So part of this Master’s paper I am doing requires me to give some feedback on some reading we are required to complete, and as per usual I am doing this too late. This blog entry relates to Marc Prensky’s article, "Engage Me or Enrage Me" an article which achieved it’s title in me! Let me vent…
What is the role of Education?
With such a range of educational philosophies one can see that this question is not easily answered. ‘To educate the child’ seems a simple and fair answer, but educate them in what? How? Do we strive for good character, scholastic achievement, well rounded, technologically literate students who are reflective and aware of their own strengths and weaknesses? Is lifelong learning a goal we encompass? How important is it to challenge students to extend their comfort zone, to encourage them to try new things or should we just deliver what they want and employ a consumer satisfaction model.
What is clear from Marc Prensky’s simple analysis of a complex sociological issue is that he has not taken the time to look at the greater underlying themes involved in education. I feel slightly enraged that he has looked at education in such a simplistic ‘user pays’ model in which everything happens as the customer wants. The educators who have influenced me the most are those that challenge me, move me beyond my own needs and take me to something greater. They didn’t give me what I wanted, they gave me what I needed.
Marc’s perspective is so limited ‘…kids back then didn’t expect to be engaged by everything they did’. Seriously Mr Prensky, who on earth is completely engaged by everything they do? And really, is the whole process of endless computer connection shown in this comment; ‘Every day after school, I go home and download music –it’s all I do’, …is this what we want our society to live like?
Marc discusses how school should be user selected, he suggests students are not ‘empowered to chose what they want’, and relates this to the idea of surfing hundreds of TV channels, personalized identities and ring tones. Sorry Mark, kids aren’t deciding these, advertising is convincing them they need them; this is not a good example of empowerment.
Ok, I have bagged Mr Prensky enough, after all he does say one nice thing… that perhaps ‘kids are sending us another message… offering the hope of connecting with them’. Here within lies the key, it is not engagement we have to aim for, it is connection, connection comes from a unique relationship with a teacher, not a computer, and when we have this special connection, then we get true engagement. Technology is a tool, not the tool.
Thanks Mr Prensky, you made me think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Glad you're finding the Prensky article controversial - that's why we chose it :)
ReplyDeleteAside from the specifics of the article, I would just like to compliment you on the way you have shared your perspective. Your statements are balanced and thoughtful and you've offered a very professional reflection on the major points in the article.
In no way do we expect everyone to agree with what we're reading (in many cases, we might not agree with everything either), but I certainly appreciate your ability to open the door to conversation instead of angrily slamming it in your readers' faces.