Week 1 - Engagement Activity 3
Reflection on Prensky's Ideas
Okay, so I read Prensky’s ideas with great interest! And, I experienced a range of 'strongly agree' moments, some 'slightly disagree' instances, and one or two cases of, 'I really don’t agree and would like to offer a different perspective!' The following is not in order of the aforementioned opinions, and may not even cover them all, but here I go anyway ...
Let’s start at
the very beginning. When formed in utero, individuals inherit, through deoxyribonucleic
acid (DNA), a genetically unique combination of physiological, cognitive,
social and emotional predispositions which have the potential to influence the
person they become. Once born, the environments and experiences the individual
is exposed to will greatly determine which of these genetically endowed
predispositions are activated, and strengthen to shape not only the personality
of the individual, but their strengths and weaknesses. And so, we are in part an
entity of nature (through DNA), and in part a product of nurture (that of our environment
and experiences).
It has been said
that the only certain thing in life is ‘change’. And in the twenty-first
century, we are experiencing exponential rates of change, as globalisation
impacts nearly every facet of existence, and the world’s largest companies seek
to outdo each other in the development of state-of-the-art technological
products, popularity and profits. With sophisticated international marketing
campaigns and a generation of parents with a penchant toward consumerism and a keeping up with the Jones’ mindset,
children of the latter part of the twentieth century and, certainly, those of the
twenty-first century, have been provided with one technological gadget after
another to occupy their time and engage their minds. These children invest countless
hours solving one problem after another to complete their ways through countless
game levels and gain ‘mastery’ ... just in time for the next even better product with an even greater challenge to land in their
hot little hands! This is the never-a-dull-moment environment many of today’s learners have been raised in, and this kind of endless brain activity or
thought processing accounts for a large part of their lives’ experience. As a result, we have grown a
generation of ‘smart’ kids – technologically smart kids! But even technology
needs something to be ‘smart’ about - there has to be a reason to press this button or click that icon!
Although today’s
learners may be technologically smart, high-speed ‘digital natives’, who are
bored with traditional teaching methodology (Prensky, 2001), it is my opinion
that they still need something to be smart about! While there is always room
for the curriculum to be modified to better meet the needs of the day and the
future, much of the traditional curriculum content, which Prensky refers to as ‘legacy content’, remains as essential
for life in the real world as ‘future content’, Prensky’s term for current and
emerging digital and technological aspects of the curriculum (2001, p.4). I very
strongly agree with Prensky’s statement that, “[A]s educators, we need to be
thinking about how to teach both
Legacy and Future content in the language of the Digital Natives’ (2001, p.4),
keeping in mind, of course, the needs and abilities of all learners within the class and catering for each one’s
individual needs as much as possible.
We are indeed
dealing with a very different group of learners who ‘think and process
information fundamentally differently from their predecessors’ (Prensky, 2001,
p.1). And ‘digital immigrant’ educators need to explore new avenues to
understand the language and functions of ‘digital native’ students, in order to
develop more effective methodologies that engage learners in positive and
necessary learning experiences that will prepare them for life in both the real
and the digital world. But we must not go to the extreme of assuming that all our
learners think in technological terms and learn through digital media. We must
take the time to truly get to know each of our learners and find what their
particular language is. Just as we are all genetically and experientially
unique, I suggest that each of us have a unique learning language. As
educators, we must learn to read our learners’ learning languages as accurately
as possible, remain sensitive to individual differences, and as ever,
understand that one curriculum does not fit
all.
References
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Prensky, M. (2005). Engage me or enrage me. Educause Review, September/October 2005, 60-64.
