Chapter 1

1.0 Introduction
1.0.1 Background and context of the problem Students of 21st century have an aversion towards chalk and board which has existed for more than a century as effective tools of education. Frand states most students entering our colleges and universities today are younger than the microcomputer, are more comfortable working on a keyboard than writing in a spiral notebook, and are happier reading from a computer screen than from paper in hand (Frand, 2000, p. 15). According to Marc Prensky, this gap is created by the rapid distribution and omnipresence of digital technologies in the last decades of the 20th century (2001a) In Digital Immigrants, Digital Natives, Prensky (2001a) notes people that are currently in kindergarten through traditional college have immersed their entire lives using computers, playing video games, using digital music players, video cameras, cell phones, and the Internet. Todays average college graduates have spent less than 5,000 hours of their lives reading, over 10,000 hours playing video games, and an incredible 20,000 hours viewing television within the first 20 years of their lives (Prensky, 2001a). These readily available technological advancements from a young age create different experiences, which lead to different brain structures than previous generations that did not have these technological advancements (Prensky, 2001a). Due to fundamental differences between generations as Prensky (2001a, 2001b) states that those who are above 30 years old and not born into technological diffusion, a different classification for this group is necessary; after all Prensky mentions that non-digital immigrants do inherently process information differently than their parents and grandparents. In searching for a proper
1

classification, Prensky notes that some people refer to this generation as the net-gen or digital generation. Prensky classifies this generation as Digital Natives. Our students are all native speakers of the digital language of computers, video games, and the Internet (Prensky, 2001a, p.1). While Prensky discusses the topic of Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives as students, for the context of this study the researcher will refer to these groups as Digital Native students and Digital Immigrant teachers (under 30 and above 30 years of age respectively). Social Scientist Bernard Dsami calls it a divide between children and teachers wrought out by the use of digital technology, which enables the students, especially those from the affluent sections to gather vast information in areas that they are interested in. Recently, a teacher in Chennai city was taking a science lesson for the 8th standard students when one of the students questioned her ability to teach and ridiculed her of using foul language. Others joined in and the class soon turned unruly. Authorities suspended the student and referred him to a counselor. Adolescents openly flout our authority in the class. It makes it difficult, especially for senior teachers says the Principal. All migrants have specific goals when they migrate and become citizens of a given country (Jupp 1966).Migration into a new environment, the impact of globalization and the technological explosion in the Information Age left many committed and highly professional teachers in a dilemma of unfamiliarity. They became the displaced persons (Panich, 1988) of the Knowledge Economy. They could either accept or reject the influx of technology into their world, but eventually it became evident that technology was here to stay. Like all immigrants, these teachers needed to be en-cultured into the cultural practices of the Information Age to allow
2

multiculturalism (Zubrzycki) and cultural pluralism (Smolicz as cited in Cope, Castle & Kalantzis, 1991) to flourish for social unity, which could finally lead to assimilation into the Knowledge Economy. While this would be the ideal state the reality of migration is often the feeling of being on the fringe and encountering unforeseen pressures and challenges. The NCPB (Non Computer Practising Background) teachers were unsure of their skills, lacked confidence and were not fully comfortable with the technology. These digital immigrants often went through perezhivanie (Vygotsky) as they were uncertain about their new experience and the process; they went through the deep tensions of apprehension, fear and all the strong vocabulary connected with living through or living over a new and unfamiliar experience, (Vygotsky 1934/1978 as cited in Wells and Claxton 2002) before they migrated and during their migration into the Information Age. Digital Immigrants learners are people, who access, process and utilize information for a particular need or a particular end. Experienced teachers as learners for the 21st century have been displaced from their zone of learning and have gone through a culture shock. They were forced to migrate into the Information Age. Their first impressions have been apprehensive and like all immigrants, they go through a number of unique experiences and finally blend two worlds; the pre-digital and digital. They find that the digital natives, (Prensky 2001a; 2001b) including their own students speak a different language and function in a different environment. Initially, these experienced teachers as digital immigrants went through perezhivanie. They were unsure of their skills, lacked confidence and were not fully comfortable with the technology. Nonetheless, as they acquired the skills, confidence and became comfortable, they were ready to share their knowledge and skills in order to learn to cope in their Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky 1978).
3

1.0.2 Definitions of terms 1) Digital Immigrants According to Marc Prensky (2003) those who are not born into the digital word but some time later in their lives become fascinated about this and adopted many or most of the aspects of the technology are known as Digital Immigrants. A technology user who is above the age of thirty who was not born into the digital world is known as Digital Immigrant Brooks- Young (2005) 2) Digital Natives A technology user under the age of 30 who was born into technology world is known as Digital Natives Brooks - Young (2005) Digital Natives are those people who have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, video games, cell phones and all the toys and tools of digital age. Marc Prensky (2003). Digital Natives are used to receiving information really fast. They like to parallel process and multitask. They have an aversion towards text and more inclination towards graphics. 3) Digital Divide Digital Divide refers to a significant difference in the access to and equity to technology experience with regard to the status of income race and location of living. It includes the imbalance both in physical access to technology and the resources and skills needed to effectively participate as a digital citizen. The term global digital divide refers to differences in access between countries in regards to the internet and its means of information flow.

4) Web 2.0

Originally in 2004, Web 2.0 was referred to as this idea of the "Web as a platform". The earlier concept was such that the web is a repository from where browsers collected relevant data when actually it was a platform that allowed people to get things done

People say web 2.0 is outcome of some programming tools which were later added in to the html which included AJAX and SOAP and other XML and JavaScript applications that allowed the readers to actually interact with the Web pages more like you would with an application on your desktop.

Now Web 2.0 is really starting to mean a combination of the technology (like AJAX) allowing the customers to actually interact with the information. Web 2.0 is starting to mean the situation where amateur writers and developers are able to create applications and Web sites that get more credibility than traditional news sources and software vendors. This combination of powerful JavaScript tools like AJAX enabling nearly anyone to contribute to and interact with the data that we are all working with is web 2.0.

5) Social Software Tools Among Web 2.0 technologies are the socially-based tools and systems referred to collectively as social software, a term that has gained increased currency in recent years. The attributes of these new software tools make possible a new wave of online behavior, distributed collaboration, and social interaction, and they are already having a transformative effect on society in general and education in particular, triggering changes in how we communicate and learn.

Researcher/theorist Mejias (2005, p. 1) observed that social software can positively impact
5

pedagogy by inculcating a desire to reconnect to the world as whole, not just the social part that exists online, referring to the isolating and decontextualized experience of much text-based traditional education. Social softwares include both Web 1.0 and web 2.0 technologies as they contribute to participation, productivity and personalization. Social Software Tools Social Software Category Examples Potential Pedagogical Applications Multi-player online gaming Multi-User environments / virtual worlds (MUDs); Multiplayer Dungeons Simulation; role play;

Massively- visualization; collaboration Online Games

(MMOGs e.g., Second Life, Active Worlds, World of

Warcraft, Everquest) Discourse facilitation systems Synchronous: Instant Communication (verbal and engagement with

messaging (IM, e.g., Windows written);

Live Messenger, AOL Instant multiple global communities; Messenger, Yahoo Instant socialization; tracking of

Messenger, Google Chat, ICQ, information flow; peer-to-peer Skype); chat Email; Asynchronous: exchange and feedback boards;

bulletin

discussion boards; moderated commenting systems (e.g.,

K5, Slashdot, Plastic) Content management systems Blogs; wikis; document Creation and dissemination of (e.g., ideas; collaborative writing,

management Plone); systems Peer-to-peer systems file

systems

web

annotation publishing, and peer review

sharing BitTorrent; Gnutella; Napster; Sharing, Limewire; Kazaa; Morpheus; collaboration eMule; iMesh

review,

and

Learning management systems Blackboard/WebCT; ANGEL; Communication,

groupwork;

Moodle; .LRN; Sakai; ATutor; distribution and sharing of Claroline; Dokeos Relationship systems management MySpace; resources Friendster; Establishing and maintaining

Facebook; Faceparty; Orkut; social contacts, connectivity; eHarmony; Bebo spaces for communication and creation of identity

Syndication systems

List-servs; RSS aggregators

Multi-modal

access

to

information; maintaining links with new content; filtering and customized display of content Distributed classification Social bookmarking sites (e.g., Tagging/categorizing del.icio.us, Digg, Furl); many resources; media sharing and social sharable maintaining collections of

systems(folksonomy)

networking sites also make resources; reuse of resources;

use of tag-based folksonomies development to organize and classify exploration interests

and of

joint common

content

6) Pedagogy 2.0 It is a framework that aims to focus on desired learning outcomes in order to exploit more fully the affordances and potential for connectivity enabled by Web 2.0 and social software tools. It is envisioned as an overarching concept for an emerging cluster of practices that advocates learner choice and self- direction as well as engagement in flexible, relevant learning tasks and strategies. Though not intended a prescriptive framework, it distills a number of guidelines characterizing effective learning environments, such as choice of resources, tasks, learning supports, and communication modalities, as follows: Content: Should consist of micro units of content that augment thinking and cognition. It may include a wide variety of learner- generated resources accrued from students creating, sharing, and revising of ideas. Curriculum: Should not be static but dynamic. It should be open to discussion and learners input. The modules should be divided into small chunks. It should assimilate formal and informal learning. Communication: Students should have multiple opportunities to interact with their peer and conduct discussions along with the support of technology enabled learning which stimulate their visual, auditory and logic skills.

 Learning processes: Learning should happen within the context of real life experience so that they can relate learning to their lives. Resources: Should include multiple informal and formal sources that are rich in multimedia. The various Web Based Applications and Computer Based Applications should be utilized in the class to support the learner. Scaffolds: The students should be assured with support from the teachers, parents, community and the peer to do more experiments which can leverage their knowledge base. Learning tasks: Learning process should become personalized, experimental and learner driven this will enable the creation of innovative contents from the part of the learner.

7) Social media It includes web-based and mobile technologies used to turn communication into interactive dialogue. Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein define social media as "a group of Internetbased applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content." Social media is media for social interaction as a super-set beyond social communication. Enabled by ubiquitously accessible and scalable communication techniques, social media has substantially changed the way organizations, communities, and individuals communicate. 8) DIY culture(Do it yourself) It is a broad term that refers to a wide range of elements in non-mainstream society, such as grassroots political and social activism, independent music, art, and film, derived from the DIY tradition.
9

DIY culture says no to the idea that there is an established answer. It says yes to empower an individual to develop answers for herself. DIY culture is not new. In fact, its always existed. Its part of our unique make up as human beings, the thing that separates us from the rest of the animal world. We dont merely exist in the world that is presented to us. We use our environment, we manipulate tools, and we actively form patterns of thought that help us cope with stress and anxiety.

9) User-generated content User Generated Content (UGC) covers a range of contents available through different forms of media which has come up with the innovations happened in the field of technology. The term was widely used after the birth of web 2.0 which utilized the user generated content .It has caused the expansion of media production through new technologies that are free for the general public to use and at times to make their contributions to the content. Most of the technologies came up after the web 2.0 which ranges from YouTube, wikis, flicker etc belong to the larger ambit of user generated content. It also involves the movement of free softwares and open source software which open the access to the general public who likes to contribute and build their skills thus breaking the barriers of collaboration.

10

1.1 Designing of Pedagogy 2.0

Presentation *Learner Agency * Learner Choice *Customization

Participation *Communication

Pedagogy 2.0

*Collaboration *Connectivity

xh

Productivity *Learner created content *Contribution to knowledge *Creativity and innovation

Objective of the study

11

1.2 Objectives of the Study

The study explores the difficulties faced by digital immigrant teachers in coping with the digital native students and their ways of gathering knowledge. How social learning tool can enrich teaching learning process To explore whether Pedagogy 2.0 can take over the traditional pedagogy. To understand the possiblties of Learner Centric Approach in classroom.

12

1.3 Assumptions
The students who study in Pondicherry University have problems with their teachers who stick on to the old successful method of teacher centric pedagogy. They have less attention span for the classes handled by these teachers. The comments collected are from students below 23 years age, studying in Pondicherry University with basic orientation to technology. In the discussion they have included their previous experiences from other institutions where they have pursued studies.

13

Chapter 2
2.0 Review of literature
According to Marc Prensky Our students have changed radically. Todays students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach. A really big discontinuity has taken place. One might even call it a singularity an event which changes things so

fundamentally that there is absolutely no going back. This so-called singularity is the arrival and rapid dissemination of digital technology in the last decades of the 20th century. Todays students K through college represent the first generations to grow up with this new technology. They have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys and tools of the digital age. Computer games, email, the Internet, cell phones and instant messaging are integral parts of their lives. Digital Immigrants are those who were not born into the digital world but have, at some later point in our lives, become fascinated by and adopted many or most aspects of the new technology. The importance of the distinction is this: As Digital Immigrants learn like all immigrants, some better than others to adapt to their environment, they always retain, to some degree, their old accent that is, their foot in the past. There are hundreds of examples of the digital immigrant accent. They include printing out your email.

14

Its very serious, because the single biggest problem facing education today is that our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language.

But Digital Immigrants typically have very little appreciation for these new skills that the Natives have acquired and perfected through years of interaction and practice. These skills are almost totally foreign to the Immigrants, who themselves learned and so choose to teach slowly, step-by-step, one thing at a time, individually, and above all, seriously. Digital Immigrants dont believe their students can learn successfully while watching TV or listening to music, because they (the Immigrants) cant. Of course not they didnt practice this skill constantly for all of their formative years. Digital Immigrants think learning cant (or shouldnt) be fun. Why should they they didnt spend their formative years learning with Sesame Street. Unfortunately for our Digital Immigrant teachers, the people sitting in their classes grew up on the twitch speed of video games and MTV. They are used to the instantaneity of hypertext, downloaded music, phones in their pockets, a library on their laptops, beamed messages etc. Todays learners are different. Www.hungry.com said a kindergarten student recently at

lunchtime. Every time I go to school I have to power down, complains a high-school student. Is it that Digital Natives cant pay attention, or that they choose not to? Often from the Natives point of view their Digital Immigrant instructors make their education not worth paying attention to compared to everything else they experience and then they blame them for not paying attention!
15

It is highly unlikely the Digital Natives will go backwards. In the first place, it may be impossible their brains may already be different. It also flies in the face of everything we know about cultural migration. Kids born into any new culture learn the new language easily, and forcefully resist using the old. Smart adult immigrants accept that they dont know about their new world and take advantage of their kids to help them learn and integrate. Not-so-smart (or not-so-flexible) immigrants spend most of their time grousing about how good things were in the old country. It seems to me that after the digital singularity there are now two kinds of content: Legacy content (to borrow the computer term for old systems) and Future content. As educators, we need to be thinking about how to teach both Legacy and Future content in the language of the Digital Natives. The first involves a major translation and change of

methodology; the second involves all that PLUS new content and thinking. Its not actually clear to me which is harder learning new stuff or learning new ways to do old stuff. I suspect its the latter. In geography which is all but ignored these days there is no reason that a generation that can memorize over 100 Pokmon characters with all their characteristics, history and evolution cant learn the names, populations, capitals and relationships of all the 101 nations in the world. It just depends on how it is presented. So if Digital Immigrant educators really want to reach Digital Natives i.e. all their students they will have to change. Its high time for them to stop their grousing, and as the Nike motto of the Digital Native generation says, Just do it! They will succeed in the long run and their successes will come that much sooner if their administrators support them.
16

Social constructivist forms of participation allows comments and annotations by others, and, furthermore, by contributing to extant communities of interest by sharing resources. Therefore, not only is this element of Pedagogy 2.0 reflective of the participation model of learning (Sfard, 1998), as opposed to the acquisition model, but it also adds a further dimension to participative learning by increasing the level of socialization and collaboration with experts, community, and peer groups, and by fostering connections that are often global in reach. Jenkins (2007, p. 51) By harnessing digital technologies and social software tools, four key areas pivotal to the development of personalization through teaching are summarized by Green, Facer, Rudd, Dillon, and Humphreys (2006). According to these researchers, pedagogy must do the following: ensure that learners are capable of making informed educational decisions; diversify and recognize different forms of skills and knowledge; create diverse learning environments; include learner-focused forms of feedback and assessment.

Personal Learning Environments (PLEs), defined by Siemens (2007a), as a collection of tools, brought together under the conceptual notion of openness, interoperability, and learner control. As such, they are comprised of two elements the tools and the conceptual notions that drive how and why we select individual parts (para. 2). Moving on from LMSs, the PLE concept represents the latest step towards an alternative approach to e-learning. Unlike LMSs that take a course-centric view of learning, PLEs are learner-centric. The idea is to have learners exercise greater control over their learning experience, rather than be constrained by centralized, instructor- controlled learning.

17

Many higher education students currently lack the competencies necessary to navigate and select relevant sources from the overabundance of information available (Windham, 2005). In the age of personal publishing and user- generated content, essential digital literacy skills are required to locate quality sources and assess them for objectivity, reliability, and currency (Katz & Macklin, 2007). Early adopters of digital media opportunities involved the integration of new media modes, forms, and genres into learning activities. These have included wikis, blogs, video logs, text messaging, email, hypermedia, and more (Ganley, 2004). Students need to develop expertise and confidence in finding, evaluating, creating, and sharing ideas, which often involves complex critical thinking skills (Jenkins, 2007; Lorenzo & Dziuban, 2006). They also need to become a global citizen, capable of communicating and working in diverse contexts. These benefits, however, need to be accompanied by pedagogical interventions that equip students with the skills needed to operate in a digital culture and that use media to enrich their learning and develop essential literacy skills, while ensuring that there is a shift in the focus of literacy from one of individual expression to community involvement (Jenkins, 2007, p. 4) Knowledge does not exist in individual minds but is a product of participation in cultural practices, and learning is embedded in multiple networks of distributed individuals engaging in a variety of social processes, including dialogue, modeling, and legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991).

18

Recent research attests to a growing appreciation of the importance of the learners self-direction and control over the whole learning process (Fazey & Fazey, 2001; Narciss, Proske, & Koerndle, 2007). Evidence suggests that we can improve learning effectiveness by giving the learner control over, and responsibility for their own learning (Dron, 2007; Nesbit & Winne, 2003). This is the foundation for such approaches as problem-based and inquiry-based learning (Desharnais & Limson, 2007; Edelson, Gordin, & Pea, 1999), and is central to the grand vision of Pedagogy 2.0, where learners have the freedom to decide how to engage in personally meaningful learning. According to Dron (2006), students will fall victims of de-motivation, boredom and desultory owing to the incorrigible stands adopted by the digital immigrant teachers. Web 2.0 and social software inculcate learners to make decisions that hit their goals and needs for connection and social interaction. T.R.Ramakrishnan and Dr.K.Puttaraju(2010) In the survey using a schedule from a sample of 100 students. Using relevant statistical tool, projects that they are very emotionally attached to the gadget and feel depressed when taken away from them among both genders. The research conducted was among the bachelors of business management and media students for the purpose of identifying the student psychosis on using the mobile phones. The findings state that the students go through a depression which affects their studies, social connection and result in dislike of the teachers who have captured their mobiles as a disciplinary measure. Apart from choosing which resources and sites to subscribe and contribute to, which tools to use, and how and where to use them, we are witnessing a shift in the modalities of expression that are now available (Jenkins, 2007).

19

. By harnessing digital technologies and social software tools, four key areas pivotal to the development of personalization through teaching are summarized by Green, Facer, Rudd, Dillon, and Humphreys (2006). According to these researchers, pedagogy must do the following: Ensure that learners are capable of making informed educational decisions; Diversify and recognize different forms of skills and knowledge; Create diverse learning environments; Include learner-focused forms of feedback and assessment.

The rise of student-generated content or student performance content (Boettecher, 2006). For example, in recent years the e-Portfolio (Abrami & Barrett, 2005; Love, McKean, & Gathercoal, 2002) has emerged as popular strategy for capturing and organizing student-generated content

20

Chapter 3
3.0 Methodology
3.0.1 Introduction The students perception about teacher has an influence in his/her interest in the subject and attention span (Albert Banduras Social Learning Theory). Technology has incurred information explosion which has facilitated students to choose information from wide range of sources. In this scenario teachers role as the knowledge repository is being questioned and the students rely more on online repositories to access knowledge. Therefore, the role of teachers in educational institutions has to be redefined with special emphasis to their pedagogy. The study try to understand whether by integrating technology into the teaching framework the role of teachers as facilitators can be improved. 3.0.2 Context of the study In an incident, a 12th standard student from Chennai slits the throat of his Hindi teacher for writing rigorous comments about his studies in the progress card. Teachers form different quarters of India complain of a sea change in the attitude of students towards closed classroom. The same phenomenon unfolded in the west during the diffusion of technology in later 90s. The study is based on the ideas presented by the educationalists, technologists and psychologists from the west to tackle the crisis. The students perception about teacher has an influence in his/her interest in the subject and attention span (Albert Banduras Social Learning Theory). Advancements in technology has

21

caused information explosion which has enabled students to choose information from different sources. In this context, the teacher is estranged as a credible source of information which is taken over by wikis and other sources of information. Therefore, the role of teachers in educational institutions has to be reinstated provided the teachers revamp their pedagogy by integrating technology into the framework. 3.0.3 Sample The digital native students are ones who suffer because of the drawbacks of digital immigrant teachers in adapting to technology. It is by understanding the problems faced by the native students that we can formulate right suggestions to the teachers. Thus the study used the qualitative method of Focus Group discussion as its Research Method. The focus group

discussion was conducted for finding out the problems faced by the digital native students in the classes handled by their digital immigrant teachers during the course of their study in Dept. of Mass Communication, Pondicherry University (2010-2012). The focus group discussion was found the most appropriate method for the research because the students can share their thoughts on the specific problems the researcher needs to focus. Before selecting the members for the focus group discussion, a prospective list of students was prepared. On the basis of this they were met and asked questions to verify that they come under the title of Digital Natives. From the list of 20 students the focus group was narrowed downed to a list of seven members. They were given prior notice about the place and time for the focus group discussion.

22

The students came from different backgrounds and they got acquainted with technology during their course of studies. None of them have certified training in using any of the application software. They learned it through frequent experimentation.

3.0.4 Data Collection All the seven students selected for the focus group discussion were asked 10 questions. They all had to respond to all the 10 questions. There was a consensus that there wont be any external intervention during the sharing. Each of them was given 10 minutes to respond to the questions. All the questions were open ended which helped to elicit more information from the group. The information they provided were mostly from the experience from their studies in Pondicherry University. They were comfortable to answer the questions as all the members were from the same Department. The focus group discussion lasted for one hour and fifteen minutes. All the participants actively joined for the discussion. As there was no interruption caused either by the group members or by any external factors the discussion went very smoothly. 3.0.5 Theoretic Perspective

The social learning theory proposed by Albert Bandura has become perhaps the most influential theory of learning and development. While rooted in many of the basic concepts of traditional learning theory, Bandura believed that direct reinforcement could not account for all types of learning.

23

His theory added a social element, arguing that people can learn new information and behaviors by watching other people. Known as observational learning (or modeling), this type of learning can be used to explain a wide variety of behaviors.

There are three core concepts at the heart of social learning theory. First is the idea that people can learn through observation. Next is the idea that internal mental states are an essential part of this process. Finally, this theory recognizes that just because something has been learned, it does not mean that it will result in a change in behavior.

3.0.6 The study This study is about the widening the gap between the students of modern generation and teachers from the old generation and its effect on the teaching, learning process. The social learning theory propounded by Albert Bandura says that students perception about the teacher has an effect on the attention span of students. The digital native students have developed a gap with their old generation teachers. The teachers estrangement to technology has widened the gap further. This study propounds Pedagogy 2.0 which is the assimilation of Participation, Presentation and Production for bridging this gap. 3.0.7 Content analysis The researcher chose qualitative content analysis as his methodology do the research.

According to Bernard Bereslon, Content Analysis is a research technique for the objective, systematic, and quantitative description of noticeable content of communications (Bereslon, 1974). Qualitative content analysis requires the researcher to select the samples prior to the analysis and also make a coding system to analyse the selected data. Qualitative analysis goes

24

beyond merely counting words or extracting objective content from texts to examine meanings, themes and patterns that may be manifest or latent in a particular text. It allows researchers to understand social reality in a subjective but scientific manner (Zhang and Wildemuth,). In this study the researcher analyses the answers that came up during the focus group discussion conducted among 7 students studying in Pondicherry University, Mass Commuincation Department.

25

Chapter 4
4.0 Data Analysis
The findings are based on the focus group discussion instituted in a group of 7 students from the Dept. of Mass Communication, Pondicherry University. The students are from a Digital native background. The findings listed below are divided on the basis of specific answers which came up during the focus group discussion. I can find more interesting lectures if I go online. Those lectures give us more options to connect with our day-to-day life and they have competition from the rival websites which forces them to update their database in regular intervals. But in the case of our teachers they have no competition so they provide us with old stuff they studied. For me institution is only a platform, I frequently visit websites to gather information rather than accepting what my teacher says in the class. How can teachers prepare their students for long-term futureas well as for tomorrow without sabotaging the legacies of the past. This is not easy but the consensus among experts is clear. The way for us to move ahead under such circumstances is not to focus only on the changing technology, but rather redesign learning, with adults and young people taking up different roles from the past and on the other hand young people (students) need to focus on using new tools, finding information, making meaning, and creating. Adults (teachers) must focus on questioning, coaching and guiding, providing context, ensuring rigor and meaning, and ensuring quality results. The system of teacher lecturing and giving his labor on students to make them

26

understand a particular topic is often known as direct instruction. Unfortunately, direct instruction is becoming increasingly ineffective many todays students number one complaint of their teachers is they just talk and talk and talk. And unfortunately the students impression about his teacher is like listening to a static radio. The era of lecturing, talking and teaching has become archaic. The teachers tool of telling has become out dated. Yet most teachers were trained to tell. Many of them like explaining and think they are good at it. Even though they are good the students take their lecturing as Greek and Latin. Thus teachers tend to use this old proverb quite frequently in their class I am casting pearls in front of swines Yes, in fact the tech savvy teachers are more interested in what we want; they have always an open mind to accept our thoughts. They are also using the same kind of technology that we are using and when we see this we find we are moving in the same wavelength. Todays students are not there to receive, they are often in the electronic world of 21st century. Most students recognize and applaud their creative, energetic teachersespecially the ones who respect them and care about their opinions. What they like is to connect with other students of their age in other places electronically (e.g., through a secure e-mail service such as ePals). Inside their classrooms, what students say they find most engaging is group work, discussions, sharing their own ideas, and hearing the ideas of their classmates. Students like using technology, the most important thing for them is to be respected as individuals by their teachers inside their class and not like ignorant. Were not stupids is a universal lament. They feel that technology has made us lazy. This is because we now a days seldom goes to the library because we have a lot of information stored on the net and this is an era

27

when all the libraries are opening their digital repositories. So the students are used to reading books online. This at times is not acceptable for many digital immigrant teachers. The fact is, we are not lazy but we are accessing information much faster than what they used to do during their formative years. Some teachers compare native students capabilities, to that of students of the past. But there are alternative ways to see our students which is more evident in the 21st century. Todays students are rockets, their teachers tend to treat them as of early 19s but in reality they are supersonic 21th century self guided missiles (metaphorically). This makes todays teachers rocket scientists. Why should we think of todays kids as rockets? The first reason is their speed; they operate swifter than any of their previous generations. Although little has changed in the emotional growth of students, there has been an enormous change in the accumulation of knowledge, and thus their intellectual growth is twice that of their previous generation. The most interesting fact is that now a days kids teach their parents how to use their mobile applications and how to create their Facebook accounts. The problem lies in the fuel we use to ignite the rocket. Parents and teachers are still using petrol instead of rocket fuel to ignite them. While some want kids to slow down and just be kids, they are asking to roll back their very nature. Increased speed is not the only character that influences the digital natives. The 21st century upbringing which includes the 5000 minutes video game they played, the number of online friends they established. Like rockets, they often cannot be controlled at every moment, so the primary target should be set with precision. And because rockets are difficult to repair in flight, they must be made as self-sufficient as possible. As with all rockets, kids fuel mix is arbitrary. Some are super fast some take time to gear up and some may even miss the target. Some even blow up. As the manufacturing keep up with the pace the quality of the
28

rockets will also improve. Perhaps the most important thing is todays rockets can reach targets far of reach with better precision guided by technology. So is the Digital Native student. With the arrival of digital technologies many fantasies in the James Bond movies started becoming materialized which is still an awe-inspiring thing for the digital immigrants. Digital Natives communicate to larger public within a fraction of split seconds. They generate contents online of various genres ranging from text, pictures and videos. They organize themselves socially and politically across the planet. Educators in this modern era deals with a group of specially engineered students who shouldnt be filled with the educational fuel of the past, because that fuel just doesnt make todays kids go. We have to design new fuel and booster. Its impossible to throw away the legacies of the past but unless we start preparing our students to fly higher in a much improved speed, educators role in shaping them up have less scope. For some teachers Wikipedia and Britanica are like taboo words. If they find this in any of the courtesy list they tend to get annoyed and at times reducing the scores. But when the new generation teachers come in this position they are very keen in understanding how we are using this and not why. In one incident one of my classmates plagiarized an assignment from the internet. My teacher who was tech savvy went into the net and typed the first two sentences in the Google and found that it was a counterfeit of a well written article. I dont know what that student felt at that particular point but for me this teacher became a yardstick of analyzing all other teachers. Partnering is just opposite of teaching by lecturing. In Pedagogy 2.0 the teachers role changes into a facilitator. Rather than lecturing teachers role should be to provide students with interesting thoughts and guide them in choosing best available resources from a junk of information uploaded in the internet. In partnering the responsibility is completely on the
29

student to search, make suggestion, find answers, and create multimedia presentation, which are then scrutinized by the facilitator and the class and evaluated for its correctness, context, and quality. Thus the curriculum gets covered much faster with much interest as students themselves gather knowledge with their experiences in the real life. There exist levels of partnering to fit different types of students, different as they come from different situations and background How can a teacher come out of the regular direct teaching to the new Pedagogy? By asking the class if they think she/he is talking too much, or more than what they need. Asking them for suggestions on how reduce the amount of time telling.

Partnering means, letting students to focus on the parts of the learning that they have a genuine forte, and letting teachers focus on the part of the learning process that they can do best. Giving students agency to focus area of their interest means letting them do the following: Finding and following their inner passion. Using whatever technology they are comfortable. Researching and finding information. Sharing their opinions and views through medium of their choice. Practicing with the help of games both Web Based Applications and Computer Based Applications Creating presentations in text and multimedia.

30

Letting teachers do what they can do best means giving teachers primary responsibility for the following: Asking the right questions Guiding the students Linking the topics to particular contexts Ensuring quality

A major shift in pedagogyfrom telling to partneringis not something that can be achieved with in an overnight. The transformation will take much longer time which can be years or month but the tipping point will be much faster if thousands of teachers will attest in the dissemination of Pedagogy 2.0. It is the call of the day because the 21st century students need such a change to cope with the changing horizons of learning. The positive signal is that many digital immigrant teachers now collaborate with their digital native student to bring in such a change in their classrooms. This has made those teachers more close to their students heart. Classes should be two way interactive. PPTs if they are not more than text it is no worthier than a stale class. It will be as if PPTs taking the role of the lecturer. But if the teacher puts in his effort and brings a particular situation or context which I can relate with the subject then the class will become two way interactive. The digital native students have an aversion to text and they have more affinity towards graphics and pictures. This might be the outcome of the exposure they had to the various digital media including Video games. They dont want their teachers to repeat that they already know. They are looking for new information. The digital immigrant teachers are
31

trying to bring interactivity to the classroom by preparing PPT presentations thus saying that they have adapted to the technology. But I reality, they are using more text than pictures in the PPTs which the students find is staler than a boring lecture. What the Digital Native student wants is to integrate the teachers experience into his teaching. They are also keen to give their point of view on a particular subject. If the teacher is able to teach in a way that the student can relate the teaching to a particular context or a situation in his real life his interest in the subject will be elevated. Teachers must keep in mind to insert more graphic in their PPTs rather than more text. It has been proven that graphics and multimedia based learning will have more attention span than the text based teaching among the learners. I have observed for myself, when we were in the nursery the teachers were fairly experienced because they knew what I wanted exactly as a kid. But if you ask me about a teacher who is above the age of 30, in the current circumstances my answer will be no. They really dont know what the students really want and they find hard to adapt to technology. They continue following the very old style of lecturing and they want us to take in whatever old stuff they present us. In fact what affects more is not their age but their inexperience in using technology. I am comfortable with a teacher who is sixty plus with a good understanding about technology and its positive use as a tool to enrich ones knowledge. Digital Immigrant teachers dont know how to teach effectively using technology. They are following the old method of talking and writing when the world has moved forward. They are not able to adapt to the new ways of teaching that involves partnering with the students. The

32

sources of information and the credibility of it should be reviewed rather than the technology used to gather it. Adopting a social model of teaching and learning rather than closed classroom model, which place emphasis on the institution and instructor is the pioneering step towards achieving Pedagogy 2.0. A in vogue feature of Pedagogy 2.0 is the increased socialization of learning and teaching, greater emphasis is on teacher-student partnership in learning, with teachers as co-learners and co-creators. 4.0.1 Achieving Pedagogy 2.0 Participation Virtual classrooms which have dwindled the confines of a physical classroom is no exception for a imprisonment of students as it is an instructor centered learning set up. To further ahead, we will need to demolish these virtual walls so as to create social learning spaces, in which learners and [teachers] become associates in a community of practice, participating in networks of interaction that transcend the old-fashioned constructs of institutions and organisations. The social software tools make it easy for learners to engage productive discourse among peers, instructors, other subject-matter experts, and the community at large. These tools opens up new possibilities of maintaining own collection of ideas, photos, and bookmarks online. . These creations facilitates personal expression and publication which in turn adds to the social constructivist form of participation allowing expert reviews and comments thus contributing to the knowledge economy, but it also adds a further dimension to participative learning by increasing the level of socialization and collaboration with experts, community, and peer groups, and by fostering connections that are often global in reach. Personalization
33

The term personalization is not Greek term for the educators as it has been in and out of their framework for past few years as there has been an exorbitant lament for student centric learning for past many years. Personalization nurtures the students potential of decision making. However, despite the efforts of many constructivist teachers, some are still recalcitrant in the prevailing and pre-packaged content and pre-designed syllabus, denying students autonomy in shaping their own learning trajectories. Text cannot perfect communication, as web-based multimedia production and distribution tools incorporating rich audio (podcasting, Skype), photo (Flickr) and video (vodcasting, YouTube, Stickam) capabilities are growing. According to researchers, pedagogy must do the following: Ensure that learners are capable of making informed educational decisions; Diversify and recognize different forms of skills and knowledge; Create diverse learning environments; Include learner-focused forms of feedback and assessment.

The challenge for educators is to enable personalization by, knowledge building, and providing learner options and choice along with supplying the necessary structure and scaffolding. Moving on from LMSs, the PLE concept is an alternate method of e-learning. Unlike LMSs that take a course-centric view of learning, PLEs are learner-centric. The idea is to have learners exercise greater control over their learning experience, rather than be constrained by centralized, instructor- controlled learning.

34

Productivity Students are ingenious in creating and generating ideas, concepts, and knowledge, inarguably the crux of the new wave in education is to equip learners as producers and not mere consumers of knowledge. The value of textbooks are questioned for their ineptness to update in frequent pace, thus increasing the reliance on up-to-date social learning tools by the learners. Todays learners have distaste towards factual information as they prefer search engines and knowledge repositories like Wikipedia and Google to go beyond the periphery of a subject. A disillusionment slowly sweeps across the teacher community that instructor supplied knowledge has limitations and if it per-empts learners from discovery and research which will affect the knowledge creation process. There is an interest amongst some of them on how the social software tools make the creation and sharing of knowledge possible with the learner in the driving seat. Student-generated content may also include synchronous and asynchronous computer- mediated communication (CMC) discourse such as chat logs and discussion board postings, reflective writing in the form of blog-based diaries, summaries, and reviews, created by students working individually or in teams. Last, but not least, it may also include came across content, including the results of students own wide reading, gathered from websites, journals, magazines, and news articles that are brought to, and shared with others in, the learning environment.

4.0.2 Findings
Teachers of digital immigrant class tend to imposture as tech savvy which affects their reputation among students.

35

Digital immigrant teachers tend to question the authenticity of the information retrieved from digital repositories like the Wikipedia.

The digital native students attention span in the classes of digital native teachers who uses Pedagogy 2.0 is more when compared to that of digital immigrant teachers who follow the course-centric approach.

Digital native students can multitask, they can learn with the help of games, for them graphics and interactivity accounts more than words.

It is impossible to rusticate technology from the life of digital natives lives as it has evolved into an inevitable component of their day-to-day life.

36

Chapter 5
5.0 Conclusion
The era of chalk and board has ended long back but teachers who adopt the new method of pedagogy are very few. Students in our colleges and universities today carry tablets and laptops instead of the old college notes. Reading, looking at screens with instant access to internet has become common among student fraternity. The dissemination of technology in rapid scale among people has contributed to this radical change. Todays students from the kindergarten to college have already adapted to the technology era by using ipods, laptops and mobile phones. They have a greater understanding of technology gained through experimentation. But a greater section of todays teachers are from the previous generation. They find hard to cope with technology. This in turn affects the technology enabled teaching which new generation students clamor for. This forces to draw a line between the new generation teachers and the new generation students. As per definitions by European technologist the people who were born before 1960s comes under the digital immigrant background where as people who are born after 1960s are digital native. But when we come to the Indian version of the same concept, the diffusion rate of the technology should be taken into account. The digital divide between the west and our country is such wide that only people who were born afer 1980s come under the bracket of digital natives. Thus the majority of teachers in our educational system are from digital immigrant background or those who were born before 1980s. The digital natives students gather and process information in a much different way when compared to their parents and grandparents. This has caused concern in people from both the generations.

37

One way or the other todays students are all native speakers of technology; they are comfortable with using mobile phones and computers. Their use of technology is beyond the periphery. But the digital immigrants are satisfied with the peripheral use of technology. The best example is their use of Mobile phones. The digital natives use mobile phones not only for making call but for wide range of other purposes including surfing internet but the digital immigrants are not interested in exploring the other possibilities of technology other than their basic use. The digital immigrant teachers tend to imposture as digital natives. To achieve this they use text based PPTs and contents copied from web sites. The students perception about the teacher is affected by this as some teachers even forget to remove the hyperlinks from the ppt. Students from the digital native background uses internet and technology enabled platforms for gathering vast information. They make use of online games and other CBA to enrich study.The digital immigrant teachers are incapable of accessing these information because of their inability to understand the possibilities of available technology. This has caused the students to look down upon their teachers. Their credibility as authentic source of information is being questioned by the students. The roles of teachers are taken over by the social learning tools like the wiki and facebook. Students want their teachers to participate in the process of learning not as a giver but as a co-learner and co-creator. They want to interact in the class and share their ideas with their friends through group discussions and other means. But the digital immigrant teachers are not open for such a change in the system. Students are more attached with the teachers from a digital native background; they are more tech savvy nad understand the new language of participation, presentation and productivity which form the basic elements for Pedagogy 2.0.

38

The digital immigrant teachers will face more problems with their students if they follow the old norms of teaching. The way to move ahead is to embrace the new pedagogy 2.0. Pedagogy 2.0 is not a new platform altogether but it is the integration of participation, presentation and productivity into the old pedagogy. The teachers who find trouble in using technology should understand the possibilities of it and alter their thoughts rather than propagating false information that it is not authentic. They could either accept or reject the influx of technology into their world, but eventually it is evident that technology will stay. Like all immigrants, these teachers needed to be en-cultured into the cultural practices of the Information Age to allow multiculturalism and cultural pluralism for the flourishing of social unity, which could finally lead to assimilation into the Knowledge Economy. The age of virtual classroom has also come to an end. Virtual Classrooms are considered as no substitute for a participatory classroom where teachers interact with the student by giving the agency to the student to come up with interesting ideas. The new age students prefer social learning spaces rather than virtual walls. Teachers must encourage students to use the social learning tools for interacting with peers and experts from different areas because these tools enable the students to share their ideas to more number of people thus building the scope for improvement The sharing of ideas through social software tools will merge them to the social constructivist world thus becoming key component of the knowledge economy. This kind of interaction will also give them global exposure as their works are reviewed by people from around the world who are experts in the subject. The teachers should accept the fact

39

that students will search for more than what they are teaching. The role of the teachers is to suggest and correct the students when they start derailing form the track. The student centric approach of teaching helps students to nurture their forte in decision making. Some teachers still believe in pre-packaged content and pre-designed syllabus, denying students the agency to choose their own learning methods. In the technologically advanced era text alone cannot perfect communication; students make use of audio video and images to gather information. The pedagogy should ensure learners are capable of making informed educational decisions; diversify and recognize different forms of skills and knowledge; Create diverse learning environments; Include learner-focused forms of feedback and assessment. Educators should enable personalization by building knowledge and providing learner options and choice along with supplying the necessary structure and scaffolding. Learning Management System should be revamped so as to give the learner the focus rather than teacher. Learning management systems are totally teacher centric and the rules are set by him but this should be replaced by PLS where students gets upper hand. Students should be viewed as producers of knowledge; the role of the teacher is to equip them as producers of knowledge rather than consumers. Students believe that the Digital immigrant instructor supplied knowledge has limitations and that it per-empts them from discovering and researching which will add to the knowledge creation process. The social learning tools help the learners in the process of becoming the knowledge producers, this includes the blogs they maintain, and the computer mediated communication such as virtual discussion rooms and chat

40

logs. The vast reading of the student through internet will also add to his or her knowledge production. Web 2.0 and social software tools make possible user-controlled, peer-to-peer knowledge creation, and network-based enquiry. The integration of technology for the creation of knowledge and networking will open a new path in the teaching learning practice. Nevertheless, technology alone should not be considered as the sole driver of change in pedagogy. Though technology makes possible interaction and peer to peer discussions possible, learning process cannot be totally based on this. Pedagogical frameworks, informed by learner-centered principles, and sensitive to the learning context, need to be considered. Furthermore, Web 2.0 is part of a group of societal factors that include changing student expectations and demographics, lifelong learning, and institutional pressures for improved, innovative, and cost-efficient modes of teaching. This implies that we must be alert to a range of factors that impact on pedagogical choice. There are already signs of optimism that existing Pedagogy 2.0 practices, by capitalizing on the three Ps of personalization, participation, and productivity, will result in a learning landscape and a diverse range of educational experiences that are socially contextualized, engaging, and generative. Can teachers, whose traditional frame of reference is formality, understand how informal learning can take place through social networking and beyond the formal spaces of classrooms, libraries, and laboratories? Can we extend our classrooms to link with open communities that are sharing, revising, and creating new ideas? Can academia, with their established legacy of transmissive pedagogy, rise to the challenge and affect the kind of teaching revolution and changes that are both necessary and inevitable in the new age? The challenge is to facilitate

41

learning, be less prescriptive, and be open to new media, tools, and strategies, while nurturing the skills of information evaluation as well as the blending, remixing, and recombination of ideas to reach creative solutions. This can be achieved by employing the social software tools, resources, and opportunities that can leverage what our students do naturally socialize, network, and collaboration. 5.0.1 Recommendations

The era of chalk and board has ended long back so the teachers should understand the possibilities of adopting Pedagogy 2.0 in classrooms.

Teachers should understand the possibilities of Social Learning tool and adopt this technique to enhance teaching.

Students should be considered as not mere consumers of knowledge but producers of it thus encouraging the knowledge economy.

The digital natives like to present their thoughts in the classroom.

42

References Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1993). How to design and evaluate research in education (2nd Ed.).New York: McGraw-Hil Prensky, M. (2001a, September/October). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Prensky, M. (2001b, November/December). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part 2: Do they Really Think Differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-6. Sue Bennett ,Karl Maton and Lisa Kervin(2008) The digital natives debate: A critical review of the evidence Prensky,M.(2005a).Engagemeorenrageme. EDUCASEReview, 40,5,September/October, 616 Prensky,M.(2005b).Listentothenatives. EducationalLeadership, 63,4,813. Lee,L.(2005).YoungpeopleandtheInternet:fromtheorytopractice. NordicJournalofYouth Research, 13,4,315326. Kolb,D.A.(1984). Experientiallearning:experienceasthesourceoflearninganddevelopment. EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall. The Three Ps of Pedagogy for the Networked Society: Personalization, Participation, an d Productivity Catherine McLoughli and Mark W Lee
43

The Mayer Report: employment related competencies for post compulsory education and training. Canberra, NBEET, 1992 Vygotsky, L 1962, Thought and language, M.I.T. Press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. Vygotsky, LS 1978, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Banner, JM & Cannon, HC 1997, The Elements of Teaching, Yale University Press, England.

Boheman, N 2003, collective professional knowledge, Medical Education 2000; 34, pp. 505-506.

Bransford, JD., Brown, AL & Cocking, RR (Eds), 1999, How People Lean Brain, Experience and School, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Brosnan, MJ 1998, Technophobia: the psychological impact of information technology, Routledge, New York.

Broudy, J 1977, The real spin on tennis: grasping the mind, body, and soul of the game, ICS Books, Merrillville.

Cooper PA Computer-Mediated Communication, The Infosphere and the Virtual Learning Community http://www.shsu.edu/~csc_pac/site%202000.doc viewed 18/10/2004

Cope, B Castle, S and Kalantzis, M 1991 Immigration ethnic and social cohesion, Australian Government Publishing Services, Australia.

Dillion, P 2004 Trajectories and tensions in the Theory of Information and Communication Technology in Education, in British Journal of educational studies, Vol. 52, No. 2, June 2004, pp 138-150.

44

Gardner, H 1983, 1984 & 1993, Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences, Basic Books, New York. Gardner, H 2004, Changing Minds - The Art and Science of Changing Our Own and Other People's Minds, Harvard Business School Press, Massachusetts.

Jarvis, P Holford, J & Griffin, C 1998, The Theory and Practice of Learning, Kogan Page, London.

45