While I understand and for the most part agree with his post, it was this repackaging of this oldie argument with the buzz-worthy idea of students making that disturbed me:
— Scott McLeod (@mcleod) May 31, 2013
I get it. At my core, student design and creation is at the core of my beliefs. I get that this notion of making is all the rage: Maker Spaces, Tinker Spaces, 20% Time, etc. My hope is that when education gets bored with these fad-ish terms, our belief systems are changed (i.e. we don’t need a maker space as much as a maker mindset).
And this leads me back to the original point. Tools are made for making. Mindsets determine to what extent we set them free.
Mcleod lists the following as the unholy grail of edtech (translation: not where we should be with technology use):
- Taking notes / word processing (look, we’re using computers!)
- Looking up stuff (Google and Wikipedia reign supreme)
- Making PowerPoints (and they’re not even good ones)
Let’s rename those a bit:
- Design and Storyboarding
Words such as these git EdTech folks all giddy. Oh, I know that this is one of those “c’mon, Bretag. You know what I mean”. No question! I get it as I said earlier.
But it disturbs me for two reasons:
- Again, tools are made for making. Mindsets determine to what extent we set them free.
- Looking at this as poor use of technology is not the best lens. The lens is learning theory. My guess and my experience continues to reinforce this is a learning and teaching philosophy issue.