My Brain Hurts

Time Magazine has just awarded the iPhone this honour made more special by the list of inventions that were beaten into second place. I was lucky enough to be in Miami when the iPhone was released and hogged the use of one in an Apple store for an hour exploring the iPhone’s features (it won’t be seen in Australia until sometime in 2008). It really is quite an amazing piece of technology. As I left the store I realised that I had been so engrossed in its many features that I had not tried to make a phone call on it!

Time liked the look and feel of it, the fact that it will set a standard for other phones, that it is far more than a phone and that it can only get better (think about how the iPod has developed).

The iPhone sets new ground in digital convergence by packing so any features in such a small device and could really become a seriously useful educational tool. Based on the This Day in History widget, the good folk at MacKiev have created a version that runs on your iPhone. This is a step from running World Book on the iPhone which is a step away from using it as a powerful reference tool apart from its wen browsing capability. It has the potential to become the first truly educationally useful handheld computer.

In another development the article also mentions that last month Apple opened up the iPhone to anyone who wants to develop apps for it. Watch the iPhone take off like podcasting.

Following on from my last post, this was the title of an article in today’s Australian newspaper on film producer turned British politician David Puttnam’s comments regarding digital natives and the chasm opening up between students and teachers over ICT usage. As he has a number of educational credentials and was addressing the Curriculum Corporation conference in Sydney I will assume that he knows the correct meaning of digital native and digital immigrant, I’m therefore assuming that the reporter messed up the quotes on that matter.

There is nothing wrong with being a digital immigrant, indeed it is what we who are not digital natives should aspire to be.

I was impressed that he made the exact point that is a catchcry of mine, namely: teachers (and schools) that fail to embrace digital technologies will be viewed by students as irrelevant.

He made an interesting point by comparing “the standoff between education and technology to the plight of the British clergy in the 17th century, who greeted with furore the first publication of the bible. It meant they were no longer the old fount of knowledge because people started to read the Bible for themselves and challenged the orthodoxies.”

He may be branding teacher too widely here for most teachers at least recognise the value of technology as a teaching and learning tool, they are just not sure how to best utilise it. The main problem is that there has never been enough funding for PD. There is a strange assumption that teachers will know or find out what to do – not so.

What really irks me is teachers (and schools) who think that browsing the web and typing in Word (with the odd Powerpoint thrown in for creativity) is utilising ICT. Rather, this is merely utilising technology at a very low level and something I’ll address in greater detail later.

The article ended with another interesting Lord Putnam quote “Steal the technology, steal the ideas, use the energy and inventiveness but protect the values you are teaching.”

Food for thought . . . . . . . . .

This term was coined by Marc Prensky several years ago to describe the great majority of today’s students who are growing up in homes and a society where technology is embedded in the fabric of that environment. In Prensky’s words “Our students today are all ‘native speakers’ of the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet. ” (http://www.marcprensky.com)

This makes a lot of sense to me and is reflected by the behaviour I have observed in today’s students. I am surprised by the number of educators who have still not heard of this term, but when I explain it (and the term digitial immigrants) to them they do understand and agree with the point. A Wikipedia article on Digital Natives makes an interesting point that it was actually digital immigrants who built the Internet, but then continues to make some statements that appear to miss the point Prensky was making. The article is open for editing so it will be interesting to watch how it evolves.

This week, five 5th Grade students on a television show were asked “What type of software are Internet Explorer and Firefox examples of?” Now these were intelligent students and prime examples of what a digital native is supposed to be, however, only one student gave the correct answer Web Browser and one other gave an answer that was close but not quite correct. Only one in five digital natives knows what a web browser is? Later in the same program they were asked “What is a graphical representation of a person?” and they all gave the correct answer Avatar. Hmmm, now this would appear to be a much more technical question than to identify a web browser.

Here we have an example that supports the digital native concept. If the students were asked to describe the functionality of Firefox et al then no doubt they would have done so easily. All you do is click on an icon and browse the web, nothing actually comes up to say You are using a web browser, so the term is logically not familiar to them.

You don’t just click on an icon and get an avatar, they need to be created. Progams where you create an Avatar would use that term repeatedly therefore the terminology becomes known.