apcampbell

I often chant the mantra of ‘pedagogy before technology’ when speaking
to other teachers about what software to choose for use in their
classes. I see technological applications as tools for communication
and learning. How we choose to use those tools depends on our purpose
and overall approach. If we want to build a house, we generally start
with a an idea, a blueprint, before gathering the materials and tools
and putting it all together. If we place technology before pedagogy, we
run a significant risk of a stunted learning experience, for we may
well be using the “right” tools for the wrong purpose.

Barbara Ganley’s recent post got me looking at this issue again:

The
deeper into this classroom blogging I get, the more I cannot
disentangle the pedagogy from the blogging–to talk about blogs means
to talk about student-centered learning, collaborative knowledge
spaces, constructivist pedagogy FIRST. Teaching with blogs the way I
do–which means not applying them piecemeal but integrating them fully
in all their messy, flexible, fluid promise– means you have to let go
of control of the classroom, give up the stage and create opportunities
for learning magic to occur. The trick is to weave the learning and the
tool so seamlessly together that the blog is the class and the class
finds the blog indispensible.

Yes, if we decide to
use blogs, they must play a central role in the learning environments
we design and there should really be no distinguishable separation
between the two if we are to fully realize the potential blogs possess
to facilitate student centered learning in our classes. They are indeed one and the same.
And when discussing the possiblity of using them with other educators,
we should consider to what extent we are willing to have blogs play
such a central role in the classroom learning we facilitate. If we see
ourselves, the teachers, as central to the learrning process, there is
no way that blogs can live up to their potential as constructivist
tools. They necessitate learner driven use to work well. Barbara writes
further:

It’s time for me to make some decisions
about how I want to talk about blogs in the future. Do I do so gently,
subtly, hoping that through a gradual acceptance and use of blogs,
fellow educators will also embrace the notion of the classroom as a
community of practice constructing knowledge collaboratively, aided by
the blog? Or do I just come right out there at the beginning of
presentations and say, okay, don’t bother with blogs unless you’re
ready to step off the stage and into the circle of learning?

The
is a great question to consider. And although the answer depends on who
you are talking to, in today’s pedagogical/political climate, I strongly opt for
the second choice. “Why are you even considering using blogs? Do you
realize what changes to your whole worldview and teaching practice
embraking on that path entails?” I suspect few educators do.

In our weblogging group at EVO,
some participants are already starting to wonder, what is the
difference between blogs, discussion lists, and normal websites and
what are
the pros and cons of each. These are good and necessary questions for
understanding the technology, but let’s not lose sight of the pedagogy!
Here are more questions for educators to consider: to what extent are
you able and willing to
immerse yourself as a participant and give your learners their own
driver’s seats in the learning process?  Can you stand back and
let them run the show? If you can do that, blogs might just be the way
to go.

Barbara
then asks one final two-part question: “Pedagogy first, blogs
second–or–blogs as the vehicle to the pedagogy?” I suppose the second
choice could lead some educators to reconsider their practice, but why
is it that they are interested in blogs in the first place? What about
them do they find attractive?  The attempt to answer such
questions leads naturally toward an examiniation  of
pedagogy.   I don’t think that using blogs alone will
necessarily lead to constructivist pedagogical practices.  Here is
a case in point.
—–