Marc Prensky writes, “it is very likely that our students’ brains have physically changed – and are different from ours – as a result of how they grew up” (Prensky 1). “Ours” in that sentence refers to those who did not grow up with technology impacting their daily life and even their brain. I found this point to be quite interesting. No wonder there is such a big difference between the learning styles of today and decades ago- there was an absence of technology then and now it engulfs us.

Another thing that struck me was how this disconnect has really affected the education system. Prensky wrote that, current “instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language” (2). Children are becoming bored and disengaged because the older generation is teaching how they were taught, not adapting to the advances of technology.

 “Who is going to adapt?” is the question that struck me from the article. Should the older generation change their thinking and teaching habits for the sake of technology and its domination in society? I’d say that is much more logical than students trying to “backstep” into a generation they are completely unfamiliar with and that will not blow with the winds of adaptive technology. I agree with Prensky in the fact that “today’s teachers have to learn to communicate in the language and style of their students,” not the other way around (4).

This article brings up two different spectrums of education and “languages” that aren’t typically differentiated. There is the first, Digital Native, which refers to students today who have grown up with technology at their fingertips, There is also Digital Immigrant, referring to the older generation where technology is quite new to them.

Digital Natives learn quickly, they want hands on and parallel process games. They prefer multi-tasking and seem to learn better that way.

Digital Immigrants learn slowly, step-by-step, no distractions present and almost have an attitude of “this is not and should not be a fun time for me.”

An example of the difference between the both is stated in the article, “They (Immigrants) wanted a slow academic pace, we (Natives) wanted speed and urgency” (Prensky 5). I personally have different learning styles than my parents did, and I now can connect that to the high technology that is in my classroom, teaching me to learn in that manner. Many students need music to focus, for example, and Digital Immigrants would see that as not focusing or studying because it is distracting.

Is there a way for Digital Immigrants to adapt to the learning styles of Digital Natives through mere experimentation instead of reschooling or re-educating them in advanced technological ways?

One thing that stuck out to me was that the ability to engage and motivate your students is greater than the ability to discipline them. I always thought that a controlled classroom was the key to engaging students, but I was wrong. I could have the most controlled and well-behaved classroom there is, but if the content I am teaching does not line up with the technological intelligence of my students, then I have gained nothing. There needs to be an aspect that reels in the students and makes them want to learn, because then I will receive the respect and attention I desire.

Student collaboration and engagement in their own material and device creates the best learning outcome. It is written that, “We shouldn’t be banning digital devices; we should be encouraging them to use them” (9). There are countless opportunities to engage with other students and share ideas to better understand concepts, but if technology is prohibited, the opportunities are drastically decreased. I understand that some phone usage can get out of control, but there should be parameters set in place instead of getting rid of technology all together.  

It surprised me that the biggest challenge was “…accepting the scale of change” (11). How can teachers make changes and conform to the needs of their students if they are not accepting of the fact that times are in desperate need of an education shift? First comes acknowledgment, then comes action. I believe most teachers are just misinformed and could use a simple lesson to bring about this acknowledgement. I really like how the article states, “We want to truly unfold the full intellectual and creative genius of all of our students more of the time. We want to prepare them for the world that awaits them - for their future, not our past” (11). This is a call to action for all educators.

The first side:

The “outdated” techniques that come from the teachers who are stuck in old teaching habits and have trouble connecting with their students. They are not willing to conform despite the changing times. Much of the blame is put on education as a whole because of its inability to see the students needs above their standardized requirements. Instead of focusing on the productivity and development of the student, their learning is turned into numbers on a database for state and national success as an education system, which is looking entirely the wrong direction.

The second side:

The technology enriched students are on a different level than their teachers electronically and have trouble staying engaged. They cannot stay focused in lessons completely full of reading out of a book because their minds are wired to do more. They desire more for their classroom but often do not communicate it because they are not in charge of the classroom.

The article states, “If we continue to focus primarily on content, memorization and value as being more important than thinking, they are still completely dependent on us in Grade 12 to tell them what they need to do to…Our job is to make sure they don’t need us by the time they graduate from our schools” (6). Instead of teachers taking on a constant “they need to know this” state of mind, they should focus on preparation and readying their students as individuals for the lives ahead of them.

How can teachers dive into meaningful technological practices instead of just dipping their feet into multiple technologies that in return, will not actually benefit their classroom?

People have the misconception that technology will steal their intellectual abilities away. Without traditional foundations backing up our thinking, many people have the perception that the intellect of our society is decreasing. This idea is portrayed in “popular culture will erode the traditional liberal arts education and reorient school” (Yu 1). This interested me because I think older generations have this mentality, but it is caused from their ignorance in technology.

Students can use technology to see their academic success and continue to make progress in their efforts. I really like how Yu wrote, “Gone will be the days when students feel like work is arbitrary and there is no continuity from year to year” (2). So many times I have felt like my work is meaningless and teachers are just handing me “busy work.” I like how connections can be drawn between content levels and lessons so I can carry information with me, not just forget it when I finish a course.

Interests that students would typically pursue outside of school can now do it within their work. With technology, they are able to do projects and use resources to incorporate what they really love into the content being taught. This helps them remember more information in the end because they were able to add in their own creativity. Yu says that “students can now take their most personal intellectual interests to unprecedented heights” (3).

There is a sense of discontentment with this society and how the future generations will be deprived of a full education. Fear and worry are two emotions that seem to reign with this point of view.
2. Others believe that technology is the gateway to extended and creative learning, that essentially grows the human mind beyond prior abilities.

With this point of view, all pessimistic ideas are thrown out of the window. Prosperity and the ability for growth and creativity are huge concepts that go along with the open doors that technology creates. This optimism is summed up in one sentence: “If you are passionate about serious intellectual inquiry, there has never been a better time in which to live” (Yu 2).

How can older generations receive a better understanding of current instruction in schools around the world?

Side 1: Assistive technology bridges the gap between misunderstanding and incapability to clarity and demonstration. Students who feel unsupported and lagging will continue feeling that way all throughout high school if they do not receive something to help their school day run more smoothly. They can reach a point of success and being able to demonstrate their knowledge if they are given the resources to do so. 

Side 2: Teachers may think assistive technology is non-effective and requires too much training. It is also not supported enough nationwide. It was written that “only a third of special education programs surveyed by Judge and Simms (2009) addressed assistive technology, and few workshops or professional development opportunities exist to continually support teachers’ use of assistive technology during instruction” (Young, MacCormack).

Would the number of IEPs decrease if more assistive technology was implemented in the classroom?

Personally Responsible Citizen: these are the people that volunteer their time at an event or donate to help a cause. They are also very active in voting and politics. These students “are encouraged to be responsible, obedient, and productive “netizens” (Krutka, Carpenter 2).

Participatory Citizen: these people still see the importance in participation and getting involved for the betterment of others, but are more hesitant. This hesitation could be from “the visibility of posts, the perceived unpopularity of their opinions, or the potential threat of derogatory or aggressive responses” (Krutka, Carpenter 3). I understand this view from a first-hand perspective because I always think twice about whether my comment or opinion is going to lead to uproar or chaos on a media feed.

Justice-Oriented Citizen: these citizens are those that raise their voice against oppression and point out the issues in society. They call attention to what needs changed and identify the poison within institutions or society. As future educators, we can help manifest these students by “raising their consciousness of oppression and identifying an array of adaptive strategies that are often needed” (Krutka, Carpenter 4)

How can a teacher incorporate lessons about political media use without using possibly offensive point of views as examples for “what not to post” online?