Group items tagged

4 sense thinking is uncritical, episodic, and disjointed, but it is also powerful because it is taken for granted”. Thus whilst the past ten years have undoubtedly witnessed significant changes in the technological practices and predilections of children, young people and young adults, it would seem sensible to reconsider the status of the ‘digital native’ description as a prima facie account of young people’s lives in the early twenty- first century. In particular, there is a pressing need to develop and promote realistic understandings of young people and digital technology if information professionals (especially librarians, teachers and other information specialists) are to play useful and meaningful roles in supporting current generations of young people. Against this background the present paper now goes on to question the accuracy and primacy of the ‘digital native literature’ in reflecting the realities of young people’s actual engagements with digital media and technology. IMPLICATIONS OF THE DIGITAL NATIVE DISCOURSE We should first examine in closer detail the broad body of work that can be said to constitute the digital native literature1, particularly in terms of how the conditions, capabilities and consequences of young people’s technology use are portrayed. In this sense, there are a number of differing practices and dispositions that are associated with the digital native condition: i) The empowered di

You can’t ‘firmly believe in life-long learning’ and simultaneously not be clued in to the largest transformation in learning that ever has occurred in human history. Those two don’t co-exist. Being a ‘life-long learner’ is not ignoring what’s going on around you; you don’t get to claim the title of ‘effective educator’ if you do this.

Changing inertia into momentum, not waiting for someone to hand us the answer, taking responsibility ourselves rather than blaming others for our own inactivity - that’s what life-long learners do. That’s what effective educators do. That’s what we owe our children.

t’s not about us. It’s not about our personal or professional priorities and preferences, our discomfort levels, or any of that other stuff that has to do with us. It’s about our students: our children and our youth who deserve at the end of their schooling experience to be prepared for the world in which they’re going to live and work and think and play and be. That’s the obligation of each and every one of us. No educator gets to disown this.

The world of work has moved on, but the educational structure, despite the efforts of many individual teachers and administrators, crawls along

Bill Gates favorite boy Salman Khan, believe that kids sitting alone, working by themselves, with canned, inflexible data in front of them, is the best preparation for life in the present and future.

So here is what your classroom, and your school, needs to offer kids:

1. A learning environment in which students make most decisions.

2. A time environment in which students learn and work along a schedule which makes sense to them

3. A technological environment which supports collaboration across every barrier.

4. A social environment where adults do not rank students according to their oppressive standards.

An Empathetic Mentor

A Technology Harmonizer

It is no longer acceptable to teach only from a textbook, to rely on the same worksheets an methods year after year without at least questioning them and researching why they are the best resource available.  

 Powerpoint and Word are becoming antiquated as newer and more powerful presentation and editing suites become available to teachers.

This means having social media accounts and understanding how they are used, even if you don’t use them specifically for learning.

This student-centered focus also creates learning opportunities for the teacher to learn with students, developing their teaching and collaborative skills

One of the keys here is that we work at making the technology work (in the best way we can) so the lesson becomes about the learning instead of the management of machines.