Four Myths About Technology and Second Language Acquisition
According to Blake (2008), "there are four misconceptions when the word technology is mentioned in circles." The first one that he mentions is that technology is viewed as a monolithic concept, i.e. is either all good or all bad. As language teachers, we are mostly end users of the tools offered (unless of course somebody is a web designer or a programming whiz), and personally I do not see these tools as inherently good or bad. What decides about their usefulness (or otherwise) is the purpose for which they are used and the way we use them. If we do it for the "wow" effect, then there is a danger of a failed learning outcome. So it is up to us educators to choose a tool which is the most suitable for our students to facilitate their learning. We should decide what to use it for and in what capacity. We must not overlook the role that our students play in this equation. They need to be presented with the possibilities of what is "out there" and given choices. If a teacher applies (too often) a "hit and miss" strategy, students might get discouraged very quickly and lose interest to learn with technology altogether.
Blake then moves one to the second myth that "technology constitutes methodology". Taking any tool just because it is available is probably more dangerous than not applying it at all. Very often a failure to achieve a desired outcome might have a "domino effect". It is probably more true for the institutions if such would invest in a hype tool only to discover that it is not methodologically sound. As teachers we have to be extremely careful not to turn our class into experimenting ground of innovative tools just to apply technology wherever possible without thinking about underlying methodology that stands behind our choices.
The next myth that Blake discusses is that "today's technology is all we need to know". As teachers we are often too busy to follow up on constant changes taking place in the world of technology. If there is anything that scares me, it is the fact that one day I will be left behind in web 2.0 when everyone else moved into the world of web 3.0. It scares me much more than the fourth myth about technology replacing teachers. As Blake rightly states, somebody will need to teach distance courses, design material and curriculum and train students to work in online environment. Will technology replace teachers? Yes, it will if you as a teacher are not willing to adapt and embrace changes as well as constantly educate yourself about technological advances.
I think some countries already reached the point where being JUST a language teacher is not enough. I remember years back when it was very difficult to find a teacher of any Western language (mostly English) willing to teach in a state school. It is a well known fact that teachers (and doctors) are (and have always been) severely underpaid in Poland. Now it is not easy to find a job in a government school as the market of English teachers is quite saturated. In other words, it is not enough anymore that you can teach the language or know how to switch on a computer and use Microsoft Word or Excel. The question is what else can you do? What other skills you possess that would make you a valuable asset for a school? Use of technology in your classes is such an obvious answer. But what will happen when even THAT is not enough?
Blake, J. (2008). Brave New Digital Classroom. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Blake then moves one to the second myth that "technology constitutes methodology". Taking any tool just because it is available is probably more dangerous than not applying it at all. Very often a failure to achieve a desired outcome might have a "domino effect". It is probably more true for the institutions if such would invest in a hype tool only to discover that it is not methodologically sound. As teachers we have to be extremely careful not to turn our class into experimenting ground of innovative tools just to apply technology wherever possible without thinking about underlying methodology that stands behind our choices.
The next myth that Blake discusses is that "today's technology is all we need to know". As teachers we are often too busy to follow up on constant changes taking place in the world of technology. If there is anything that scares me, it is the fact that one day I will be left behind in web 2.0 when everyone else moved into the world of web 3.0. It scares me much more than the fourth myth about technology replacing teachers. As Blake rightly states, somebody will need to teach distance courses, design material and curriculum and train students to work in online environment. Will technology replace teachers? Yes, it will if you as a teacher are not willing to adapt and embrace changes as well as constantly educate yourself about technological advances.
I think some countries already reached the point where being JUST a language teacher is not enough. I remember years back when it was very difficult to find a teacher of any Western language (mostly English) willing to teach in a state school. It is a well known fact that teachers (and doctors) are (and have always been) severely underpaid in Poland. Now it is not easy to find a job in a government school as the market of English teachers is quite saturated. In other words, it is not enough anymore that you can teach the language or know how to switch on a computer and use Microsoft Word or Excel. The question is what else can you do? What other skills you possess that would make you a valuable asset for a school? Use of technology in your classes is such an obvious answer. But what will happen when even THAT is not enough?
Blake, J. (2008). Brave New Digital Classroom. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Comments
Post a Comment