I’ve also always thought it was interesting to think about how technology changes “what should be taught”. Once upon a time it made sense for students to sit and memorize large quantities of facts, but in today’s world it is such a simple task to look up information that perhaps it would be best to teach how to run effective searches and analysis… which again goes back to the importance of incorporating technology into education .

I use digital slide shows (“powerpoints”) in my teaching (I teach in secondary school), following the rhetorical principles of Garr Reynolds.

Furthermore, I have experimented an interesting interactive method: first, I present a chapter of my philosophy teaching program, and then I ask the students to reformulate and illustrate this content in digital slide shows.
The students search their llustrations on flickr.com (creative commons pictures) : this is a good way to make them reformulate and understand the content. Why ? Because to find the illustrations, they have to identify the pertinent keywords and tags (e.g. : what tag should be used to find a visual illustration for the idea of physical laws ? Possible answer : “equation”, i.e. a formula of a constant relation between elements).
Some examples (in French !) :
- http://profjourde.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/diaporamas-de-philosophie/
- http://profjourde.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/suffit-il-dobeir-aux-lois-pour-etre-juste/

I would love to hear your in-classroom experience with students who struggle with the basics… writing, reading and technology… and how you incorporate basic lessons into your teaching while still working on the specific style of “reading” you like and find beneficial.

They often have difficulty finding the time to participate because of working 40+ hours a week, family responsibilities including care of their parents, illness — physical and mental — and long commutes. Their backgrounds do not include this kind of learning — they may never have done anything outside of a classroom in their entire educational experience. They often have never memorized a body of knowledge — they have not mastered their multiplication tables, the parts of speech, the systems of the body, or any foreign language. Frequently, they read at the 8th grade level or below.

Their goal is often not to learn more about the world. They are often understandably looking for a ticket to a job that has benefits. They come from families that do not value education unless it is practical.

Is technology something that will motivate them to do work outside of class and engage them in the “culture of college?” In my experience, this happens only if completing the task has a clear impact on whether the student will pass or fail. The work must be assessed, it must “count” for a lot, and they must feel that it makes a difference in their performance. The feedback has to be immediate. Podcasts are better than doing a reading, certainly, but if they can get by without doing either, then it doesn’t get done.

For those of us with intense teaching loads at non-research universities and no release time, it is a tremendous challenge to find the time to develop content to be delivered as new media whether it is clicker questions or podcasts or on-line quizzes. There are just so many hours in the day. And, it is not a static process — all of it has to be continually redone and updated.

–Laura

I also think we need to understand how our students want to express themselves. Just last night I was lamenting that I felt the technology (in this case BlackBoard) was getting in the way of my learning instead of helping it.

Let’s take your example of the Socratic classroom and philosophy (but why have you switched the ground away from Math?). I think the Socratic classroom, as inherited from the Greeks, is probably one of those fictions we tell ourselves in the academy. But nevertheless lets take it on the surface. Are we to imagine that those who taught in the “Socratic Way” prior to the invention of the printing press did not alter their teaching practices in any way? That all around them with the growth of available print texts the teachers said, “No these books are new technology, we should stick with our old ways of instruction.” Perhaps some did, but the successful ones realized that the existence of books allowed them to significantly alter their classroom practice, and thus the modern University system was born (okay this is a really fast history but you get the point). Yes, we will still have dialogue in the classroom, sit in on any one of my classes and you will see I totally agree with you, but I don’t think we can anymore have a class based entirely on in class dialogue. This may mean podcast lectures, this may mean inviting others outside the academy to participate in the discussion . . .it may take many forms, but to be sure the classroom that remains unchanged by the digital network will be a quaint ineffective relic.

And, I’m all for authority, but lets not base it on a piece of paper that says I have a PhD, lets base it on something better, like you know actually knowing something . . .

re:furniture, not really that invested in how this gets implemented. I think there are probably various ways. I just want moveable furniture to accommodate a range of teaching and learning activities.

@Jon Precisely! Should have put that line in my original post. We are beyond the ability to differentiate between online v. offline. In fact I should have had that whole paragraph. (I often say, “be online or be irrelevant,” but your paragraph has a more nuanced way of making that point. Plus the more important point that students are going to use digital tech whether we use it or not.)

@Lance: totally agree with you re:PowerPoint. I have seen some very effective uses of PowerPoint, and often tell my grad students (future teachers) to read Presentation Zen. Slide show software can be used really effectively. My particular complaint with PowerPoint is that it is designed specifically against such uses, as a piece of software you have to work against it to design good presentations. This is why I prefer Keynote which operates more as image design software than document design, but ultimately this is a matter of preference. (There are not online slide software programs that mimic the image creation of Keynote over the document design of PowerPoint.) I think maybe we need a class for instructors about design, one component of which could be slide design and if you don’t pass you can’t use the software to teach (I am only partially kidding).

Also I think your point about class size is really important, there is a tremendous amount of privilege in the SMU example that goes unmentioned. Ultimately what we are talking about, or should be talking about is effective use of digital technology, not being naked or clothed.

My point is that yanking computers out of classrooms to keep people from using PowerPoint badly sidesteps the important questions about pedagogy. As a matter of policy, wouldn’t it be more productive to provide support for profs to use classroom technology more effectively?

It’s also important to highlight a point you made about small class size at SMU, where Bowen is dean. The value of “teaching naked” surely depends a lot on the size and format of the course. I’m at a large state university where I teach a 700-student class about human sexuality and culture (where “teaching naked” would be particularly precarious). Yanking computers out of the lecture hall for that class would seriously harm the level of interaction I have with students, especially because I’d have to do without clickers (which are integrated with my PowerPoint slides). Being able to display, in real-time, the frequency distribution of students’ behaviors or attitudes about sexuality breaks down the traditional model of a lecture as one-way flow of knowledge and opens up conversation in a way that would otherwise be impossible in such a large class. So, in my case, having computers in the classroom allows me to have the kind of interaction with students that Bowen’s policy is meant to achieve at SMU.

Regarding the “either or” debate, we’re now well beyond the point that we can think in terms of online v. offline, traditional v. technology-enhanced, etc. Whether we as educators create online or technology-enhanced aspects of our courses or class sessions, our students will add these dimensions to whatever we do. Whether we embrace and incorporate technology into our teaching or not, students are taking digital notes, texting each other about the class, creating Facebook study groups, etc. etc. etc. Sure, there might be days when a good old-fashioned, low-tech discussion is in order. But suggesting that such conversations can or should exist outside the realm of “new technology” is to ignore the potential to expand, enhance, and add enduring value to what we’re able to do in the limited “contact” time we have with our students.