I connect, therefore I am

Having watched Turkle’s 2012 TED Talk Connected, but Alone? and read Wesch’s 2010 article Anti-Teaching: Confronting the Significance Problem, I have come to view both as allies. To be sure, Wesch seems to be more okay with (and encouraging of) the presence of technology and media in our everyday lives than Turkle. However what seems abundantly clear from both of these individuals is that both are determined to create opportunities for authentic human connection. For Turkle, getting to a place where genuine human connection can occur requires technology to be put to the side intermittently, so that people have “time to talk.. [and] reconsider how we use [technology]... to develop a more self aware relationship with them [meaning technology], with each other, and with ourselves” (Turkle, 2012). On the other hand, for Wesch, technology is used as a catalyst for human connection; it is the hook to engage his students in their coursework as well as the vehicle to document their learning together over the course of a semester. 

To borrow our idea of a dinner party, I see Turkle and Wesch as the type of guests who remain at the table after the plates have been cleared, talking passionately about where their positions overlap and diverge. I foresee Turkle insisting that her research suggests that the average individual’s phone use isolates them from the world whereas Welsch acknowledges her work but counters by citing his classroom experiences as spaces where technology is used as a means by which his students can connect with one another and display their learning, not just with each other but with the world at large. 

Based on the information presented in their pieces, I would also argue that both accept the belief that today’s youth are digital natives (as defined by Presnky), however, I suspect that if Boyd was also invited to this party Turkle would look to her for support in sighting that our youth still require direct instruction to develop the skills for utilizing technology responsibly. I see this connection most clearly when Turkle is describing her theory of the Goldilocks effect: “But what might feel just right for that middle aged executive can be a problem for an adolescent who needs to develop face-to-face relationships'' (Turkle, 2012). Here, Turkle’s point reminds me of Boyd’s main criticism of Prensky’s: that one cannot assume all youth are digital natives due to the fact that not all have the same level of access to technology as well as the skills required to critically consume media.

That said where Turkle would find an ally, I think Wesch would find an opponent. Specifically, I think Wesch would push back on the idea that our youth require direct instruction to obtain the skills and knowledge they need to be successful in life. According to Wesch (2010), “the best learning almost always occurs in the absence of a teacher, for it is then that learners are free to pursue with great passion the questions that are meaningful and relevant to their own lives (p. 5). Wesch’s laissez faire approach to instruction suggests that he believes today’s youth have the capacity to answer their own questions and learn the skills they need based on their life experiences; teachers are merely facilitators of the learning space (and not the sources of knowledge). Here I am reminded of the work of William Ayers and his belief that “greatness in teaching engages students, interacts with them, draws energy and direction from them, and offers reasons to plunge into classroom life” (Ayers & Alexander-Tanner, 2010, p. 97). Simply put, the students drive the instruction. 

At the end of the day, once the dishes are cleared, I see Wesch and Turkle coming to a compromise: youth today require authentic connection. Although the path to fostering authentic connections may vary, the ultimate goal is to create a learning environment where youth can deepen their understanding of themselves, those around them, and the world at large.

"REAL" learning as told by Wesch

From the very beginning of his talk, Dr. Michael Wesch makes the statement that traditional classrooms are strange due to their set-up. According to Wesch, the unspoken message the traditional college classroom layout sends to students about learning is that “learning is all about dumping information into people’s heads” (TEDx Talks, 2016, Kansas State University). Contrary to his classroom set-up, Wesch believes that learning is an active process that is driven by an individual's interests. Like Boyd (2014), Wesch points to his experience with his students (or youth) to demonstrate his beliefs about what students are capable of as well as what they require in order to be successful in his classroom. Based on Wesch’s time with students, he has come to identify three important questions that guide student’s thinking and actions: 

Who am I?

What am I going to do?

Am I going to make it?

Realizing that his students were most concerned about their identity and livelihoods, Wesch began to reconsider how he could revamp his classroom so that learning was meaningful to the students in front of him (rather than about obtaining a perfect score on an assignment or fulfilling a page requirement). Getting to this place required Wesch to get to know his students and apply what he would learn about them to his teaching practice so that he could adapt his instruction to meet the strengths and needs of his students, thus demonstrating his belief that learning can be accessible to all so long as one is willing to make it so. Although Wesch is vague in describing the actual steps he has taken as a professor to adapt his instruction, he does assert that he modified his instruction by incorporating scaffolds throughout his courses to support the academic as well as socio-emotional development of his students.

Additionally, although he does not use this language directly, I would argue that he also modifies his instruction by incorporating a growth mindset philosophy with learning. Specifically, he states that with his new grading model “the rule is there’s never an end to this [meaning learning]. You don’t just get an ‘F’ and you’re out. Instead you get a ‘Not yet’ and some feedback” (TEDx Talks, 2016, Kansas State University). I also argue that his view on learning has shifted to a community-based effort rather than an individualistic act–in his modified classroom, his students are encouraged (and expected) to help one another to learn the material in a way that makes sense and is meaningful for them.

Through this shift in mindset and actions, Wesch reveals that “real” learning is dynamic, ongoing, and collaborative. Real learning is NOT memorizing facts or getting the highest grade in the class but rather is an active pursuit that is driven by one’s interests, strengths, and needs. Like Robinson (2013), Wesch asserts that learning is more than obtaining high scores but rather is a pursuit of identifying one’s purpose. In order to support students’ ability to identify and define themselves and their life’s purpose, educators must create opportunities for students to genuinely connect with and be curious about the content being taught in a space that welcomes risk-taking and creativity.

Unpacking the term "digital native"

     In the eyes of Prensky (2001), today’s youth are “digital natives” meaning that they are a generation who possess intuitive knowledge regarding how to use technology due to the (assumed) omnipresence technology has had in their lives (as opposed to the lack of technology present in earlier generations’ lives). From this perspective, Prensky makes the claim that youth today process information differently than previous generations and therefore require teaching methods that are more aligned with their "new" style of learning. Certainly, the latter sentiment is not far off from what Sir Ken Robinson shares in his TED Talk, How to escape education's death valley (2013). Similar to Robinson, Prensky believes that today’s classrooms need to shift and be individualized based on students’ interests, strengths, and needs. However, once one reads the work of Boyd (2014), one realizes that Prensky’s ideas about youth as digital natives is based on a variety of assumptions regarding access and skill-set. 

    To begin, Boyd communicates that the presence of technology is not synonymous with digital literacy or technology savviness. In her own words, she states “many of today’s teens are indeed deeply engaged with social media and are active participants in networked publics, but this does not mean that they inherently have the knowledge or skills to make the most of their online experiences” (p. 176). Essentially then, Boyd argues that the presence of technology does not automatically ensure that today’s youth know how to best utilize that same technology, rather youth must be directly taught how to use technology responsibly and productively. Similarly, Boyd uses testimonials from teens as well as her observations regarding teen’s usage of technology to demonstrate that youth’s knowledge and ability to skillfully use technology varies greatly, which is in direct opposition to what Prensky reports. 

    In my own experience as a teacher I find that my observation of my students’ technology usage is in stark contrast to what Prensky claims to be true for our youth. Outside of navigating their lives on social media or viewing content on Youtube or Netflix, the majority of my students become quickly stuck when they are asked to independently navigate their devices (usually chromebooks) to access academic content on Google classroom or other academic websites. I believe my experiences coincide with Boyd’s assertions that “youth need opportunities to develop the skills and knowledge to engage with contemporary technology effectively and meaningfully. Becoming literate in a networked age requires hard work, regardless of age” (p. 177). 

    Connecting to Boyd’s latter point, I find that in my personal life I often witness how one’s knowledge of technology varies based on one’s usage habits. For example, my fiance and I are the same age and were brought up in similar households, however our skill level regarding technology varies greatly based on our technology usage. Case in point, my fiance is an avid online gamer and can navigate multiple game spaces with ease as well as build a tower from scratch, yet when it comes time for responding to and finding old emails or creating a budget with excel, he relies heavily on my knowledge of Google suite as this is my area of expertise. All this to say, I think the idea that today's youth are digital natives (as defined by Prensky) is a fallacy. Like Boyd, my personal and professional experiences lead me to believe that one’s media literacy and technology skills are largely dependent on one’s access to technology as well as their experiences of being taught how to utilize that technology to the best of their abilities.

Introduction

Hello and welcome to my blog! My name is Alyssa Mason. As you may have guessed from the title, I am a millennial teacher. Born in the 90s, I am someone who grew up consuming media primarily via Disney Channel, Nickelodeon, and MTV. As I got older (and technology became more accessible), my taste for culture expanded to the world wide web in the form of Buzznet, Myspace, and Facebook (and yes, in that exact order). When I wasn't at school or hanging out with my friends, I was tucked away in the corner of my family's apartment, hunched up in a peeling, leather office chair (you know the type) on a Gateway desktop, learning basic code and writing fanfiction that centered around the bands I devoted my ears to at the time (primarily Panic! At the Disco and Fall Out Boy) while listening to these same bands on my iPod shuffle. As an aside, have you heard about the girl who went viral for using iPod shuffles as hair clips?

Flash forward to today: streaming giants, like Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime are what I use to watch my favorite shows and movies. Any time of day, I can curl up on my couch with my cat or my fiance (or both) to watch what I want without the annoyance of commercials (unless we are watching Hulu) or having to wait until a certain time of day.** Like Tivo, but better. Similar to my TV watching habits, my online presence has also shifted. Instead of curling up at a desk when I want to engage in my favorite online spaces, (mainly Instagram nowadays, although I do still keep my Facebook app updated), I can curl up on my couch, in the car, at a cafe, at a bar, or even in my bed (usually when it's past my bedtime) to read, watch, listen to, and write content. Despite the many hours I devoted to my family's desktop computer screen, I think it's safe to say that I spend way more time online than I ever did before (especially when you calculate the amount of time I spend on a laptop or a chromebook during the school day). 

And yet, even though I may have just presented myself as this evolved tech-addict, I do still find time for other things that do not require apps or screens: running, yoga, hiking, biking, baking, and attempting DIY garden and home projects. But don't get me wrong, like any good participant of an online community, the things I do well get posted on my story (because that's the new norm, right?). So, here's yet another place for me to engage in an online community, albeit for academic purposes. This blog is here to document my learnings as I participate in a two week course. Feel free to learn along with me and leave a comment when you like (or dislike) something I write.

** Looking for a list of TV show recommendations by streaming service? Check out my post on the RIWP blog.