Difference between revisions of "Jawanir"

Revision as of 21:09, 11 February 2020

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         File:Jawanirpic4081.jpg

Greetings!

My name is Jawanir, and I am currently a graduate student enrolled in the 1 year STS Masters program at York University. I also have a P/J background but have been out of the field for quite a while now. However, my heart is in education and will always be indebted in primary/junior education.

My interests lie in technology, human rights, and especially refugee rights. I took this course because I thought it would be very helpful to me and my MRP final project.

I find this course to be unique because we get to examine the educational possibilities of digital media and also broaden our understanding of the importance of identifying the “epistemologies and cultural practices that are co-produced and re-shaped through the use of such technologies”, i.e.) cultural practices and media.

I look forward to learning and engaging with all of you in this course. 

Production 1

“Indigenous people have worldview's and means of relating to the world” (Absolon,2010, p.74).

In this article, this quote explains the key difference between IK and WK, and views “Indigenous knowledge, as contextual and contextualized, as lived, and an integral part of survival while Western knowledge as more focused on the search for eternal truths, laws, and principles” (Brayboy & Maughan, 2009, p.11).

“Knowledge is not what some possess and others do not; it is a resourceful capacity of being that creates the context and texture of life. Thus knowledge is not a commodity that can be possessed or controlled by educational institutions, but is a living process to be absorbed and understood” (Brayboy & Maughan, 2009, p. 12). Verbs as we know are active and so is knowledge because it is lived (Brayboy & Maughan, 2009). Therefore, the other knowledge that is described as being a noun is non-active, and rooted in things and books (Brayboy & Maughan, 2009). Western knowledge is the noun that is being described here, and the verb describes Indigenous knowledge because knowledge from an indigenous perspective is active.

We also see this student teacher begin her lessons by contextualizing and adding a little of herself and her students to the lesson. When thinking of a word that best describes this, the word “iterative” comes to mind as this teacher has found a way to include/incorporate the knowledge that is being taught by tying this to the lives of the children and making it more interactive and personal. (Thus making this knowledge and way of being come full circle). As already mentioned, the text explains that “the process of contextualizing what is being learned and tying it to the actual lives of the children is an important part of IK systems. It is not just seen as a way of teaching "but much rather connected into a pedagogy that more fully nuances the use of knowledge and ways of being” (Brayboy & Maughan, 2009, p.11). By exercising this at the beginning, she is contextualizing the act of growth, transforming it from a noun to a very, or even "an experiment to a way of thinking about and engaging the world in which her students live everyday"(Brayboy & Maughan, 2009).

The traditional approach in teaching was analyzed and critiqued by educators and scholars. Mainly looking at “e-learning courses and mobile apps still being modeled on prescribed outcomes, and teacher defined content/curricula that assumes students will learn what they are told and that the learning will make a difference in their life and work experiences” (Mitchell, 2016, p. 205). Here, content- driven curricula is looked at as being a global concern, especially in higher education (Mitchell, 2016), and has been linked with the these concerns: a) linear and behavioural view, b) unrealistic expectations on students to keep consuming, c) students dissatisfaction with prescribed content (Mitchell, 2016, p.206).

Reading about Daagu, and how it’s described as a “virtual space of possibility for new knowledge creation, and a space where these differences create spaces of possibility through meaningful conversations and reflections is amazing (Mitchell, 2016). “Student’s engaging in the complexity of pedagogy in Daagau are able to identify shifts in understanding with a click of a light bulb that is embedded in conversations” (Mitchell, 2016, p. 210). Complexity pedagogy also invites teachers to a place of possibility with uncertainty, where students are presented with resources that encourage them to think critically, and constantly challenged when conversing with others (Mitchell, 2016). It’s amazing how Daagu’s platform is a “participatory process”, and how the diversity/difference of the teachers and learners bring insights from traditional thinking through meaningful conversations using diverse perspectives so that new insights emerge” (Mitchell, 2016, p. 212).

Refereces:

Brayboy & Maughan (2009). Indigenous Knowledge and the Story of the Bean, Harvard Educational Review, 79(1)

Mitchell, G., et al (2016). DAAGU: Complexity Pedagogy and e-Learning: Emergence in Relational Networks,International Research in Higher Education Vol. 1, No. 1; 2016.

Production #2

“The Hole in the Wall”- (HiWel) - A way to spread computer literacy

1. When was your technology/ media tool invented?

The Hole-In-the Wall was established in 1999 by Sugata Mitra, and since its launch has expanded from a single computer at Kalkaji, New Delhi to more than a hundred computers at various locations across India.

2. When was it first used in education (how?)?

As per my research, it was first used in1999 to experiment in children’s learning. A computer was placed in a kiosk in a wall in a slum at Kalkaji, Delhi, in an open area where children were allowed to use it without any direct supervision.

The aim of this experiment was to prove how learning could be done in another way other than being in a classroom. In this case, the Hole-in-the-Wall helped break traditional confines of how schooling should look like by placing the learning in the child’s hands outdoors. This experiment also aimed to prove that children didn’t need to be put in a conventional classroom to “learn” and could be taught by computers without any formal training. It didn’t matter what the child’s formal or past education, learning through the use of computers could be accomplished anywhere. Due to it’s success, this experiment was repeated and also carried out in Cambodia.

“In India, I found two illiterate people texting each other. They had invented a language for themselves which you and I would not understand. I wonder: are there such things as illiterates at all? Yes, if we give them an examination on grammar, but maybe we’ve got the definition wrong and there’s a new literacy that we’re unaware of” – The Guardian.

It’s quite neat that this technology is able to be used by all people (rich or poor). No barriers.

3. How did it (re) shape education or transform or transform literacy, learning, or social orders (changing roles, authority & power-relations, exclusions & inclusion, ideology)?

"The constructivism theory discusses 'cognitive growth and learning' and how children actively construct their knowledge rather than simply absorbing ideas spoken at them by teachers” (Mitra, 2000, p.4). This technology has definitely re-shaped education and transformed learning in the sense that it has allowed students conduct and take lead of their own learning without being placed in a conventional classroom. It has also allowed students from all socio-economic backgrounds to have access to these technologies that are placed there to help them learn. In a sense these technologies are transforming these communities for the positive by providing educational access to all. The- Hole-in-the-wall- technology does not discriminate because it is accessible to all. This technology definitely has a progressive approach where the child is in control of their own learning. Mitra’s basic theory of learning lies in the child simply needing two things to learn effectively: 1) access to a computer with internet, and 2) need to be in the absence of a teacher (Thompson, 2017).

"The whole art of teaching is only the art of awakening the natural curiosity of young minds for the purpose of satisfying it afterwards." - Anatole France

Resources:

Wikipedia

de Castell, S., & Luke, A. (1986). Defining literacy in North American schools: Social and historical conditions and consequences. In S.C. de Castell, A. Luke, & K. Egan (Eds.), Literacy, society and schooling (pp. 87-109). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.*

Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (2009). ‘Multiliteracies’: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164-195.

Thompson, K. (2017, October 15). Sugata Mitra's Hole in the Wall Experiment. Retrieved from https://revisesociology.com/2017/10/14/sugata-mitras-hole-in-the-wall-experiment/

in-the-Wall - Publications. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.hole-in-the-wall.com/Publications.html

Don Passey, Digital Skills for Those in Transition – Where Next, Key Competencies in ICT and Informatics. Implications and Issues for Educational Professionals and Management, 10.1007/978-3-662-45770-2_19, (219-230), (2014).

Production #3

Production #4

Chosen option: Option# 2 Make More Movies (Using the Ideation Card Deck)- Coming soon.