Vygotsky and Spontaneous Learning

Vygotsk suggests that schooled learning ought to be an experience in which teachers guide students in the acquisition of knowledge from a built up information pool (the contents of which may span a great many years).  As part of the guidance process, teachers need to find ways of bringing students to the most elemental process of learning - spontaneous learning.

While schooled learning involves a systematic process of being taught a variety of concepts (each built upon ones that came before) at specific times (periods) in a student's educational development, spontaneous learning is, well, spontaneous!  It happens randomly through various environmental stimuli that the student experiences from birth onward.  Therefore, in a given day, an individual can learn a variety of concepts in a random fashion through observation of and interaction with their world, and through basic questions posed to the people around them.  This type of learning is the basis of all knowledge acquisition.  It is the way primitive man learned to eat fruit from trees, learned to make tools, learned to build shelters and so on.

Vygotsky implies that effective teaching should involve a blurring of the lines between both types of learning.  While a teacher is expected to teach the structured curriculum, they should find ways of involving elements of spontaneous learning.  In a way, this goes back to the idea of learning through active engagement and learning through connection to real-world contexts.  What the teacher has to do, is plan lessons in a way that capitalizes on what the student brings to the classroom - what they already know - and what elements of the curriculum can be tied into their environment.  By crafting the lesson around these two factors, teaching can done with 'guided spontaneity' if you will.  That is to say, the teacher takes the structured curriculum, and creates lessons that allow students to arrive at certain conclusions based on their previous knowledge and the stimuli provided by the lesson.

As we have seen, the use of ICT can provide avenues to encourage this by allowing students to escape the four walls of the classroom.  They can collaborate with students studying the same course in various parts of the earth, share experiences and come to a variety of conclusions.  Students are also privy to information available from sources well beyond the limited views of their prescribed textbooks.  Students may also have the luxury (depending on the course) to interact with online models of the concepts they are learning and even communicate with experts in the field.

We therefore arrive at a place where both forms of learning mesh to interest and educate students.  The result is the reduction of rote learning and the molding of students into true sentient beings.

Activity 2 - Two Generation of Teachers

Silvia Ferrero's article was very enlightening.  The research findings on the difference in attitudes of older verses younger teachers was somewhat unexpected. 

My interpretation of the findings suggest that the 'generation divide' has far less impact on the the willingness and capability of teachers to utilize ICT in the classroom than previously expected.  Instead, the experience of the teacher is a far greater influential factor.  Some older teachers have backgrounds (whether through professional training or personal interest) in ICT.  Therefore, some may not be as 'afraid' of technology as many persons presume; they turn out to be far more competent and comfortable integrating it in their classrooms.  In contrast, there are persons in the net-generation who are not as comfortable with the technology they have been exposed to and are therefore less likely to gravitate towards using it in the classroom.  Those without a keen grounding in ICT may be fearful of using it in education because of the risk of 'exposing' their shortcomings - shortcomings that they apparently should NOT have since they are part of the net-generation, or so it is perceived.

The second conclusion I've drawn from the article, is that the overall willingness of persons to utilize ICT is not defined by the persons age.  Instead, it hinges on their attitude towards ICT and its possible advantages in the process of learning.  Therefore, an older teacher's attitude might be one in which they believe that both their students and they themselves could benefit from ICT, and they then decide to seek out opportunities for learning (if they had limited knowledge beforehand).  They may also be more patient and systematic in both their learning and in implementation.  A younger teacher on the other hand can be well versed in the technologies but may not see ICT in education as important or even interesting for the students.  Some may simply prefer older tried and tested methods.  Therefore, they avoid using it altogether.  While I specified older and younger teachers in these two examples respectively, it was merely to illustrate the average expected knowledge base of the two groups sitting on each side of the generation divide.  However, the same holds through in both examples regardless of age.

And that, my friends, is the way some things in this article look to me!

Cheers.

The ICT Power-game!

In reading Silvia Ferrero's “Two Generations of Teachers, Differences in Attitudes Towards ICT”, I was struck by the issue of power that became evident in her research.

In my experience, there has generally been a certain esteem placed upon the tech-savvy individual in any group. He/she was looked upon as being specially skilled and as the go-to person to get you through a difficult IT issue. It wasn't always that the person wanting help was older, many times it was younger folks (it is a misconception that everyone in the net-generation is tech-savvy). Furthermore, the go-to person wasn't always young! Regardless of age, however, that person had a certain level of respect given to them.

While respect was given to these individuals, I cannot recall it ever translating to a concept of power (although, in reality, power is not always overt). “Creating a domain of power” and splitting “teachers up into factions” on the basis of ICT, as in Sardinia, was not something I ever perceived taking root in a school setting. It is also intriguing to see, in the French context, that male teachers were showing up their ICT expertise to their female counterparts. It makes me wonder if, in this case, it is an issue of ICT sexism or if it was merely a case of males using their skills in this field as part of their attempts to woo their female colleagues.

The Scottish research which showed that a few cases of friction between teachers and the defensiveness of one's knowledge, skills and expertise, resulted from ICT issues, is something I can see more easily. For in that scenario, you may have one teacher who has the ICT skill-set and another teacher who is lacking it. The later may feel it necessary to safeguard their own knowledge or fear of losing more ground while empowering the former teacher who is already equipped for this net-generation.

Quite interesting indeed.

Group Activity 1 - Discussion Conclusion

On the posed topic "It is impossible for a developing nation to compete with developed nations in the field of ICT integration in schools", the general consensus of the group discussion was that this statement is false, that it is possible for a developing nation to compete with developed nations in this field.

My perspective is somewhat different.  One might argue its a matter of semantics.  Here goes.  It is impossible for developing countries to compete with developed ones in this field.  Each country is operating from far different backgrounds in thought, socialization, resource base, available technology, among other factors.  Essentially, the countries are not operating on a level playing field.

Developed countries are usually on the frontline of technological advances and their utilization (even if they are not responsible for the technology's development, they can usually afford to purchase it from the get-go).  Developing countries on the other hand, tend to be playing catchup most of the time.  They don't usually have the financial backbone to purchase new technologies, and even if they can, it usually means small acquisitions rather than sufficient quantities.  This goes not only for technological devices but also for infrastructural development to make effective use of new technologies.

Developing countries often rely on the generosity of other countries or entities to fund much of this type of development.  Some may argue that once we have received some of the necessary resources to get us really going in this field that it means we are competing with the developing countries.  I argue that if we are unable to integrate the wealth of technologies on a similar scale to developed countries, then we are not competing.  If we are matching the same scale as developed countries, then we are competing.  So one's perspective is hinged on what one perceives competing to mean, and what possible/impossible means in relation to that.

In stating that from a general standpoint we cannot compete with the developed nations in this regard, I am in no way suggesting that we are hopeless.  Far from it.  Quite simply, I mean that we are operating at two different levels and the realistic objectives for each country would be different based on the resources and training available.  Therefore, developing countries will use the resources and training they acquire to get as much done as possible, and will make many strides forward in this field as the pieces fall into place.

As we progress through this course, my perspective on this could well evolve to a different place based on new information, but for now, this is the picture as I see it.

ICT Usage at My School

In examining the main institution at which I teach, it appears that there is little integration of ICT in the general day-to-day instruction of most classes.  

The school possesses a computer lab that is primarily used for the delivery of Information Technology courses to the various forms.  My observations suggest that the use of computers at this institution primarily satisfies Rationale #2 of the extract from Applying New Technologies and Cost-Effective Delivery Systems in Basic Education (World Economic Forum, Dakar 2000).  The basis of this rational is to equip students with basic computer skills so that they would not fall behind the technology curve and would instead be able to take advantage of the opportunities which may come their way from a technological perspective.

Outside of the IT Lab, students have no other access points to computers set up by the institution.  However, there are many students who own laptops that were provided through a Government initiative.  These laptops appear to have had very little practical use in the classroom, based on my observation over the past six months that I have worked there.  They are used largely as gaming devices.  

As indicated in my opening, ICT seems to have little if any integration in the classroom.  The reasons for this may be several-fold:

1. While there are many students who own laptops, there are still many more who do not.  This in effect hinders any classroom approach that would require individual usage. (Remember the only computers set up by the school is for the IT Lab).

2. Teachers may not have the requisite know-how and resources to adequately incorporate the use of the laptops (ICT) in the delivery of their subject matter.  (Hence the importance of courses like this one.)

3. The physical design of the classrooms do not lend well to multimedia presentations.

4. Utilizing the IT Lab for non-IT classes requires a significant amount of juggling as there are potential clashes with the IT sessions being held in the lab at the same time.

Also, while it may be seem expensive at first, I believe newly designed or redesigned classrooms should come equipped with certain technological resources. Things like a projector should now come standard (perhaps fixed to the ceiling). That way, certain elements of lessons can be easily reproduced from class to class efficiently, for instance:- a complex diagram can be broken down into subsets as part of a slideshow and as the lesson progresses they are tied together into the full diagram; should the teacher need to backtrack to a simpler part of the diagram, simply view that image again. This saves time in drawing diagrams over and over in each classroom, or the moving around with numerous flipcharts etc. from class to class.

From the standpoint of assessments:- With a grounded use of the technology, tests/quizzes (multiple choice format) can be administered, graded and examined in a mater of minutes by having students do them electronically. This frees up a tutor from grading a large quantity of papers and affords them more time to evaluate course direction/redirection. Such assessments would also help in providing statistical data on the course areas which are strongest/weakest and where greater teaching focus is needed. Of course this isn't the only way to achieve such data, but its a lot more efficient!

There is potential for ICT integration at my institution if proper guidance can be provided to students and teachers for the positive use of the technology available, and also if more resources become available for both teacher and student.  Of course, everything does not rest on the technology itself, but the creativity of the instructor and his ability to mold the technology to his subject matter, or is it the other way around?  :)