 |
|
Larry S. Anderson
|
With the inevitable invasion of Facebook and other social networking tools into the classroom, educators have begun a heated debate on their worthiness as instructional tools. Many seem determined to reject such tools, while others seem willing to consider them an engaging avenue for strengthening the phenomenon of learning.
It's intriguing to hear adults'reactions when they first discover Facebook. I have often heard people exclaim how great it is to "connect” with a former classmate, distant relative, or colleague after a lengthy drought of contact. There is just something magical about the feeling of being connected with one another that lifts our spirits and helps us achieve things we might not otherwise. So, rather than treating social networking like an unnecessary malignancy, maybe we should learn how to leverage its value when it's in the hands of learners.
Facebook has significant merit compared with face-to-face (F2F) learning. Of course, it’s not always superior to F2F modalities, but under the right conditions, Facebook should be the medium of choice for interaction. Why?
Frequently, we make judgments about people based solely on appearance. We don't take time to really know them. And when we allow one’s physical appearance to shape our opinions without building rapport, we often arrive at faulty conclusions. On Facebook, however, we can peruse the person’s information; interactions with others; personal, professional, and political tendencies; and the nature of the communities he or she is constructing and nurturing. So, if we are wise, we will use social networking tools as a precursor to F2F encounters. And as we educators model such behavior, we will enhance the productivity of the personal networks our students are developing.
Facebook is also a significant time saver. Each of us has gotten "caught" by someone who, during a F2F encounter, can't stop talking. Frequent, lengthy conversations about topics of little interest rob us and our students of productivity. Facebook transmits shorter messages rapidly, and, due to its asynchronous nature, interruptions are kept to a minimum.
In contrast to the F2F scenario, Facebook allows for facile transport of supporting multimedia documentation, such as videos and photos, to make a point clearly and quickly. Embedded multimedia components provide immediate evidence that helps one judge the value of accompanying material and comments. Facebook also allows users to embed hyperlinks in messages for immediate learning and/or general enlightenment. This is not possible in F2F interaction.
And because Facebook is agnostic regarding geography and personal schedules, its message is always timely. For this reason alone, social networking should be given serious consideration as a 21st-century learning tool.
Let's give Facebook a chance to be the occasional forerunner to F2F relationships. Surely we will witness an enthusiastic expansion of learner achievement.
Larry S. Anderson, PhD, retired from the Technology and Education faculty at Mississippi State University in 2000 and now devotes 100% of his time to public speaking, writing, and consulting. Anderson founded the National Center for Technology Planning in 1992 and currently acts as its CEO.
|
 |
| Ellen Hildenbrand |
Of course Facebook can't replace face-to-face! Even though I see myself as a genuine agent of change in the world of education, I think that harboring the idea that social networking is the "holy grail" of pedagogy is a major mistake. In fact, isn't the search for such a "one size fits all" magic-pill approach always the wrong way to go?My experience as a teacher (and as a student) tells me that differentiated instruction is not a method, it is a philosophy. It recognizes that it is as individuals, with personal passions, talents, and presuppositions, that we learn—and teach! The most, and perhaps the only, way to effectively teach anyone anything is in the context of that understanding. Such individual needs and characteristics can be identified only through communication—effective communication—and communication itself is not best achieved in a climate that allows for only one medium.
Face-to-face is, and will continue to be, an important component of education, at least for as long as education is a human endeavor with humanistic objectives. We cannot allow ourselves to be convinced that everyone is best served by Facebook any more than we can continue to convince ourselves that every student needs to be able to excel on standardized tests. Such either/or scenarios have no place in the future of education. The radical shift in the educational paradigm precludes such ancient attitudes. Students and teachers must be freed from the tyranny of finite choices and facile solutions.
The Internet has opened up a world of possibilities for us and our students. But we must refrain from making hasty, confining choices and remain open to opportunities that we have yet to imagine. Face-to-face, for example, allows for the development of skills that would never be addressed in an exclusively online context. Haven’t we all, as educators, found ourselves reading students’ facial expressions and body language? I have honed my intuition concerning the unspoken needs or concerns of my students through careful attention to such clues, and I see a real value in helping my students to be similarly attentive in a social context.
And although group projects can be, and often are, accomplished regardless of geographical proximity, the social skills acquired through face-toface collaboration will continue to be of value to our students in whatever career paths they choose. Likewise, face-to-face also allows, and often requires, some degree of student aptitude in public speaking. Clearly this ability can be improved only through face-to-face practice.
Go ahead, use Facebook! Allow its use among your students and explore its potential. But avoid the temptation to designate it as the teaching tool of the future. I have no doubt that Facebook and its like are here to stay, and that they will be useful for many. Nonetheless, communication among learners should not be confined to such sites.
We must not take an essentially bad idea—one-size-fits-all education—and give it a 21st century spin. That, most assuredly, is not progress!
Ellen Kemeza Hildenbrand is a teacher at the Academy of Notre Dame de Namur in Villanova, Pennsylvania. She holds an MS in education (instructional technology) and an MA in theology.
|
