21st Century Learners...

Wow. What can I say? That was quite a read! Sounds like the traditional image of a Teacher that inspired most of us (by that I mean me) to enrol in this course will be a thing of the past... my dreams of bossing and writing on the board are over! ;-) To be a part of the transformation occurring to accommodate the digital learner sounds like a fascinating (albeit challenging) journey.

After reading Prensky's Digtial Native or Digital Immigrant article I pondered my belief and understanding of today's learners. He categorised 'Natives' as being multi taskers who worked collaboratively, processed information quickly and required instant gratification and frequent rewards. Digital Immigrants were the polar opposites: slower learners who liked to learn one step at a time and by themselves. I would say that I am on the cusp of being a digital native. For as long as I can remember there has been TV and video games and I remember getting our

first computer when I was 10 years old and my first cellphone when I was 14. Despite this I still consider myself a digital immigrant at heart. I have an "accent" and I definitely fit the bill when it comes to silly immigrant acts like printing out pages, mainly because I like to read without getting a headache! Because of this I think that today's learners aren't necessarily one or the other and that the issue is more complex than this. I had the native "environment" and yet I chose to stay out of it and focus more on the real world rather than the virtual one. The online resources that I have become involved in now are mainly social networking. I would say this goes for most digital natives I know. Social networking is an easy way of keeping in touch with friends and getting the gossip on acquaintances. Being involved in texting and social networking does not mean you are only engaged by ICT's and discount all other forms of learning. Or does it? Maybe I am further from the cusp than I thought. I still think that teachers need not assume that ALL students from the digital generation are passionately about technology.

Prensky highlighted a really important point about students today though: they have changed. In a world where entertainment saturates our everyday lives, I can see how traditional teaching would offer little stimulation. I can honestly say that when I was at school I was bored. Nothing was as exciting as the TV I watched or the text messages I giggled about at dinner while ignoring the table manners my Mum was attempting to enforce. But teachers didn't know better did they? They were teaching the only way they knew how. Prensky mentioned teachers (who he assumes are immigrants) "grousing" more than once in his article. Maybe they are just terrified of blindly directing students learning experiences using methods they themselves have not been educated on. Yet.

The idea that "edutainment" is the way into the future is exciting and valid. I definitely think that ICT's have a lot to offer digital natives AND immigrants. Having fun is integral to learning and creating a meaningful experience. It is a blessing that students have found fun in something that can be brought into the classroom and used to educate them in accordance with the curriculum!

Prensky's article "engage or enrage" ties in with what I have already mentioned. I know the feeling of being underwhelmed by the school environment, however I think that there is a difference between being "enraged" and being disinterested. "Enraged" suggests that students care about school enough to become enraged by their lack of engagement. However Pensky states that the majority are students who "are convinced that school is totally devoid of interest and totally irrelevant to their life." This is where construcitivism comes in. I think that many students today have home environments that do not encourage a love of education and do not signify its importance. Many are also caught up in peer pressure and think it is cool to act out... this is how they gain acceptance from peers. So do they have any interest in actually being engaged? I am not sure. I think the group that Prensky talked about as the students who "play school" and "go through the motions" are the ones most likely to be enraged because they do the work and still don't understand what relevance it has to the real world. This is the main issue for me: Kids are not being taught things that they can relate to the real world. My friends and I were always wondering WHY WHY WHY about everything we were taught at school. I frequently moaned about not ever needing to know algebra in my future career and in a world where people skills and financial skills seem to be the key assets in success, why are these subjects not being taught?

His proposal that games are the answer was interesting to me. I can see how at a surface level its a good answer because it's fun and innovative but I feel there needs to be a balance. Kids still need to get outside and talk face to face! A world where students played games all day at school and then went home to play them in their free time seems odd to me. Hmmmmmm... I am only 26 and already I sound old fashioned!!