Reading about new strategies for student learning and cell phone applications in the classroom reminded me of something I learned this summer while teaching in South Korea. In remote areas of South Korea, students are learning from a teacher who is not physically in the classroom. Teachers were spending so much time commuting to these schools that the government decided it would be much more effective and efficient to have English teachers skype in to the classroom from all over the world. Clearly, today’s classroom is unique from any other time in history.
I found the Prensky reading to be relatively outdated as far as inspirational ways to use technology in the classroom today. It seems that most students have smart phones, and very few have standard cell phones. I think the capabilities of a smart phone go far beyond some of the more basic examples provided in the text. That being said, I think that this teaches an important lesson: technology is outdated by the time a book is written about it. It is important that we include our students’ opinions and feedback when selecting technology for the classroom. Chances are, they will know about the most innovative forms of technology before I do.
The Rosen text made a point that I think is very true about 21st century students: the preferred method of communication is texting. Texting is often the means of connecting with others and making plans. I think it should also be part of the conversation that some critical components of communication can be lost through texting. Texting requires no body language, facial expression, tone of voice, etc. In a way, one could say that it has been abstracted to become communication in its simplest form. I can see a juicy lesson being developed from this premise. What kind of information is lost in texting? What are the results? Miscommunication? Misinterpretation? Misunderstanding? I think this would be a very relevant conversation in a 21st century middle or high school classroom.