03/06/2015
By, Casey Skoog.
Squire’s piece really strikes me and I think about the classroom experience of my generation with students who had already “checked out long ago” (2009). In light of it, however, I would argue that while implementing mobile technology has important pedagogical implications (Squire, 2009; Holden & Sykes, 2012; Sykes, Oskoz, & Thorne, 2013; Thorne, Black & Sykes, 2009) traditional classrooms have always left something to be desired as they generally benefit those with a narrow set of learning styles and abilities. Moreover, they may exclude economically disadvantaged students whom may not only not possess such technologies, but lack knowledge in their uses as a result. While there has been some improvement, particularly concerning kids with disabilities and some attending to cultural diversity (including learners from backgrounds where education was not accessible), consideration for such has also been slow and lacking.
It is never too early to implement technology whether for mainstream students or those with limited education backgrounds and/or learning disabilities. It is also critical to account for different learning needs and paces of learning regarding all of these issues (and possibly more).
Indeed, an interactive type of learning is great for more profound and lasting learning experiences. Using augmented reality games, blogs, and the variety of medias available for enhancing learning general subject matter and acquiring digital literacy does offer positively affective benefits for mainstream students. [I Love Bees](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Love_Bees) was a great example of a broad human collaboration and cooperation to utilize problem solving skills and an overall socially constructive and relevant learning experience despite it being a video game promotion.
I agree we must engage students and access them through habits erroneously and too commonly discouraged in the classroom. We do have multiplicity of identity and space (Squire 2009). It is true that failing to adapt our classrooms would squander opportunities to implement pedagogic practices into already routine and automatic habits. Such habits which already include engagement where most all of us are multiliterate (Blattner & Fiori, 2011; Reinhardt & Thorne, 2011). There are countless groups and communities each with their own superdiversities (Thorne, 2013) exchanging cyber-tons of information and ideas while also developing a broader set of skills (Blattner & Fiori, 2001; Mills 2011; Reinhardt & Thorne, 2011; Squire 2009; Thorne, Black, & Sykes, 2009).
The questions I have relate to students with alternative needs and different challenge. I mean students who remain disadvantaged in education despite some very slow changes. They are the poor, blind, paralyzed, deaf, illiterate, innumerate, dyslexic, ADHD, somewhere on the autistic spectrum, etc., students lacking the same access either by material, physical, or mental means. We cannot assume that when we do include technologies in education more comprehensively that some will not ‘check out.’ So, how do we start a discussion about implementing technology, including mobile tech, in education in ways that will account for all types of students?
References
Blattner,, G, & Fiori, M. (2011). Virtual social network communities: An Investigation of language learners’ development of sociopragmatic awareness and multiliteracy skills. Calico Journal, 29(1), 24-43.
Holden, C. & Sykes, J., (2011). Leveraging mobile games for place-based language learning. International Journal of Game-Based Learning. 1(2), 1-18.
Mills, N. A. (2011). Situated learning through social networking communities: The development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement, and a shared repertoire. CALICO Special Volume: Second Language Acquisition Theories, Technologies, and Language Learning (Eds., S. Thorne & B. Smith), 28(2).
Reinhardt, J., & Thorne, S. (2011). Beyond comparisons: Frameworks for developing digital L2 literacies. Present and future promises of CALL: From theory and research to new directions in language teaching, 257-280.
Squire, K., (2009). Mobile media learning: multiplicities of place. On the Horizon.
17(70-80).
Sykes, J. M., Oskoz, A., & Thorne, S. L. (2013). Web 2.0, synthetic immersive environments, and mobile resources for language education. Calico Journal, 25(3), 528-546.
Thorne, S. L. (2008). Transcultural communication in open internet environments and massively multiplayer online games. Mediating discourse online, 305-327.
Thorne, S. L. (2013). Language learning, ecological validity, and innovation under conditions of superdiversity.
Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. M. (2009). Second language use, socialization, and learning in Internet interest communities and online gaming. The Modern Language Journal, 93(s1), 802-821.
Loading comments...