Technology At City University of Seattle

The Web 2.0 Connected classroom has a blog entry that is well worth reading when it comes to how colleges can incorporate Web 2.0 into the classroom better. The distinction comes in with the difference between Teaching and Facilitation of the conversation. Personally I think facilitation is a worthy goal, but there are times where teaching needs to happen to ensure the viability of what students are learning.

I am going to rip from the blog entry fairly heavily for this because each of the points is worth discussing, and discussing here. My apologies in advance for ripping a huge amount of the blog, but we should be having the same discussion, if not here, at any other place online connected with the college.

• I feel that teachers need more training in being “facilitators.” Students need choices and need to feel that they are part of the learning process. Teachers need more training in how to use Web 2.0 tools. Their training should consist of a lot of modeling by classroom teachers who actually use the tools. Administrators also need to see the benefits of using the latest technology in the learning process.
• Real world experiences, cooperative learning, changing the environment, facilitation, integrating tech, and allowing students to have choices regarding what topics they want to explore and how they would like to present the material.
• Students are motivated by the excitement of teachers and other students. Giving students choices and input in their learning will also help motivate them. We need to concentrate on encouraging other teachers to motivate students and update their teaching practices.
• Methods that bring relevancy to the material are what motivates students to enjoy learning. I saw several post about teachers needing to makes changes within themselves first and I agree with that 100%. What worked 30 years ago does not work now and that applies to any teacher that is reluctant to bring forth new innovations and discoveries in their classroom.
• Students need to know what meaning there is in the learning. Students can understand the steps/the process, but if there is no application to their lives, what motive is there for remembering?
• I was interested in the emphasis on real world application and student choice. There wasn’t a lot of disagreement. However I started thinking, what does “real world” mean? Bills, taxes, 9-5, chores. Is this what we mean by “real-world” in education? I think we mean some kind of ideal world where people pursue their interests regardless of the constraints of authority. If we mean that we can prove that some one, some where uses the topics we teach, that is different (and probably not motivating).
• I think it all goes down to how well the teacher interacts with the class and then introducing them to technology that supports their learning. I try and use lots of simple applications that the students can master -especially in terms of collaborating eg online whiteboards/Google docs etc.
Source: Web 2.0 Connected Classroom

As we move forward with our own social networking plan at the school (even if it is slow right now), the questions that we need to start answering are the ones that are being asked above. What are the thoughts of the readers here? Are these worth rebutting and talking about or worth doing something completely different with?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Social Networking for Education (q-ontech.blogspot.com)
• Teachers to Tech Support-We are Not the Enemy! (blogs.adobe.com)
• Teachers in the New Education Thrust (klp.org.in)