Lately I’ve been noticing a lot of podcasts that are simply “proof of concept” shows that seem to be part of an effort to show kids how to podcast. Sounds good, right? It sounds fine, except that is as far as the projects seem to go. There is no transfer from technical skill to academic pursuit. In this episode I discuss this troubling occurrence and suggest some ways to turn it around.
Related Articles
4 users responded in this post
Regarding podcast number 58, as much as I can identify with your point, I do need to provide a different perspective.
You mentioned that podcasts were in many cases being done just to fulfill a requirement in a computer apps class and that the content seemed secondary. Yes, that is absolutely correct. Let me explain.
I have taught middle school technology for over three years and my intention is to add podcasting to my curriculum. I am an avid podcast listener, and I myself am beginning a podcast relating to my secondary career as a tennis instructor. Students have created multi-media PowerPoint presentations in my class using high-resolution graphics, custom animations and transitions, and music and sound effects. Podcasts, both audio and video, are a natural progression to utilize student creativity and technical skill.
In the state of NJ, the NJCCCS (NJ Core Curriculum Content Standards) dictate what skills are required of students by 8th grade. Technology is typically taught in a rotation, and there are less computer teachers in a given school than there are custodians. As a matter of fact, we had 300+ students in grades 5-8 with at least 4 teachers for each “academic” subject and only one computer teacher. Therefore, many skills must be taught by very few teachers and in a shorter time than virtually any other subject. If a computer teacher decides to use Podcasting as a way to teach technology skills, this project needs to fit into a very small time window, sometimes meeting with kids only once a week, which limits the research and development of rich content.
As a former professional graphic designer for two decades and now a teacher, I know that this process of podcasting is not just software-based skills and content alone. A key component that you mentioned was “presentation.” I don’t consider this to be a part of the content however. This is the “hook” to get people engaged and listening. Teachers use this technique all the time in their classrooms, and students need this skill as well. This relates to the interesting design of the podcast such as intro graphics, music, or thought-inspiring quotes and tag lines.
But time is always short for the computer teacher, and my goal has always been to provide kids with the skills in technology that can adapt to any content. For example, a Social Studies teacher can take their class to a computer lab and provide their specific requirements for a multi-media project on Ancient Egypt. The teacher should not need to cover the nuts-and-bolts of the software and hardware. The kids should apply what hands-on skills they have learned in technology class to fulfill the teacher’s assignment using electronic means.
I agree that content should not usually be secondary, but in the case of the overburdened computer teacher who is usually responsible for several hundred kids in one school, teaching the skill of “creation” versus “good design” is all that can be done in order to achieve a balance between all the computer and technology skills required by state standards.
Ron makes brings up some interesting points. Thanks for your comments and point of view. Perhaps my title was too rigid. Maybe I should have used “The Medium is only PART of the Message” or “The Medium is the Vehicle…now where are you going?” The challenge that is inherent in computer applications classes is that if their work is to carry on and find context in the rest of the curriculum, it must find an entry point in other classes. We need to explain the capacities we are developing in our students to other teachers, so they know what is possible.
Some would argue against teaching technology as a separate subject area. I think we need technology instruction, but learning the application is not an end, it is opening an opportunity for context. The challenge will be to find teachers who will take up this challenge.
I was very excited to listen to Dan’s message (again
). This is one of the most powerful reasons I am very excited about my new job next year. For the last 3 years I have been teaching “computer” or “technology” to K-5th graders in a pull out specialist classroom. There has been very little colaborative work between me and the regular classroom teachers. I have a good idea of the concepts they are teaching in class and I have designed “projects” centered around those curricular areas. And that is what I called integration.
However, I focused mainly on teaching the software and a key element of technology education was missing from what I was teaching. Making it real. Sure they had a pretty neat project by the time they were done. But because of time we never got to the important part. Now that we created it, how do we present it? How do we share it? Why do we share it. The only audience my students performed for were me and themselves. In many ways we were just mass producing projects. The focus wasn’t the content, it was creating the projects.
Next year I have the opportunity to work in collaboration with teachers on using technology in the classroom. This brings a fantastic opportunity for the content to be the focus and the technology skill acquired are secondary. They will learn how to use technology how I have learned to use technology. By doing.
Having the ability to have the time and an audience will be powerful. Teaching presentations skills with technology as a tool to enhance the presentations will be a huge shift in how I work with students and what I work with them on. Podcasting is one of those things I would like to do.
Dan, I’m new to this whole business of expecting kids to “publish” all their work. I think that’s what your saying, essentially. As an elementary teacher, we’re more focused on teaching skills and the process of learning. Yes, we ask for products, but as Ron said, there are only so many hours in the day. He’s responsible for teaching the technology. Classroom teachers are responsible for teaching the content but I believe the type of knowledge production you’re talking about comes from problem based learning. I used that type of learning in my 2nd grade classroom several years ago. It was very time consuming and required a tremendous amount of behind the scenes teacher time to assure that students will have the resources they need to do their work. Many of the materials kids need to organize information is teacher made and mediated. It’s exhausting work, well worth it, but exhausting. I can assure you that if I was currently teaching 2nd grade in my district there would be absolutely no time for kids to explore this type of learning or generation of new knowledge. I would be tied to pacing charts, prescribed curriculum and mandated district and state assessments.
I guess my other question is, if I’m doing most of my thinking and learning before teaching the technology, why use that particular mode of representation?
Leave A Reply
Please Note: Comment moderation maybe active so there is no need to resubmit your comments