Pedagogy & Technology

This blog is going to be an overview touching on several different issues. Over the net few months, this blog is going to touch on the mutual impact that pedagogy and technology have on each other with an emphasis on Pedagogy 2.0 (coined by McLoughlin and Lee) and the Read/Write Web (coined by Richardson).

The areas I intend to discuss with you include:

Pedagogy 2.0 (Is it really new?)

Role of Faculty (Is anyone in charge?)

Role of Student (What does learner centered/controlled mean to me?)

Public versus Private Social Media (Must learning be in the public domain in order to go beyond the classroom?)

McLoughlin & Lee coined the term Pedagogy 2.0 in their 2007 article: Social software and participatory learning: Pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. “The interdependence between ideas, individuals, communities and information networks,supported by technology, underpin the demands of Pedagogy 2.0, and offer a range of choices to individuals to suit their personal needs and goals.” (Emphasis is mine.) In their definition about content and curriculum they discuss “micro units”, “bit-sized modules”, constructivist learning and active participation. My question is if all this is really new – an out growth of Web 2.0? I’d argue that this is not brand new. In fact, these are the principles of good teaching; teachers creating a learning environment for students. There are always lectures – now they are shorter, chunked, but they still exist. Our own excellent model of good teaching, Cheshta, gives us a 5 – 10 minute overview of the unit. One of the first things I did when I began to teach faculty to use WebCT in the late 90’s was to teach our faculty to “chunk” materials; to turn one-hour lectures into 15 minute guides.

This is not to say that Web 2.0 has no role in the transition of pedagogy, after all, part of the definition is that Pedagogy 2.0 is supported by technology. Engagement about the materials beyond the “transmission of the content” becomes easier for both faculty and students because of the ease of continued dialogue and bringing in experts and peers and others. Collaboration wasn’t created with web 2.0, but the tools make it possible for students to create and sustain the collaborations themselves.

I believe that “personal meaning construction” of knowledge is the single most important part of learning. It has its roots in problem-based learning. Essential components of problem-based learning include feedback, reflection and group dynamics. PBL predates Web 2.0, but students were dependent upon faculty and librarians for the materials they needed. With Internet access to experts, databases and peers, students gain control over the PBL experience.

Is pedagogy evolving because the Web 2.0 tools provide the freedom necessary? Or is pedagogy being forced into a specific direction because of the available Web 2.0 tools? Which is the tail? Which is the dog?