts policies, a similar outcome may be had if I opened up a discussion board through Google Classroom where students could share ideas.
Chapter 4 focusses on how educational technology encourages a democratic education and more “rhizomatic” thinking. In this chapter the authors reviewed what had happened in the Facebook case study and noted that the students “learning was highly personal, contextualized and relevant to their own investigations as they endeavoured to construct and co-construct responses based on their own choices made through use of the Internet and discussions on Facebook” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.90). The students took ownership of their learning and did not rely on a teacher for their knowledge which will empower them to take charge of their own education in the future. I also found it interesting when the authors expressed that the students took charge “without necessarily being disciplined or regulated to do so by the demands of prescribed curricula and the pedagogic authority of teachers” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.90). This showed that the teacher indeed became the “ignorant master” he was desiring and the student’s self-motivation to learn and express themselves was enhanced by the use of Facebook. Another area of student learning growth found through the Facebook case study was that the students were more “rhizomatic” in their thinking. The authors state beautifully that “like the offshoots of a rhizome that forge links with other rhizomes, the students’ thoughts were scattered and then scrambled together to form new assemblages of knowledge” (Waghid et al., 2016, p.94). The students didn’t have a pre-described area that their discussions needed to lead them, they just went where the knowledge they were gaining lead them.
Chapter 5 focuses on the new roles of teacher and student in the new frontier of educational technology. First it is stressed that students should be expected to become more rhizomatic in their thinking through the use of educational technology. Another interesting shift through the use of educational technology that is discussed in Chapter 5 is the shift from the competitive “performative culture of producing only winners and losers in learning contexts” to a more collaborative classroom which is rich in “trust and humour”(Waghid et al., 2016, p.98). I have seen the shift from the high stakes testing to the collaborative hands-on projects our new NGSS curriculum entails. Chapter 5 also puts into focus the “democratizing” of our classrooms through educational technology. Learning through the Facebook site allowed each student the equal right to participate. There was no teacher calling on one student or another. One concern about the Facebook case study that the authors brought up was the lack of anonymity. I personally do not see this as a problem. When in school, no one is anonymous. In fact I believe if the students interactions were anonymous it may lead to more problems because with anonymity sometimes comes disrespect and a lack of moral regard for others which is very rampant on the internet these days.
References
Waghid, Y., Waghid, F., & Waghid, Z. (2016). Educational Technology and Pedagogic
Encounters: Democratic Education in Potentiality. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.