[Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
Dr Paul Chandler
paul.chandler at YVG.vic.edu.au
Fri Oct 19 17:07:07 EST 2007
Hello all,
I've been strangely quiet (ie busy) whilst this discussion has rolled
around, but I am also of the opinion that integration with specialist
support is the the way forward, and there is also room for computing in
the curriculum. In fact, in my perfect world, I'd have both.
My PhD considered "self-taught computer-using teachers", and I'm not
going to try to summarise it all here. There are some observations
which can be made. Firstly, there is remarkably little research on such
teachers, how they teach, what they value, how/what they teach ICT etc
etc. We can make links to studies (also relatively few in number) which
have considered teachers who teach outside of their speciality. Put
starkly: sometimes it works really well, and sometimes it doesn't. One
study I read of a non-legal studies teacher (from Qld) who took up
teaching Legal because there was no-one else to do it showed great
success and adapation. In general, the literature shows very little
relationship between capacity to teach in a particular discipline and
formal academic background in that area. So I would argue that the only
ultimate thing stopping our non-ICT colleagues from delivering good ICT
is a desire to do it.
My thinking is not related to demolishing parochialism, but this: the
self-taught computer-using teachers I studied had an implicit (and
sometimes explicit) expectation that students "knew how to do it", that
they could simply "use" students ICT skills without having to teach
them. There is no way that we could ever fully equip, in a timely and
effective manner, students with all the ICT skills they may ever need in
the range of other subjects they are studying. In Science (my other
discipline area), we have certain expectations of the language and
standard of presentation which are required, for instance, in prac
reports. It would be naive of me to think that I never have to remind a
student of how to write neatly, spell correctly, title a table or write
in past tense, although these are English skills. I see that as the
parallel with other subjects using ICT. In fact, I think we need to
deliberately move some (not all) ICT skills to be the province of other
subjects to teach because it is the means by which they will "own" the
skill rather than expecting to be a "consumer" of it. If we try to
'keep it all to ourselves', we will never foster the desire in others to
develop; collaborative culture rather than consumer culture. That is
not to say that teachers don't need any formal knowledge of ICT (I think
they do). I once worked at a school which had a school objective that
all teachers would develop skills at teaching English (such was the ESL
population). This went well beyond the generic "we are all teachers of
English" but to specific teaching strategies; it was loved by some, and
hated by others; but we did it. We can "all be ICT teachers", but
schools need to help teachers get in touch with particular teaching
procedures.
I would also observe that a full discussion of the parallels between
language learning and learning ICT would be enormously complicated. I'm
not a teacher of English at all, but I know that in the early years of
schooling, immersion is a big part of language learning, but so are
approaches such phonemic awareness and spelling (and a language teacher
would be able to name quite a few other techniques). It is far from
simple to draw parallels between the two. Perhaps, to parallel language
learning closely, we would develop a range of interventionist strategies
to direct student learning about ICT (ie what might be the ICT
equivalent of 'phonemic awareness'?)
Language teachers in the early years use a nice phrase, "barking at
text" - kids who can apparently read the words on the page, but don't
understand a word of it. In our apparently ICT-savvy world, how do we
know that students aren't doing the ICT equivalent of barking at text?
I once knew a student who was writing some relatively detailed PERL in
Year 7, and when I met him in a programming class in year 9 I was amazed
to find out that he had absolutely no concept of a variable, and he
struggled for some time to develop one.
I had a colleague a couple of months ago say that she felt generally OK
with teaching ICT in her English classes, but she felt that she was not
doing justice to it because the only teaching approach that she had a
"demonstrating" - what could I offer which is 'more' than this; 'more'
like how ICT teachers do it. And it got me thinking - I do an awful lot
of demonstrating; the range of teaching procedures (to borrow a PEEL
phrase) in the ICT classroom about ICT content strike me a typically
being pretty narrow.
And so my circuitous thinking bring me back to the wiki which I
established a while back http://pdchandler.wikispaces.com specifically
to help foster a community of ICT teachers which are concerned with
issues such as developing a range of interesting teaching procedures for
ICT and being interested in cultivating deep understanding (compared
with barking at text). I have some concern that we have used the
"interest" generated by using ICT in other subject areas as an excuse
for not having terribly exciting and engaging ways of fostering ICT
knowledge of itself. And whether you believe in "integrated" or "stand
alone", these fundamental issues of pedagogy need to be addressed. The
wiki is a work in progress ... largely by me ... but a community would
be better ... please join in ....
________________________________
From: yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au
[mailto:yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of Anne-Marie Chase
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 3:21 PM
To: 'Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
Hello all
I think this idea of understanding what "ICT" is exists at industry
level too. I was involved in organizing a GoGirl
<http://www.gogirlwa.org.au/> event in 2005. The event is a Careers
Showcase for female students to be introduced to the many faces of the
Information, Communication and Technology Industry. I worked with a
voluntary organisation from the IT industry to organise the event which
included speakers from the IT industry telling the students about what
they did and how they got there. It's a great event and the feedback
from students and teachers is very positive. The speakers included
programmers etc which you'd imagine as being part of the IT industry.
However, the speakers also included a vet, a dentist and a few others
you wouldn't really call the IT industry, yet IT was integral to their
job's. IT is the tool in these roles. Incidentally GoGirl is concerned
with the falling number of students studying ICT and the need to attract
students to the ICT industry. At a speaker level the support is great,
at an organisation level the support from the ICT industry is virtually
non-existent as is the support from state (WA) and federal government.
Not sure what that says about a skills shortage in the ICT industry or
the value of the ICT industry to the economy.
As for a future model for ICT.......... I think it would be great if an
organisation like VITTA or ICTEV could organize a group of interested
parties, consulting with industry (AIIA) and gov (MMV & DET) which could
develop this whole line of thinking and provide some sort of
advocacy/lobby group role. At all levels there is confusion about a way
forward from classroom level, school leadership, regional, state and
federal government. It would be good to see IT teachers push a
direction.
Personally I think integration of ICT with specialist support is the way
forward. Like the role of the Atelierista in Reggio schools. (An
Atelierista assists children to express themselves through materials
(The 100 languages of children)). This provides benefits too in terms
of:
* Project based learning/constructivist approach
* Development of multi-literacies
* Vocational skills
* Resourcing - access to skilled ICT teachers
* Resourcing - access to specialist hardware and software
* Mentoring/PD for teachers
* Encouraging non-IT specialists to have a go etc etc
Integration offers the opportunity to draw on students ICT skills
(digital natives) and their interest and motivation in using ICT
(assists with engagement). This is the area I am currently doing a
doctoral study in so anyone interested please go to
http://digital-kids.wikispaces.com <http://digital-kids.wikispaces.com/>
However, there is a place for computing in the curriculum, is this
different to ICT? I read a recent post on Digital Chalkie with interest
http://www.digitalchalkie.com/2007/09/12/picaxe-2007/ I kind of think
computing is different/separate to ICT, yet I first learnt to program
when I was at school and I'm sure this has helped me in the digital
world, so not separate at all???
Cheers
Anne-Marie
P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
________________________________
From: yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au
[mailto:yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of Bill Kerr
Sent: 18 October 2007 04:53
To: Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
I had another go at this on my blog:
http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/10/decline-of-it-in-education.html
it gets a bit complicated because probably many traditional subjects are
at least sometimes taught in routine, formulistic and uninspiring ways
eg. maths out of the textbook
certainly its asking too much for any teacher to be continually
innovative in whatever subject they teach, given the pressures on
teachers in general
but when computers came along as new, important, "vocational" some of
this was then converted into skill routines at the school level - here's
a new application (eg. Office), how do we use this properly - initially
this was enough to establish the subject but has not been enough to
sustain it R-12 or K-12 in the longer term
Yes the IT teacher knows how to use Word better than the English teacher
But it's not reasonable for a subject (IT) to sustain itself long term
mainly on a skilling basis. It would not be reasonable for any other
subject to do that
In some cases the forces for IT have not developed a compelling enough
argument for IT to be retained as a separate subject
In other cases a compelling argument - a deeper approach - has been
developed and the stakeholders (students, school admin, universities)
have heard it
For the students who think they are "digital natives" it has to be a
good argument since it is coming from the "immigrants"
In other cases the argument has been developed but fallen on deaf ears
I'm saying that its not reasonable and not inspiring for IT to remain as
a separate subject unless it does develop an argument that is equivalent
to the best argument that English, Maths, Science could develop. To
teach IT mainly as a skill is boring anyway - who really wants to do
only that?
These other subjects have a 400 year plus magnificent tradition
Now what is it about IT that makes it equivalent to these subjects? That
is the argument that has to be developed for IT to compete long term as
a standalone with these subjects, if we want that.
Your comments could also be read as an argument for a new subject such
as "media studies"
How do media changes effect our learning - eg. if students watch as much
TV, play computer games, web surfing, use their mobile phones etc. - how
does that impact on their ability to sit in a class and listen to a
teacher?
Media studies might be an elective in school - but there is something
happening here in the way media is changing that is having a profound
effect on everything that happens in school
IT teachers losing their subject is a wakeup call for a bigger problem -
like a species becoming extinct might signify a broader significant
change in the whole environment
--
Bill Kerr
http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/
On 10/17/07, Costello, Rob R < Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au
<mailto:Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au> > wrote:
making the parallel with English / computer literacy is suggesting that
"digital native" status does not mean we necessarily abandon attempts to
build on kids skills in a concentrated way
what are the ideas that computer literacy opens to us?
Well, what is software?
It is medium in which we carve and express ideas. It provides a milieu
in which we increasingly communicate. It is an increasingly dominant
substrate in our culture. It is mirror in which we see ourselves -
watching my 5 year old snap himself on the web cam.
there is a plasticity in software, that means it can morph into every
domain - can be video editing, email, spreadsheets, game design,
blogging, CAD etc
and teaching kids how to work with it, be creative with it, in whatever
form or context, can be valuable
sometimes the very diversity of forms works against seeing what the
deeper ideas are
Also can lead to the "ICT is just a tool, lets not focus on the
technology" - "its teachers who make sure its used in meaningful
contexts" sort of thing
and I broadly agree with the sentiment, in many cases
Yet given the plasticity of the software, it would also be nice to let
kids experience how to work with that - to take control at that deeper
level, to have some ideas of how to write it, not just read (experience)
it (=literacy)
Its harder, but potentially it goes further than mastering applications
- valuable as that is
Kay says that putting a piano in a classroom is not going to make
musicians - the teacher, and the music (software) are the key elements -
the music is also the expression
the discipline of performing music is "hard", takes years of training to
reach higher levels
and it builds in complexity as it goes - builds on previous skills
Systems thinking, object orientation, etc, is possibly as hard to
master, just as useful and adaptable when mastered - and accessible at
earlier stages with the right tools
Agree we don't have a clear sense of what these big ideas are - too
taken with the range of apps (=music appreciation, reading?)
though playing with them does also give some measure of the ideas,
indirectly- and may payoff in other ways (the communication or
expressive or analytical power of the tool) - and may be appropriate in
many cases, classes etc
PS here's one spinoff of tinkering with software at school age -
wouldn't have occurred if I'd been left to the apps of the day - a
little induction into BASIC started the accessibility of constructing
www.brainshapes.com
experimental, may change, copyright, incompletely documented etc
cheers
Rob
PS lots of disciplines are making some sort of extended "literacy" claim
- not just ICT (financial literacy, ethical literacy, scientific
literacy - the multi-literacy grab-bag)
> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:17:10 +1000
> From: "Bill Kerr" <billkerr at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
> To: "Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List"
> <yr7-10it at edulists.com.au>
> Message-ID:
> < 5d2dce520710151717x5d8d6618h6708ca82433b91bc at mail.gmail.com
<mailto:5d2dce520710151717x5d8d6618h6708ca82433b91bc at mail.gmail.com> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I'm interested in this argument about the "information age" and "IT is
> equivalent to English", which has come up before on these lists
>
> The term "information age" is too vague now IMO. The "information age"
did
> not start with the computer - it started with the printing press.
> ...
>
> The argument that "we can all read and write" implies that IT is
another
> form of literacy (equivalent to reading and writing) and so deserves
an
> equal place in the curriculum to English
>
> That argument might turn out to be correct, eg. we could argue that
> students
> could learn to program the computer to represent dynamic systems (eg.
the
> spread of AIDS or a traffic jam simulation or global warming) and that
> this
> systems theory knowledge is a new form of literacy required by the
modern
> citizen. If we understood systems theory better then society would
have
> picked up on global warming earlier or developed other perspectives on
> global warming to our current ones (ie. panic)
>
> But it's wrong to equate the ability to read and write English with
the
> ability to learn basic computer skills.
>
> The English curriculum does not or should not justify itself in
secondary
> school on the basis of learning to read and write. It might justify
itself
> on the basis that the study of Shakespeare for example provides
students
> with new insights into the human condition.
>
> "Computer science" (which is perhaps not a real science yet) could
only
> justify itself on this sort of basis - that it provides new unique
> insights
> into the human condition.
>
> Integration of computers into the rest of the curriculum (and
computing
> being phased out as a stand alone subject in the middle years) is
> proceeding
> on the basis that all computing has to offer is basic (computer)
literacy
> skills and that the "digital natives" will pick that up anyway. The
> comparison here is with oral literacy. Humans learn to talk without
formal
> teaching. They don't learn to read and write without formal teaching.
That
> process is meant to happen in primary school and is the major focus of
> primary school. The ability to read and write then opens doors to the
> collected wisdom of humanity, be it through books or the web.
>
> So, what is the argument that computer skills are somehow equivalent
to
> English - the subject which provides the underlying basis for all of
> modern
> human knowledge, post Enlightenment?
>
> Maybe there is such an argument. But the fact that IT teachers haven't
> developed it coherently is the underlying reason why they are losing
their
> subject.
>
> --
> Bill Kerr
> http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/
>
>
Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before
opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects.
Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the
negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from
the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying
any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are
those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the
Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
Teachers Association Inc
DISCLAIMER:
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by return email and then delete this message.
Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Yarra Valley Grammar.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/yr7-10it/attachments/20071019/a3fabce2/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Yr7-10it
mailing list