— Scott McLeod (@mcleod) October 28, 2013
The tweet above was made in the context of a debate (here) on flipped-classrooms in a University setting. Flipped-classrooms are not the subject of this posting, but Scott McLeod’s quotation from the debate on the e-Literate blog is.
It reads “Exaggerated claims by ed tech enthusiasts are not helpful, but neither are exaggerated claims by ed tech skeptics” – I suppose there will always be a debate between the old and the new – but unfortunately it is sometimes couched in the language of the progressives and the regressives.
In my last blog posting I cited work from Erika E. Smith where she conducted a literature review (2012) around the work of Mark Prensky. Smith has an interesting use of terminology where she talks of a dialogue of distinction in the use of the digital immigrant/native construct.
In moving on from that I wonder how we develop a dialogue of inclusion rather than letting develop a dualistic approach – those that e and those that don’t e.
Is it a question of enthusiasm versus skepticism? Every country, every educational system has its own context and there will always be some who try to discount the e, equally there are the e enthusiasts who want change now.
I have found in my own practice that consistent small changes and conversations bring most teachers forward in considering changes towards their teaching and learning practices.
Exaggeration won’t work in education. It will lead to skepticism. Consistency will work and may indeed lead to genuine enthusiasm.
Smith, E 2012, ‘The Digital Native Debate in Higher Education: A Comparative Analysis of Recent Literature’, Canadian Journal Of Learning & Technology, 38, 3, pp. 1-18, Education Source, EBSCOhost, Accessed 27 October 2013.
Image from Southern Methodist University, Centre for Teaching Excellence (here)