Last night I met with the students in the grad course I teach. While I am retired, I still have the opportunity to teach some graduate courses and I look forward to this opportunity. In this context (preparing for this class and having the initial meeting in which the approach and the goals of the class were presented), this morning I happened to come across this post on graduate education for educators. If you have an interest in graduate level professional development, the post is well thought out and worth your examination.
I am not certain how the approach I take would be evaluated by the writer of the post I encourage you to examine. I am certainly willing to offer my syllabus for examination. I am very possibly an example of the “old guard” according to the expectations explained in this post. It is very possible that some of the vocabulary used by this writer limits my understanding. We academics all use terminology unique to our own perspectives and terms used as part of daily communication by others may be vague to others. The phrase “critical digital pedagogy” has no concrete meaning to me. I may actually take this perspective in the course I am teaching and I may not. I really don’t know.
Here is what I can say about my perspective. I understand that various perspectives can be brought to bear in examining instructional practices. My approach is based in the cognitive understanding of human learning and the research available on the effectiveness of different learning experiences. I am aware that many other factors are influential. There are political influences. There are historical influences. There are sociological influences. There are philosophical influences. There is also the reality that graduate education offers opportunities to examine the experiences of learners from all of these perspectives. I am certain that all perspectives have something to offer. I am also certain that my attempt to address the potential interplay of all of these perspectives would limit student focus on any given perspective.
I used to think that technology was neutral and that it was important for educators to understand that how students applied the tool should be the focus. I think my perspective has changed a bit. I understand that tools have affordances (things that the tool allows to be accomplished with great ease) and existing predominant applications. It is the combination of affordance, predispositions and an understand of how learning happens that I try to emphasize.
