Those who
can use technology have an advantage over those who cannot use technology. That’s obvious. For some time this has been explained as
another example of the haves vs. the have-nots.
The divide caused by a lack of access to early exposure, training,
and opportunities (predicated on financial / social mechanisms such as
positive parenting and school district educational offerings). I see this in the classroom.
Every semester,
approximately 8% (yes, I keep purely anecdotal, statistics on all sorts of
things) of my students do not know how to do simple computer-based activities
such as using a word-processing program like MS Word, navigating to a folder on
a network drive, or saving and then retrieving a document on that same network
drive. On the other end of the bell-curve are those
students who are uber-proficient. Once
in a while someone brings in a laptop or tablet and adds the classroom printer
to their device, via wireless routing magic.
Please don’t tell anyone as this is against college policy. I give these examples merely to demonstrate the
haves vs. the have-nots.
My guess is,
we are nearing a point where there is going to be a split in the traditional
two-cell dichotomy. In a few years a
third type of student is going to emerge and this student will be stuck
somewhere in the middle of the computer-skills illiterate and the
computer-skills proficient. These
students will represent the touch-screen generation.
Most
tablets, cell-phones, and newer laptops and desktops have touch-screen
options. If all one does with technology
is consume media (movies, books, music, videos, and web-related social networking) ala
the Kindle for example, there is no need to learn about network drives or files
or how to type a cogent sentence. There
will be those who know very little, those who can navigate visual user-interfaces
to see what they want to see, and those who sit bored as I try to help the others.
For
educators, this poses philosophical and practical challenges.
The
touch-screen and the icon (like the little picture of the trash can; the recycle
bin on the computer screen) hearken back to the pictographic form of written
communication. For the previous fifteen
centuries or so, mankind has favored script-based communication for recording
information and for passing that information forwards, with deep roots in
math, language, and history. As a
comparison, the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics were pictographic while the
ancient Sumerian cuneiform represented the more script-based written language. Of course, this is not a hard and fast rule
because throughout history one can find examples of pictographs. Consider the relatively recent and universally
understood lady with a skirt verses the man in trousers on many public restroom
doors. Nevertheless, it has been
impossible for many, many years to write one’s doctoral thesis using such symbols.
The question
arises, can knowledge be created, organized, presented, rearranged,
and moved forward using a less than script-based paradigm? How can a student express their own thoughts
and ideas on a subject when they are lacking in basic scripted language
skills? I’m not saying it can't be
done. Go learn ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics
before telling me otherwise.
It reminds
me of the world imagined by Hermann Hesse in his 1943 book Magister Ludi
(The Glass Bead Game). The protagonist
of this book, Joseph Knecht, rises to fame by playing a knowledge game wherein
all fields of study, to a very granular level, are represented by glass beads
and the players of the game receive accolades by rearranging them in new and wonderful
ways. As a side note, Hesse seems to
have envisioned something similar to the internet, at least as best as a
writer in 1943 could have done it.
Are the
touch-screeners reaching out in a new way or have they devolved into something
that is going to hurt them academically?
In the short term, the answer is probably. But in the long-term, say ten years from now,
I’m not so sure.
On a more practical
level, what’s the role of the educator in all this? Obviously, those who are technology illiterate
will remain so, and should be given opportunities to learn how to do these
things. And those who love technology will
continue to excel in that field, often as a natural outgrowth of their other
passions. But, what of those who know
only the touch-screen?
The classes
I teach focus on other matters, though I do offer to help those
learners who need a crash course in how to create, save, and retrieve a
file. But these mechanical skills are a
means to an end. What I’m curious about
is whether or not the touch-screen offers a new means to the same end.
Presently, the
technology allowing for a more image-based knowledge articulation isn’t widely
available on an accessible scale. Today,
my hands are tied, as are those of all educators.
We will be stuck making the same offers for the same type of help for
those who have grown up in touch-screen land.
Yet, increasingly, students will arrive looking for a
continuation of what they know best; accessing information in a visually intuitive fashion, while still relying heavily on technology.
No comments:
Post a Comment