Written by It was a recent article in the Los Angeles Times, entitled “Handing out iPads to Students isn’t Enough,” and a prompt from @Think_teach that inspired this next post. What is our role as 21st Century educators?
Is it our role to teach students the content (knowledge and facts) that they need to move forward in life? Or, is it our job to teach them the skills (critical thinking, application etc.) that they need to move forward?
It is in my opinion, that in era where information is available at the “click of a button” that we should be teaching them the skills to locate, analyze and apply this information, not merely memorize it. I understand that a certain level of content understanding is important and necessary, however should we be using the content to teach them the skills they need, or using the skills they have to teach them the content?
As @Think_teach suggests this may differ for each student, but I might also add per subject. I know that in my English course we use the content (poetry, fiction, film etc.) to teach a skill (analysis, communication, application). It is true that without the knowledge of the text that they may not be able to practice their skill, but where does the true value lie, in the content or skill?
As we fast forward into the 21st Century, and the implementation of technology into the classroom, knowledge is only the starting point; we need to teach them how to apply their knowledge and as the article suggests encourage the creation of new information and/or technology.
I am interested in hearing your feedback. Please leave a comment.
Hi Sarah,
it’s been great tweeting with you, and to have you consolidate some of your thinking on the blog – this is the PERFECT way to use these tools. I strongly suggest that you take a look at Tim Hutton, from RSGC, and Cohort 21 member from ’12-’13 and his thinking on the subject: http://cohort21.com/members/thutton/
Enjoy the discussion,
garth.
Sarah, I’m excited by the questions you are posing and see some important musings bubbling to the surface. You are not alone (cue MJ song) in wondering these things, as many teachers who are noticing what technology in the class changes are asking the same questions.
I read this great article (http://www.wired.com/insights/2013/12/rethinking-education-self-directed-learning-fits-the-digital-age/) that I think connects nicely to your ponderings here. Amy Harrington writes:
In its inception, fact driven accumulation and regurgitation served a purpose as did punctuality, direction following, obedience and conformity…There no longer is a need to memorize disjointed, a la carte facts and call that learning. Memorization is a useful skill but in and of itself it is not demonstrative of thinking and learning. What one is capable of doing with that information is more relevant. Someone who engages in rote learning may give the wrong impression of having understood what they have written or said. By definition, rote learning repudiates comprehension, so by itself it is an ineffective tool in mastering any complex subject at an advanced level.
The rest of the piece is as intriguing and useful. So not so much feedback as more fodder for your fire.
Thank you so much for the resource Celeste it definitely sounds like it is worth checking out. When planning a lesson and looking for new ways to integrate technology (Twitter, Diigo, Poll Everywhere) into my lessons, I now find myself referring to the SAMR model more and more, to ensure that I am challenging my students with higher level learning. I am also interested in how we can use technology to move our students beyond rote learning (and teaching to the test) to develop the critical thinkers needed for the future. We already know all to well the problems associated with standardized tests.