Today
I am going to discuss the article Our Brains Extended by Marc Prensky. The
article was written in March of 2013. Here is the link of the
article: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar13/vol70/num06/Our-Brains-Extended.aspx
Marc
starts off by stating his stance about technology in the first paragraph. He
stated Reading continues to be important—no one argues against teaching or
learning it—but today, reading is no longer the number one skill students need
to take from school to succeed. Technology is." Then in the next
paragraph he goes into detail about the statement he made above. He claims that
the human mind is not as powerful as it uses to be because technology
has advanced so far. Technology offers more enhanced capabilities.
Technology is not an added component but it is now a part of "mental
activity". The next part of the article examines redoing the curriculum
in schools. Marc poses questions such as "In a world where machines
can do calculations faster than any person ever could, do we still need the
kind of math we currently teach? In a world where humans are becoming
overwhelmed by volume, do students still need to practice composing long
essays—or should they learn to powerfully condense their thoughts into pithy
paragraphs and tweets?" He believes that math should be taught with tools
like calculators and spreadsheets. Marc also believes that writing should
be taught in a way where less is more. He likes for his students to summarize a
story by just one sentence. Then he moves into the next section of the article.
He begins to explain that technology can be used as test prep for tests like
the ACTs and SATs. He believes that technology should teach the tests, and
teachers should provide guidance and coaching. Marc then wants students to be
more aware of database usage because they are so helpful. He uses an example of
one database called Wolfram Alpha. Questions or comments can be placed into the
search bar and then moments later the computer will pull up relevant data. He
makes a powerful statement ending this section. He says, Today, technology
like this puts many college-level questions with definitive answers within the
reach of 10-year-olds." Marc then goes into his next section and he is
adding more to his argument that technology needs to be added into
the curriculum more. He makes comments like, science cannot be taught
without the use of technology because the volume of data is too
overwhelming for the human mind to comprehend. He wants teachers to implement
and embrace technology in their classroom. In order for teachers to
implement technology, teachers and students must learn how to work and
understand technology. Marc then goes into explaining
what students need to learn in order to control/ understand technology. He
breaks it up into three subjects. Subject one is effective thinking, subject
two is effective action, and subject three is effective relationship. Effective
thinking is simple mathematical and logical thinking and a focus
on obvious flaws. The student would start at a young age learning how
to use world databases, knowledge, sources, and teams. Effective
thinking would have the teacher and student focus always on thinking
in various forms and on being an effective thinker. The next subject is
effective action. The Effective Action curriculum would focus on getting
students to be proactive, to initiate positive actions and programs to improve
their communities, their country, and the world." The third subject
is effective relationships. This subject wants students to learn how to
work in groups and work on communication skills. To conclude his
article, he says, "What all students would have in common, though,
would be a strong, underlying, long-practiced skill set of thinking, acting,
relating, and accomplishing, which, when they leave K–12, they could bring to
more specialized higher education or work."
As
I read this article, I appreciated Marc's opinion. I come from the
generation where technology began to advance quickly. I also
used technology in my elementary classrooms. For example, when I took A.R.
test, the test were computer driven. We played educational games on the
computer and we also had computer lab as an elective. I think having technology
in the classroom is an idea that needs to be acted upon. However, I do not
fully agree with him wanting to change the entire curriculum and base it
entirely around technology. I feel like it is a far-fetched idea. Common
Core states that their standards will ready students for college and the
workforce. Do I know for sure if they do? No, not yet, but I do not agree on
changing the curriculum. Many schools cannot afford computers or other up to
date technology. Changing the curriculum to focus around technology
requires a lot of money. It also requires persuading a lot of people to think
the way Marc is thinking. Everyone has different opinions on how a school
should run. I think a medium needs to be reached. Schools should spend
a little money on technology for example, a few computers or tablets
should be purchased for each classroom, but they should not have to change
everything including the curriculum to center on technology.
