Simone Giertz talking at Webbdagarna 2016 on the importance of building useless things and making mistakes. (Check this post (in Dutch) about failing = learning.)
Source: Nieuw Nederland
Permanent Beta is de toekomst van het onderwijs
Op 13 november werd voor de 7e keer de landelijke Permanent Beta dag gehouden. Het evenement verbindt techniek en wetenschap met kunst en is voor iedereen die zich aanmeldt geheel gratis. Omdat Permanent Beta te gast was op een school werd ook een hackathon ‘Slimmer Leren’ georganiseerd, aangevoerd door Johan Groenen. Professionele programmeurs gingen samen met leerlingen nadenken over slimme apps om leren leuker en effectiever te maken. Nynke Schaaf was er bij en deelt haar gedachten op ons digitale platform.
Grey areas abound–the usefulness and quality of the Common Core Standards. The importance of curiosity in learning. The evaluation of technology in learning. The utility of letter grades. (And alternatives to letter grades.)
For every educator dead-set on personalizing learning through technology in an outcomes-based K-12 classroom, there is another educator working to develop new learning models that extract the potential of self-directed learning, the role of play in learning, and better understanding the different levels of integration of technology in the learning process itself.
And it’s all good work.
What exactly technology does in learning is also subjective. We’ve offered a clumsy analogy in the past, but sometimes a simple T-chart clarifying “good and bad” is helpful, which is what Bill Ferriter of the wonderful Tempered Radical blog has done with the following image.
The Right & Wrong Way To Use Technology For Learning
Ferriter’s image begins simply enough, with a statement so many of your already believe (based on comments we’ve seen across social media and here on TeachThought as well).
Technology is a tool, not a learning outcome. (Learning is not about technology, mind you.)
But for those that need examples, it goes further, saying no to “developing apps” and “publishing animotos,” and yes to more general functions like “Raising Awareness” and “Starting Conversations.” (Our favorite is helping students find answers to their questions.)
Certainly it’s not true–in our grey area of our own we’re creating here–that creating animoto videos is “wrong” or producing videos is “bad,” but rather that technology should ideally function in pursuit of that awareness and that conversation, not the app or “the animoto.”
Of course you probably already know that, but here’s to clarifying.