Rebekah Willet (2017), writes about a study in which a group of 9-13 year old boys participated in a weekly class to learn how to design video games. Though by the end of the course the goal of video game design proved a bit too advanced for the young learners, some interesting insights developed regarding the process of teaching technology/teaching with technology. “It is possible that the boys did not require the tutor to give them step-by-step instructions, but instead they were gaining familiarity and learning to use the software through a gradual process of experimentation” (p.141). In this way, the article pairs nicely with the “Video Games, Learning, and Literacy” video (Gee, 2011), examining learning through a video game-like process in which the assessment is integrated into the learning. What the students in Willet’s study learned was demonstrated week-by-week in what they produced and the questions they asked; in fact, the creation of a video game was not necessary (nor, it turns out, possible) to gauge their understanding.
Wagler and Mathews (2012), discuss the ideas and methods that went into creating a mobile app that turned a trip to a local estuary into a sort of real-world museum. The meat of the piece came at the end where the authors discuss eight rules for anyone attempting to develop a similarly functioning educational app. Several of these tips, such as “collaborate with students” and “consider multiple uses for media,” provide insight beyond the development of a tour guide mobile app, and are applicable to teachers developing and implementing their own technology into the classroom in any fashion.
Frank Baker (2018) provides a curated collection of videos with which to teach students about various aspects of media literacy (though some videos seem geared more at teaching educators methods though which to teach media literacy to their students). For me, the videos focusing on “Fake News” were probably the most interesting as this concept was non-existent in my middle school days. Its a sticky subject to consider as an adult; approaching it as a young adolescent is almost mind-boggling. This article serves its purpose, but I think the author doesn’t go far enough in justifying the value of YouTube in the classroom, saying, “Every educator knows that using videos as part of instruction is one great way to get students’ attention” (para. 26). Ok, buy why? Overall though, a worthwhile resource.
Dr. Erica Halverson’s (2011) argument boils down to, “we need to teach creativity and innovation if we wan to lead the wold in creativity and innovation.” I found myself very interested in her idea of a “production oriented mode of literacy,” which focuses on creating in general, and creating meaning in particular. It caused me to consider the methods by which I will teach literacy as a future ELA teacher. Maybe constructing “This American Life”-style radio stories is a bit advanced for middle school, but something else can cover similar territory. I’m tooling around with Storybird for my EPortfolio lesson project and that might be the answer.
My biggest takeaway from this week’s readings is the idea that the process of education/learning can be an end in itself, regardless of the final product. Further, this process-based learning can not only be aided by technology but is oftentimes a more accessible model to young learners because of the digital culture in which they grew up. “It is clear, however, that children and young people are experiencing various ways of learning through their consumption and production of digital cultures” (Willet, 2017, 143). So, young adolescents are both producers and consumers and through this give-and-take they simultaneously learn and demonstrate their knowledge.
This idea is pursued further by Gee (2011) when he points out that you would never test a Halo player who has played the game for hours and hours in order to assess proficiency. The act of playing Halo for hours and hours is demonstration enough. So why do we test students in math? I think there’s a valid point here, but it is a little muddled as this is not a one-to-one comparison. The goal of playing Halo is not to learn Halo. The goal of playing Halo is to have fun; learning Halo is a necessary byproduct. The goal of participating in math class though, is to learn math. Still, the idea of a process of learning that demonstrates proficiency on its own is interesting. And the readings seem to suggest technology makes this more easily achievable.
So this brings me back to considering what sort of creative “production oriented” task could be used by students to demonstrate a certain level of knowledge, without relying fully on the product itself to demonstrate mastery. This seems like it works best with concepts that can be self-taught through trial and error and I’m struggling to see how this would be executed in English Language Arts. Perhaps teaching students to use digital tools to produce and publish writing (NCSCS.ELA.W.7.4), could be done in this way. The students’ working through the creation of a blog/website would be demonstration enough that they have achieved proficiency in the standard.
References:
Baker, F. (2018, June 6). Using Short Video Clips to Teach Media Literacy. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from https://www.middleweb.com/37862/using-short-video-clips-to-teach-media-literacy/
Gee, J.P. (2011, August 4). Video Games, Learning, and Literacy. Connected Learning Alliance. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNfPdaKYOPI
Halverson, E. (2011, May 2). Art and Stories [Video file]. TEDx. Retrieved July 20, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeeimXjwNgg
North Carolina Standard Course of Study. English Language Arts Standards. Writing. Grade 7. NCSCS.ELA W.7.4
Wagler, M. and Mathews, J. (2012). Up River: Place, Ethnography, and Design in the St. Louis River Estuary. In Dikkers, S., Martin, J., & Coulter, B. (Eds.) Mobile Media Learning . 39-60. Pittsburgh, PA. Carnegie Melon University ETC Press.
Willett, R. (2005). New Models of Learning for New Media: Observations of Young People Learning Digital Design. Jahrbuch Medien-Pädagogik 4, 127-144. doi:10.1007/978-3-322-90687-8_8
Nossen_CI5630_Final Project EPortfolio 