Elements of presentation
Where does one draw the line between education and entertainment? I have been annotating "Amusing Ourselves to Death" for one of my classes and it occurs to me, is this post-modern? What is the difference between "engaging" students and "entertaining" them? Should we consider it one or the other, or is there a gradient and a definite point past which they can't take the information seriously?
Pardon the rant-like questions, I am in the midst of writing a piece about post-modern education.
Mike,
As I am working on a class, I like to ask myself - "does this provide educational benefit constant with the amount of time it will take me to develop?"
Jon
Wouldn't a better test be, "Does this provide educational benefit constant with the amount of time it is being presented in class?" I like being able to get students involved, but I am not sure I want it at the expense of intellectual rigor.
Also, your forum e-mail reminder sent me to answer the wrong thread.
Micheal,
That may work as well - it is somewhat dependent on who you are developing for, and the nature of the institution.
Jon
There Should be a line between education and entertainment. One should first "engage" the students and if the "atmosphere" is kind of cold, ask if anybody brought "cookies", virtual that is? This relaxes the atmosphere and we go back to business as usual.
I think that if you are running or taking a class you have to ask yourself if there is real world relevance with this info.
While I see the importance of showing a historical movie in a history class I would first ask how/does this relates to modern life and can I just focus on key point to teach not the whole thing to entertain.
If I am the instructor I have to “keep my eye on the prize” meaning before I show, say or teach something I match it directly to an objective to decide if it’s an entertainment (extra) piece or educationally driven?
Jessica,
Correct! Always be thinking about efficiency and how your activity aids to enhance learning.
Jon
hello Michael,
I often use the term "Edu-tainment" because I believe that it is part of what we "do" as educators - we have to educate, but also we have to entertain so that what we are saying, doing, showing, etc. "sticks" with the students. If you think about it - a LOT of presenters - who want to capture the audience - are really "edutainers" not just educators - and we all know that students will roll their eyes if you come in entertaining all the time but don't "show them the beef" so -to -speak.
I am also finding that with a younger (more tech-savvy) audience, it is even more important in the virtual classroom for me to "edutain" becuase they are so used to so much stimuli (iphones, video games, etc.) that we have to bump it up a notch in order to capture the student's attention.
Thanks,
Toni
I think academic rigor is important. I also have seen the results of students defecting away from a class that was technically correct but not designed for the end customer - the student. There is a balance between the two worlds. I do like your reference to "Amused to Death" as society seems more interested in being entertained than really informed.
Great points - thanks, Jon
As long as there is a rubric and the learner is following it I do not mind if there is a lot of amusement in a presentation. Everyone has different technological and artistic ablities to add to their work. Putting a time limit on the rubric may help to keep the learner on task and stay focused.
Toni--I really appreciated the way you framed this issue. I think all learning begins with people being engaged in a topic so they are motivated to take the next steps to absorb that material. Even in the "old" days-before technology existed to supplement learning- instructors that could lecture with more passion or made personal connection with and/or for students inspired greater learning than those unable to do so. Technology must support what we do NOT become the focus of lessons (unless we're learning something about technology itself ;) As long as it's a supplement, it's just another tool like a chalk board.
Toni, I whole-heartedly agree. I practice "edutainment" both in my on-ground and online classrooms. I put a lot of energy into the delivery of my lectures. I keep them insightful and direct, covering the necessary learning objectives, but I also pepper in professional anecdotes and pop culture references as supplemental examples. Students enjoy and respond to this much better than a "dry", technical lecture.
-Rob
For young people entertainment is important, eventough the lessons may not get to them. For more mature students, entertainment is not so critical. I believe it should be angaging, participatve and challenging.
that is so true!! Different generations learn differently.
The fact is, the students of today are used to being entertained and they have been since birth. They have been exposed to TV and videos, interactive games, iPods, social media,etc. If you watch them, they are constantly multitasking. Teaching these students takes a lot of work, innovation and yes...entertaining. It is how they learn. Give them a lecture with no images, no interaction and you will lose them quickly. I think that as long as the information is being presented and they are retaining it, it can be "entertainment". I have found that the more interactive they are with the information, the more they like learning it. The added bonus is that they remember it too! I think the days of giving a lecture and reading assignment then expecting the students to learn are over -- whether we like it or not...most of them just don't learn that way!
Beverly,
This is a good point for the younger generation. We do have several of the older generation taking online courses for the first time.
Shelly Crider
Shelly, FYI...actually, according to the most recent research, different generations do not learn differently. The research has revealed there are very little differences in learning between generations. However, what is vastly different is how different generations use the technology. There is an abundance of research on generational differences since Marc Prensky (2001)wrote his article on digital natives and digital immigrants.
In a study by Tom Reeves (2006), he stated in the light of the weak nature of generational differences as a measurable construct, that any quasi-experimental studies aimed at determining the effectiveness of different instructional designs or educational technologies across generations are not needed.
In a recent issue of Chronicle of Higher Education (CHE),in its The Millennial Muddle article, Palmer Muntz, director of admissions at Lincoln Christian University is said to have asserted that “To accept generational thinking, one must find a way to swallow two large assumptions. That tens of millions of people, born over about 20 years, are fundamentally different from people of other age groups—and that those tens of millions of people are similar to each other in meaningful ways†(Hoover, 2009).
Also, in its September 2008 issue, The Chronicle of Higher Education published an article entitled Generational Myth. Its author, Professor Siva Vaidhyanathan (2008), claimed that there is no “Digital Generation.’ Today’s young people—including college students—are just more complicated than any analysis of imaginary generations can ever revealâ€. The article went on to say those focusing on those “born digital†ignore the “vast range of skills, knowledge, and experience of many segments of society, and ignores the needs of the those who are not socially or financially privileged.â€
In another CHE article, Bauerlein (2008) claims that “The greatest disappointment of our time is that huge investments made in technology (beginning with Telecommunications Act of 1996) in public schools have met with negative results. In fact, he reports, reading proficiency dropped from 40% to 35% from 1992 to 2005â€. Addressing the use of the new popular technologies and applications, Bauerlein claims that leisure-time technical skills did not translate to educational and training use of technology. Intellectual habits such as deep reflection decrease with increase time spent on browsing, blogging, Instant Messaging, Twittering, and Facebooking. Fast scanning does not translate into aca-demic reading.
Reference List:
Bauerlein, M. (2008). Online Literacy Is a Lesser Kind. Chronicle of Higher Education, September 19, 2008
Hoover, E. (2009). The Millennial Muddle. Chronicle of Higher Education 11 October 2009
Reeves, T. (2006), Do Generational Differences Matter in Instructional Design? Retrieved from http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Paper104/ReevesITForumJan08.pdf
Vaidhyanathan, S. (2008). Generational Myth. Chronicle of Higher Education, 19 September 2008
Jolly,
What do you think the technology will be like in 20 years from now?????
Shelly Crider
