On teaching 'naked', Pride and Prejudice and unplugged digital pedagogy

In Paul Fyfe’s article Digital Pedagogy Unplugged he states “Debates about what defines and qualifies digital humanism periodically flare” and then proceeds to deliver such a debate. He poses many a question that compels one to think about their understanding of technology and digital humanism. What does it even mean to be digital?

One of the most striking points Fyfe makes is “technology cannot change the classroom without first changing the pedagogy”.  After reading the article, I would restate the sentence as “technology should not change the classroom without first changing the pedagogy”. What this means is that in order to fully benefit from technology in the classroom, one should not merely use the technology to achieve the same tasks that were previously achieved manually, but to rather find ways of adapting the teaching methods in order to fully realise the potential that the technology can offer. Using a data projector and a computer instead of an overhead projector merely changes the media used in order to achieve the same effect. Technology should be used to modify, morph and improve how teaching takes place. Understanding the technologies used in the classroom could allow for interactive maths lessons for instance, where children can actually visualise the geometry they are learning, or science lessons that provide digital versions of experiments that may not be safe in a school environment. We cannot simply redistribute the work from one form of technology to the other, rather we have to adapt teaching methods and practices and evolve teaching and learning along with technology.

In his article, Fyfe speaks about teaching naked. He clarifies this by explaining that all he means by this is that “instructional technology is not banished but instead moved to the pedagogical periphery”. Another phrase to describe this situation is the notion of the ‘flipped classroom’; students engage electronically with material outside the physical and time barriers of the classroom, which then allows for more in depth and engaging discussion within the walls of the classroom. This ‘flipped classroom’ idea effectively uses technology in a new way in order to free up interactive time with students. Here the teacher is ‘teaching naked’ without the use of technology in the actual class, but technology is still very much a part of the class.

Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice is used to demonstrate different types of reading. A story is told where a teacher goes home and highlights all the instances where the words “pride” and “prejudice” appear. This is obviously a taxing task and a contrast is drawn to how easily this task would have been accomplished with a computer instead. This brings up the concepts of linear and extensive (or distant) reading. A question can be posed: will both these types of reading be achieved if the teacher were to use a computer search function instead? One must always consider both the positive and negative effects of technology on pedagogy and the outcomes of teaching.

I think the most notable and striking concept to take away from the article is that much care must be taken to use “technology effectively” and to “subordin[ate] it to the pedagogical goals of the class”. By doing this, teachers will fully reap the rewards and draw out the potential of the technology they are busy working with.

Note: All quotations are taken from Digital Pedagogy Unplugged by Paul Fyfe. Found at http://digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/5/3/000106/000106.html