The Myth of the Digital Native, part 5: So What?

 So, what do we do?  Students are not “naturally tech savvy,” multi-tasking is not an effective leaning or coping strategy, and letting students learn only what they think they like leaves them with gaping holes in their understanding.  I propose we look at steps in the right direction.  I am not claiming that any of these ideas are new.  I am claiming that some of them have been discounted or devalued in the rush to “integrate” technology into learning. 

• Scaffolding takes time.  Prior knowledge matters, so if students do not have it, they need a way to build it.  This may involve whole group instruction or a reading with a Socratic Circle discussion.  It may mean some combination of direct instruction, discussion, investigation.  Once the students have covered the basics, if the lesson also includes research, they need time to explore and find a topic, within limits, that will satisfy their own curiosity—they should get some choice, while still meeting some criteria of the teaching and learning objectives for the unit. 
• Let students choose, but give them limits and guidance.  “Controlled experiments [in pedagogy] almost uniformly indicate that when dealing with novel information, learners should be explicitly shown what to do and how to do it.”  (Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark 79)  Don’t be afraid to do some teaching.  Even if you define teaching as guiding, students need guidance.  They should not be set adrift and told to figure it out on their own.  They need to develop tools and research or other units should be designed to help them gain the tools they need at the appropriate time in their school careers.  A first grader probably doesn't need to know what a peer reviewed article is, but he may need to learn how to use a table of contents or a site map. Choice is important as a motivating factor (Corbalan, Kester, and Merrienboer 751), but is not the only factor affecting learning.
• Be prepared for messy learning.  As a librarian, I have had many teachers complain to me that they hate doing research.  I understand.  It requires a lot of work and it is frustrating.  Students end up at different stops along the way. The students themselves may become frustrated, but this is a normal stage of the process.  If we value persistence as a tool that helps students thrive, we need to help them develop it.  By working through information problems, they will develop persistence that will serve them well.  Research is messy, but it  is worth it.  

Corbalan, Gemma, Liesbeth Kester, and Jeroen J.g. Van Merriënboer. "Selecting Learning Tasks: Effects of Adaptation and Shared Control on Learning Efficiency and Task Involvement." Contemporary Educational Psychology 33.4 (2008): 733-56. Web.

Kirschner, Paul A., John Sweller, and Richard E. Clark. "Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching." Educational Psychologist 41.2 (2006): 75-86. Web.

Image made using image generator: http://www.redkid.net/generator/8ball/