Technology for engagement?

Posted by: ashleytan on: February 22, 2012

• In: Uncategorized
• Comment!

Seems like student-teacher engagement is more impt than tech chronicle.com/article/A-Tech…—
Elizabeth Koh (@elizabethkoh) February 21, 2012

When I read the linked article in this tweet, I wondered out loud: Don’t people know that making connections is one of the things technology should be used for?

Then I reminded myself of what I hear and see all the time when I conduct ICT courses or supervise in schools. Technology is used instead of integrated. Technology is often used to transmit or engage instead of to create and connect.

Honestly, engagement is not enough. Depending on how you look at it, engagement can fleeting. Engage. Disengage.

Larry Cuban called engagement a fluffy term. I tend to agree with Cuban on this.

But he says engagement is a “fluffy term” that can slide past critical analysis. And Professor Cuban at Stanford argues that keeping children engaged requires an environment of constant novelty, which cannot be sustained.

“There is very little valid and reliable research that shows the engagement causes or leads to higher academic achievement,” he said.

Technology can certainly be used to engage. But so can a good human storyteller.

No, technology should be used to do what people cannot do easily or cannot do at all. It could be used to create widespread awareness of your cause, amplify your thoughts, organize the masses, or connect different people for perspective-taking.

It can also be personally meaningful too. While some accuse technology of being distracting, blogging and tweeting is great for focused reflection and self-directed learning. It can help you create a professional and personal learning network that extends beyond your immediate reach.

Using technology to engage is just not good enough, not if you know how it can do so much more.

Tags: engagement