“Remember when …”

In a recent National Public Radio (NPR) essay I listened with interest to the challenges of defining what is a television.  Is a computer a television? Is your tablet?  Is your phone?

I listened with interest especially as the discussion turned to something very familiar with my childhood – sitting as a family and watching a single television.  Wow!  Was it that long ago?

Then I reflected further on the expansion of television sets (remember when we called them a “set”) or better put “screens” in our home.  Roof top antennas, rabbit ears, cable and satellite are to varying degrees a part of our television experience – okay, for some of us.  Now we have wireless and Internet.  The whole situation is troubling, right?

With the advent of handheld devices “viewing” shifted from a communal to an individual experience akin to modes of transportation – have you ever thought about the radical shifts in transportation?  Consider we moved from individual modes like walking or riding a horse to the forerunners of mass transit – wagons, buses, trains, and airplanes.   There are even books, manuals, and now Internet blogs on etiquette, manners, and the like for traveling with “strangers”.  This isn’t new by the way.  The shift from individual and family travel to traveling in mass with strangers generated all sorts of publications in the 18^th and 19^th century respectively.

In our home though we may be sitting in one room, the number of devices streaming personal choices to each individual is very real.  Some may argue that at least the family is in one place.  Some may argue that individual choice, preference of programming trumps discussing, debating, and deciding collectively what will be watched.

Yes, we truly have a dilemma.

Not sure what the answer is or what the question is for that matter other than technology has created “different” with respect to “viewing”.  Hmm … come to think of it – this has serious implications for teaching and learning.

  Technology has called into question the “one size fits all” approach to both instruction and learning.  In as much as the K-12 model is challenged by the authentic, effective and efficient integration of new learning models, tools and etc., higher education is really scrambling.  The traditional “brick and mortar” delivery model – students physically attending a class taught by a physically present professor is under unprecedented challenges as a generation of learners naturally and without reservation birthed and raised in a digital world have little hesitation or apology gravitating to different.

The K-12 world is possibly slightly ahead of higher education.  The “flipped”, “blended”, eText, TechBooks, virtual learning, and etc. already exist and are only limited by cost – the cost of connectivity, device, and training.  In many respects the “size of the shoe is dictating the growth of the foot”.  Sadly, it really does come down to money. 

Really?

Well, no! 

It comes down to vision, commitment, conviction, and courage.  These are based on an understanding and therefore behaviors that embrace in many ways what we have experienced with television.  There are times where communal watching enhances the experience, creates common bonds, and builds community and other times when individual viewing is “best”. 

In those rare times that our family is in the same room experiencing a movie together, a news cast, an agreed upon sitcom, or sporting event we have more than physical proximity in common.  There is a common reference point to discuss, debate from a diversity of perspective.  Funny thing, as our children mature so do their opinions, arguments, and positions.

The implications of these shifts in television viewing have significant import and utility for K-12 classrooms as well as higher education.

Our challenge is seeing possibilities.  Seeing different.

We must consider that communal learning has its place just as small group and individual learning.  The vehicle for facilitating learning is enhanced by technology. 

Yet, it will require (as I believe will always require) a gifted educator to guide, coach, inspire, instill, and assess the application of learning.

And ...

The Anson County Schools fact of the week.  Did you know …

In 2007-2008, our 6^th grade Reading proficiency was 41% as measured by the End of Grade Assessment. 

In 2011-2012 it was 71% Reading, a 30% increase!