An (aspiring) Educator’s Blog

An educator blogging….novel idea.

Edupunk.is.dead. (Insert witty web 2.0-eduism catchphrase here)

with 4 comments

Lindsea over at Students 2.0 makes a great point about the diy/edupunk internet movements:

The only thing that I see missing in these discussions of “edupunk” are students. Sure, in theory students are supposed to be given more power, but where are the student voices in the actual discussions of edupunk? This Jim Groom, smart and interesting man though he is, is an adult, a teacher, and (I’m sorry) not actually punk or DIY. Coining this new term and making it seem cool because it uses the word “punk” doesn’t change the fact that a teacher made it up, teachers are discussing it right now, and a teacher will be implementing the theory.

I realize that the application of the term isn’t exactly focused on the real punk community, it’s obviously about education. But I’d like to make it clear that the punk and DIY cultures are the domains of the younger generation now. The students will be the leaders in whatever underground change there may be.

I agree with her. Adding technology or any other edupunk reforms is a disaster when student feedback doesn’t drive the process. The February 2008 Washington Post article A School That’s Too High on Gizmos provides examples of this:

For a while, I thought it was just older teachers like me — immigrants to the Internet world — who were chafing at the so-called technology initiative, but it turns out that even the youngest teachers are fed up. “They would rather have a cyborg teaching than me,” one young English teacher complained to me. “It’s technology for the sake of technology — not what works or helps kids learn, but what makes administrators look good, what the public will think is cutting edge.

I think that the term ‘edupunk’ fails to capture what the DIY reform movement is all about. The most important aspect of the reform is changing the nature of student-teacher relationships. Instead of a top-down classroom hierarchy where the educator creates the rules of the classroom and controls content, the classroom needs to be an interactive community where interactions between students and educators drives curriculum. A great example of this is the behavior management techniques discussed on Elona Hartjes’ blog:

Establishing a positive classroom climate is essential for a safe, positive learning environment, and establishing classroom agreements are one of the ways to do that.

I used to call the classroom agreements rules, but rules seem so top down, and I don’t want that. Some kids see red when they see the word “rule”. I want them to see green instead. I want students to buy into the classroom code of conduct, not rebel against it.

At the beginning of the semester we establish our behaviour agreements. Basically it boils down to attentive listening, appreciation, mutual respect and right to pass.

In my graduate level special education courses, the instructor (a master teacher and researcher) said that the best indicator of student success and fulfillment is how much the voices of the students matter. She said that “pretty” classrooms with store-bought posters and teacher-made cut outs may not be as successful as classrooms where student work clutters the walls and spills out into the hallways. Many of the Optimal Learning Environments (OLE)  techniques for at-risk learners involve student publishing, student chosen curriculum and literature, and student lead presentations and discussions. I am passionate about student empowerment. Often, to be a child is to be trapped in a world that you have no control over. Teaching students that their voices/writing/art/debate matters should be the first step in education (instead of teach first, contextualize later).

The term edupunk is also misleading because I don’t want ‘underground’ reform. Information networks and tools must be accessible to educators struggling to meet the changing needs of diverse learners.

Edupunk.redefined.

Advertisements

Written by TeacherC

5 June 2008 at 12:28 pm

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. […] Home Edupunk.is.dead. (Insert witty web 2.0-eduism catchphrase here) […]

  2. “It’s technology for the sake of technology — not what works or helps kids learn'”

    I’d like to comment on that quotation. I find that technology engages my reluctant/struggling learners. I started a class blog http://www.mrshartjes1.edublog.org, and use all kinds of digital technology to hook my students so they are more open to doing all the things I want them to do- to be creative, to read, to write and to think critically about issues that impact on all of us.

    I have been teaching students who need additional support of one kind or another for a long time and have found that as far as engaging the “at-risk” kids I teach, the judicious use of digital technology can’t be beaten. I am amazed.

    I’ll be the first to admit that it’s a learning process for me, too. But, you know what, my students are marvelous teachers. I’ve asked for their help, and they are only too willing to help me. I’ve told them they are the first class that I’ve done this with and I need their input to make it even better. They trust me enough to be honest, and I appreciate that and will certainly implement some of the changes they have suggested.

    Elona Hartjes

    5 June 2008 at 5:28 pm

  3. Thank you for your comments and the link to your class blog. I’m a tech geek (worked as a tech consultant during college, could take apart a computer by the time I was 8, etc). I’m excited about the prospect of using new technologies in the classroom, but I am also a little hesitant. There are large opportunity costs for what teachers do in the classroom – every minute spent doing something that doesn’t enrich students could have been spent on another task. I hope that I learn about educational/assistive technologies in my coursework. I’m also always on the lookout for ed tech blog posts and quantitative analysis of best tech practices.

    educatorblog

    5 June 2008 at 5:38 pm

  4. I think your Gizmo High is a good example of what edupunk is not: a one-size-fits-all corporate environment mandated from on high to look good as a showcase. Edupunk, if I understand Jim Groom correctly, is bottom-up, individualised approach to edtech. Obviously, this requires student input because what works in one classroom and not in another depends largely on the students in that classroom (and to some extent, the teacher).

    I have web 2.0 projects that have worked quite well with some groups (better than I expect, even, and taking off in different directions), and the same experience with a different group bombs utterly. But it should not be an admin or board office telling me what web tools I can and can’t bring into my classroom.

    Ian H.

    5 June 2008 at 7:07 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: