Prior to the days of the advent of the Internet, the human network used to be a much smaller, isolated place. People could only communicate through letter and e-mail, and inter-continental communication was inefficient. Less people would and could communicate with each other. You used to only be able to meet people through others, and the opportunities were vastly different. The basic human network was the exchange of information and ideas amongst a limited set of people, typically when they were all in the same room or on a long distance phone call. The human network was much smaller, compact, and isolated. NOW the human network is virtually unlimited. Anytime of day, week, year people can contact each other. Exchange of thoughts and emotions has never been simpler. People actually meet each other on the Internet, and THEN meet in person.
Not far from this, the networked student is essentially a pupil who is able to utilize vast technological resources to connect globally with people to gain the most insight and best possible information available. The networked student virtually has no limitations on what he or she may learn, or how he may learn it. I think a central aspect of the networked student is connecting with people of other countries and cultures, and seeing things from their perspectives.
Of course, digital literacy is an integral component to the successful aspect of each networked students. With all the good the Internet can provide today, there is plenty of bad. Students must be able to be savvy enough to sift through all the nonsensical material and evaluate for themselves the credibility of websites. Students must also maintain their own ethical standards, knowing which sites to visit and which sites are not appropriate to visit. There is also digital literacy etiquette to learn, such as appropriate behavior on a web chat or live video conference. Digital literacy is a highly untaught component in my opinion, which brings us to the role of the teacher.
For the networked student, the teacher must serve as the ultimate facilitator. Much of the responsibility falls on the teacher for the successful implementation of networking. First and foremost, teachers must provide their students with the appropriate technological tools, and coach them in the field of "digital literacy." Teachers must serve to supervise and moderate class discussion and success. The teacher simply cannot sit back and enjoy the show, but must guide the students in their learning. Although the learning is largely independent, each classroom still needs a teacher for a basis of the assignment.
Personally, I believe this model of instruction is great as long the teacher maintains an active role in all the assignments. Student generated learning is fantastic, and I think this model can work well as a hybrid with some of the other more conventional methods.
Below is a site of networked learning I enjoyed examining because it's actually occurring outside of the school year. And yes, students ACTUALLY responded. I think the blog is a brilliant idea to keep students on task with any summer reading required.
http://teachers.emints.org/FY04/youngj/bookclub/
To play devil's advocate, what are some ways that networked learning can actually hinder student learning?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I wonder if we gave our students projects that they really enjoyed, they could be "trusted" to do some outside work, that is, whether they would do it or not... the website you found clearly shows this is possible. Its reading for enjoyment, which almost seems like an oxymoron for students sometimes.
ReplyDeleteIf the teacher decided to go nuts and relinquish all control, things could go terrible really quickly! Without a friendly "here's how to use the internet talk," students might not have any direction to their searches and might not learn anything constructive.
ReplyDeleteI think networked learning can really open itself up to a new dimension of cheating among students that use it. Of course there are ways to combat this, it requires the teacher to adapt to the new model and make sure this type of concern is addressed. Putting the learning in students hands is a novel concept, but it doesn't automatically teach them personal responsibility, and whose to tell them they're wrong if they cheat on an assignment because they don't believe in its relevance to their success, whatever they deem that to be.
ReplyDeleteI agree that networked learning is a great theory, I'm just not sure about how applicable it is. First, it requires extensive access to technology, something that I haven't seen a lot of thus far. Second, while students are responsible for discovering the content, teachers will still be responsible to parents and administrators for student content. Without the control, yet all the responsibility, I'm not sure teachers would be willing to implement this. Also, in the high-stakes testing environment education currently operates in, how do you ensure that students all receive the information that will be tested?
ReplyDeleteI think networked learning is great but does not reflect the true nature of a lot of 21st century students. If a teacher completely turns over the students' educational experience to the students themselves the lazier students might try to get by doing the bare minimum. Also, as others have noted, this method of education would be extremely hard to assess and expensive to implement.
ReplyDelete