Education and the Digital World

The other day I wrote a post commenting on an article by Doug Mann, a University of Western Ontario professor who calls into question the wholehearted embrace of all things digital in the classroom, arguing that efforts should be made to curb its distracting potential.

A good letter by David Collins appears in today's Star advancing that discussion. Since it makes eminent sense, expect it to be ignored by educational authorities.

I reproduce it below for your consideration:

Re: Unplug the digital classroom, Opinion, Oct. 7

When many whose level of education should make them know better are towing the party line equating use of the latest technological devices in the classroom with “progress,” professor Doug Mann's straightforward account of the actual effects of this thinking in education is most welcome.

Having been both a TA and a college instructor over the past 10 years, I can confirm there has been a dramatic drop in literacy, numeracy, critical thinking and basic verbal comprehension among college and university students in that time, coinciding with the rise to ubiquity of mobile/digital devices.

While no cause can be definitively proven, the amount and type of use of such devices by students in the last few years is the only real demographic difference between them and students eight to 10 years ago.

More important than proving a cause is the recognition that mediating education through computerized devices is actually less engaging, more passive (students become mere users of programs, while the programs do the work!) and, by reducing education to content delivery, promotes the uncritical acceptance and regurgitation of information far more than traditional approaches.

To say today’s learners learn differently is a cop-out; if students show difficulty understanding via listening, reading and in-person discussion, the answer is surely to give them practice in these skills. Handing them computerized crutches to make up for lack of ability while ignoring the fact they're using them to surf the Internet and “chat” in class is not helping — it's manufacturing artificial disability.

David Collins, Toronto

Ministerial Responsibility

Does anyone remember that quaint notion?

During the lead-up to the Falkands War, the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Carrignton, and two junior ministers resigned. They took the blame for Britain’s poor preparations [for the war]and plans to decommission HMS Endurance, the navy’s only Antarctic patrol vessel.

Since those days, the concept of ministers taking responsibility for what is going on in their departments has been largely ignored, never more so than since the Harper regime assumed power, operating, I assume, pretty much on the principle, "Apologize for nothing, admit nothing, and wait for the public to go back to sleep."

So far, it is a strategy that seems to have worked very well for our federal overlords.

In his column today, Government’s reaction to tainted beef scandal the real crime, Tim Harper resurrects the notion of ministerial responsibility in looking at the pathetic example of Agricultural Minister Gerry Ritz, missing in action since the XL Foods tainted beef scandal broke:

When it became clear there was a problem, he disappeared.

He was not in the House of Commons to rebuild confidence in consumers, or take questions, he blithely defended meat quality at a Saskatchewan luncheon as the crisis grew, he cut short a briefing in which he referred to anything that knocked him off his talking points as a “technical question.’’

Despite the calls for his resignation, Tim Harper concludes that Ritz is safe for the time being, yet another example, in my view, of the contempt in which Harper Inc. holds the Canadian people and their health.

In Praise of Thanksgiving

I'm especially thankful this year for turkey.

H/t somecanuckchick

Psst! What's The Latest On TMZ?

In the latter part of my teaching career, I had the feeling that those in charge of education, especially on the local level, were suffering from a kind of drift that was largely absent when I started my career. More and more, administrators were embracing technology, and the next 'big thing' that it promised on a regular basis, as the solution to student underachievement.

The process started off mildly enough, with the introduction of video (reel-to-reel was actually the first format used in the classroom) as a supplement to instruction, but by the time I had retired, whiteboards, school wi-fi networks, etc. were starting to gain currency. As my last administrator said, we have to hold their interest with new technology, a statement I took as sad evidence of pedogogical bankruptcy.

All the while, I was dubious of each new marvel; any reservations I openly expressed were readily dismissed, the assumption being that I was some kind of Luddite naturally resistant to change. And of course, for those who harboured notions of advancement, objecting to any new 'paradigm' would have been tantamount to career suicide, the institution of education quite Machiavellian in imposing its own brand of control on critical thinking.

It was therefore with some satisfaction that I read a piece in today's Star entitled Let’s unplug the digital classroom. Written by Doug Mann, professor in the sociology department and in the Faculty of Information and Media Studies at the University of Western Ontario, it argues that the ubiquity of digital technology in educational settings is not an unalloyed good, and suggests what some would regard as drastic measures in an effort to curb the distractions students fall prey to whilst in the thrall of that technology.

Cross-posted at Education and Its Discontents.

So You're Not Interested in Politics, Eh?

Oh yes, I am in a bit of a scolding mood this morning, and the object of my vituperation is that substantial group of Canadians who demonstrate their apolitical natures by sitting out elections.

You know who you are: the ones with an array of excuses for not rousing yourselves from the couch - I'm not a political person, I don't understand politics, there's no one to vote for, they're all the same, they get elected and then forget their constituents, they're only in it for themselves, etc. etc. ad nauseam.

All of these trifling justifications for apathy and indolence ignore one very important fact: politics is not an arcane science accessible to the few; politics, in fact, permeates almost every aspect of our lives, and the decisions of those who don't have the time of day to consider voting influence everything from the minimum-wage job they or their son or daughter or spouse may be working in to the healthcare they receive to the livability of the community they reside in. Ultimately, as Tip O'Neil once said, "All politics is local."

My reflections were prompted by two stories in today's Star, both of which are shown side-by-side in the online edition. One is about how Toronto Mayor Rob Ford is faring in the polls, and the other details preposterous allegations that the latest job figures released in the U.S. showing a decline in joblessness is attributable to Obama's people 'cooking the books.'

First to the Ford poll. While the majority feel that Ford is doing a bad job, a whopping 97 per cent of hardcore Ford fans — those who voted for him in 2010 and plan to do so again — think the mayor is doing a good job providing leadership.

If you think about the implications of that figure, you may come to the conclusion that if those enthusiasts turn out in the next Toronto election and those who 'aren't interested in politics' stay home, the man epitomizing magisterial ineptitude may very well go on to a second term in the city that once called itself 'world class.'

At this juncture, one can't help but think of the hardcore true believers who gave Stephen Harper his majority, just 39.7 percent of those who bothered to go to the ballot box. Of those eligible to vote, about 40 percent stayed at home, presumably to watch the Shopping Channel or similarly diversionary 'entertainment.'

The second story, Team Obama accused of ‘cooking the books’ over employment figures, deals with accusations from the usual suspects, again those who are put into office by zealots who also subscribe to notions such as 9/11 conspiracies, faked moon landings, and underground alien bases on earth. And doubtless, as the presidential election comes every closer, this impossible manipulation of jobless figures will become gospel with that crowd who will almost certainly turn out at the ballot box to put an end to such rank government cabalistic deception.

While I realize most readers of political blogs are not likely to be the benighted souls I have described above, I have to admit this rant felt good.

And the choice of whether to embrace or ignore their duties as citizens rests, of course, with everyone.

Chopped Liver, Everyone?

Comedians like Don Rickles, whenever he felt slighted, would turn to host Johnny Carson and ask, "What am I, chopped liver?"

I couldn't help but think of that line when I read this story in today's Star, which reveals the following:

[The Canadian Food Inspection Agency] stopped allowing XL Foods to export its beef to the U.S. on Sept. 13, but did not inform Canadians about the health hazard or the voluntary recalls until after it had completed an in-depth investigation at the plant on Sept. 16.

It would seem the Harper government is not the only body that holds the Canadian public in contempt.

Everyone is a Politician These Days

Echoing the Conservative government's 'hang tough' attitude that means never having to say you're sorry, XL Foods had this to say about the tainted beef scandal they are at the centre of:

“XL Foods is committed to producing high-quality beef products and the safety and well-being of our consumers is our number one priority. We will continue to act in their best interests throughout the implementation of the enhanced food safety systems. Food safety is simply too important to our customers, our employees and our business.”

It issued no apology to those who have fallen ill – four cases, none of them fatal, have been linked to the recall, with more under investigation. Instead, echoing its previous statements, XL Foods said simply it’s committed to food quality.

With their tendency toward passivity and indifference, will the Canadian public deem this platitudinous public relations effort sufficient?