To me, contemporary pedagogy means adapting one’s teaching style to current times. I’m grateful that a specific term for this phenomenon exists because teaching is a practice that has remained stubbornly resistant to change. In fact, it may be the most resistant to change of any everyday practice – after all, instructors commonly advocate for Socratic teaching methods, referencing a philosopher alive 2500 years ago! While I recognize the value in his methods, Socrates lived before the existence of paper. So needless to say, a lot has changed since then. A failure to incorporate modern advances into teaching strategies is a disservice to the most critical facilitator of progress, education. Fortunately the Flynn effect indicates that our education is improving, as average IQ goes up every decade. But with more incorporation of modern technology, we can improve even further. So I’m very glad that this class and professors like Dr. Murzi are encouraging us to think outside the lecture box and find newer, better ways to educate.
I’m going to go on a tangent for my critical pedagogy blog post, thanks to this video and interview of Henry Giroux dredging up considerations that I’ve been mulling over for the past few years. In this video, Giroux talks about the importance in education’s development of agency in children. In fact, he proclaims that the ultimate goal of education is the growth of agency, indicating that it might be the most important tool for children to develop – as I fully believe. Agency is what turns people into critical thinkers, leaders, the movers and shakers of the world. If you see a problem, agency is required to get up and change it. Agency is how progress happens.
Where my internal debate comes in, though, is the role of technology in enhancing agency. As Giroux addresses, technology gives children more power than they’ve ever had in developing their own agency. Almost every piece of knowledge that we have as a human race is available on the internet, and children have almost as much power as anyone else behind a computer to go get that knowledge. And they can do it autonomously.
However, not all knowledge is good to ingest, especially at a young age. As everyone knows, the worst of humanity is also available online. So I find myself debating how I would handle technology and specifically internet access if I had kids. If I could give them technology without social media, then I personally would feel less worried. But my feelings should not take precedence and practically speaking, this option might not be feasible. Social media is now the reality of the world, and we need to equip children to handle it and to build up their emotional intelligence in the face of our new reality.
Another concern of mine is the bias of content presented. This problem is worsening everyday, along with the ramifications it is having on …everything. Here, again, I think is an issue that is now embedded in current society, and so rather than trying to steer children away from bias, we might be obligated to expose them to it so that we can better educate them.
These issues also bring us back to the burgeoning importance of critical pedagogy, because the best way to combat the influence of bias and negativity faced by the next generations is critical thinking. Now more than ever, people need to know how to – and to – question what they hear. They need to recognize the psychological manipulation that can accompany education and learn to combat it. With problem-solving and processing skills fostered through strategies emphasized in critical pedagogy, I think we can help empower our next students to leverage technology while handling its consequences.
If not all educators are called to be pedagogues, then how do we hold (or expect to hold) educator’s accountable for sound pedagogical practices in a global environment where everyone is barely treading water? On the flip side of this coin (as if it’s really a coin), is the question of where the collaboration exists between campus pedagogues and educators? For all their filibustering about what digital pedagogy is not, I would argue Stommel and Morris don’t do a solid job of saying what digital pedagogy is – aside from this ethereal manifestation of co-constructed knowledge heralded by Eris than organization – or how collaboration can exist to begin filling in the schisms that exist between those that know, those that do and those that know and do. The current era, and times to come, there will never not be the option for online learning, so how about we begin educating educators on sound, digital, pedagogical approaches so both learners and educators get the most out of the platforms they are (for better or worse) existing upon?
Students in the classroom have different strengths and weaknesses, the use of digital tools can be a way to address those differences. It is within the professor’s responsibility to identify these differences among the learners and address and understand where students might be troubled. This is when digital pedagogies come in hand as they can be used to simplify and balance student’s abilities and focus on getting the feedback needed to improve the learning process.
One of the things our group chatted about was the need for an Incorporation of more studies related to people’s attention capacities online. Because we have all been forced into this online learning environment, more research ought to be done to look into the best easy to disseminate information to students and how they are retaining it. We’ve heard pieces of information here and there about how long videos should be, things to incorporate in a narrated presentation to increase engagement from the students and how to make online learning interactive. However, it would be both interesting and helpful to have data to support the comments in one location that all educators could pull from to aid in their online pedagogy.
Online instruction specialists would be a useful new field to develop too. Since research and practice are, at least preliminarily, indicating that learning happens in a different manner when done fully online, new tools and methods are needed to optimize teaching in this context. However, as many teachers are discovering with the forced rapid conversion to online educating, incorporating these tools into lessons takes time – enough to merit a full-time job. Schools with prior experience educating online are finding themselves at an advantage, being able to use the knowledge of1 employees already experienced in this context. If more schools invest in such professionals, then they too can get ahead in online education.
In the realm of digital pedagogy, efforts need to be made to encourage the accommodation of traditional and nontraditional students. One benefit of online teaching and MOOCs is the ability of the program to be able to conform to a person’s life. Creating an engaging classroom through the usage of online tools is paramount, and ensuring these programs have a positive user experience is another hurdle. Creating platforms that provide users with an easy, intuitive, and positive experience of interaction can improve the learning experience for students.
Teamwork is a skill that is vital to professional success yet is not taught in schools. Courses often utilize teamwork with the intent of allowing students to become better at it, but it is never explicitly taught. In previous blogs, I have aired the exact same grievances regarding giving presentations. I am embarrassed that I had failed to recognize teamwork as a vital skill that is similarly neglected with respect to education.
I appreciate Dr. Murzi’s inclusion of this point into the Contemporary Pedagogy course because I don’t believe I would have recognized the need to teach teamwork skills otherwise. I am also very grateful that he is providing somewhat of an instruction manual for doing so, since I have no idea how to teach this skill set, nor would I consider myself a particularly good teammate.
In line with case-based learning, Murzi et al. (2020) actually turns the learning over to the teammates themselves. While a professor does initially give a lecture on teamwork (which I do feel is valuable), most of the learning appears to come from doing – and reflecting. By reflecting on what worked, what didn’t work, and challenges faced in displaying effective teamwork, students can begin to recognize how they can best handle situations as a teammate.
With all the group projects and group work I was forced to do as a student, I never once thought about or processed the team dynamics. Instead, I was only focused on getting the project done so that I could forget about the (often traumatizing) group work experience. Little did I realize I was robbing myself of the opportunity to learn a very important life skill. But now I can give my future students the opportunity to learn teamwork skills and in a simple way.
The importance of inclusivity has been well demonstrated in my field of Psychology, which is still trying to make up for past psychology researchers’ failure to recognize inclusivity’s value. The theoretical foundations of psychology are rooted in the experiences of the early psychologists, who were all White, Western men. Theory was shaped by their understanding of the world and the results of studies based on samples of, once again, White, Western men.
However, as more studies were performed in more diverse areas, many of the early theories upon which the current understanding of psychology was based were failing to replicate. In psychology terms, the theories were failing to generalize to wider populations. Thanks to the open-mindedness and work done by cross-cultural researchers and researchers with other backgrounds, psychologists began realizing the extent to which they made false assumptions about people because they had never known any differently. They had never thought to question that factor, this element, those interpretations. They had never understood the extent to which people perceive the world differently, and now they were starting to see the implications of those differences.
Similarly, fostering an environment of inclusivity in the classroom is important to gain multiple perspectives from people of different walks of life. They can enlighten you to differences that had never occurred to you could even be different. Silencing contrasting voices is a disservice to the pursuit of knowledge – as is the failure to encourage such voices. Many students won’t speak up if they’re not certain that their comments will be met with enthusiasm. Through increased interaction and support of all (topical) commentary, I hope to make my students feel comfortable in the classroom and confident in sharing their own, unique takes on the course material.
The greatest enemy in teaching is boredom. Sitting and listening, sitting and reading, sitting and pretty much anything – these are all generally boring activities. And when you’re bored, your mind wanders away from what it’s supposed to be learning. Yet this is the most common and certainly the easiest way to teach.
I’m no comedian, so I won’t be entertaining my students with lectures of laughs. I’m not much of a storyteller, nor did I appreciate it when my teachers went off on long tangents. I managed to be somewhat of a jokester when teaching elementary age kids, but older students don’t appreciate that energy from an adult. So, rather than changing who I am for my students, what I try to be is relatable.
When a teacher is relatable, the students can feel more comfortable in a classroom. Anxiety is another detriment to learning, so easing any nervous energy can help facilitate learning. Students are more likely to ask questions and participate in discussions. When the lecture becomes more like a conversation, students engage with the class content, turning the material over in their minds and looking for holes. Doing so helps them gain understanding and commit it to memory, even if they are not speaking up about it.
In this manner, I try to make my classes interactive. Not everyone will feel comfortable with speaking out, but it’s still possible to engage these students in a one-way conversation. I can ask questions, prompt ideas about the material without immediately answering, pause before the ends of sentences to make students fill in the blank. I like to use animations, pictures, and comics (I’ll let someone else write the jokes) in my slides to visually re-capture any students who lost track of the conversation.
Moving forward, I would like to build games into my classes. I feel like my current teaching style targets oral attention (through conversation) and visual attention (through animated slides), but hands-on learning seems the best way to combat boredom. Ideally, the games would keep the interest of the students who don’t like to be vocal and, of course, would be fun. More brainstorming is needed!