The form of the digital medium as a driver of a participatory approach in teaching and learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17501/24246700.2019.5114Keywords:
media education, negotiation, maieuticsAbstract
Teaching methods are characterized by media both for the historical (when they were conceived or widespread), the communicative (the relationship between the subjects of the teaching process), and the cultural aspect (the concept of knowledge in the relationship between subjects and objects of teaching/learning). The lesson derives from the “book” form, becoming unidirectional with the emergence of electrical technologies; Skinner’s programmed instruction also appears in the electric age, and so on. Today, network technologies are structurally related to self-discovery learning paths (such as in gamification strategies) and collaborative methodologies (cooperative learning, PBL, etc.); moreover, the continuous handling of digital technologies imposes a different conception of knowledge. It is precisely these media characteristics that suggest a didactic approach based on interactivity and horizontal participation, new concepts that can be exploited and put into practice by old words: dialogue and negotiation. If the former refers to the never outdated Socratic system and to the need for the teacher to put himself in a situation of listening, negotiation becomes a way of interaction that can be established at every level of the teaching/learning process, from the definition of some contents to be studied to the definition of evaluation criteria. The paper shows an example of this approach in a blended university course held for 4 years, where some of these strategies were experimented: group works, peer evaluation, co-responsibility of evaluation criteria, and a partially free choice about the contents to be studied and learnt.
Downloads
References
Armstrong, J. S. (2011). Natural Learning in Higher Education. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning, Heidelberg: Springer, Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/marketing_papers/140
Barkley, C., Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., Major, C. H. (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey Bass.
Barr, R. B., Tagg, J. (1995). From Teaching to Learning - A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27 (6), 12-26
Barrows, H S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 3-12.
Bolter J. D., Grusin R. (1999). Remediation. Understanding New Media. Cambridge, UK: The MIT Press.
Bottero, E. (2014, Il metodo di insegnamento. I problemi della didattica nella scuola di base. Milano, Italia: Franco Angeli.
De Kerckhove, D. (1991). Brainframes. Technology, mind and business. Utrecht, Netherlands: BSO/Origin.
Debray R. (2000). Introduction à la médiologie. Paris, France: PUF.
Del Rey, A. (2013). La tyrannie de l'évaluation. Paris, France: La Découverte.
Freinet, C. B. (1994). Œuvres pédagogiques. Tome 1 et 2. Paris, France: Seuil.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, USA: Continuum.
Fuentealba, C. (2011). The Role of Assessment in the Student Learning Process. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 38 (2), 157-162.
Galotti, K. M., Clinchy, B. M., Ainsworth, K., Lavin, B., & Mansfield, A. F. (1999). A New Way of Assessing Ways of Knowing: The Attitudes Towards Thinking and Learning Survey (ATTLS). Sex Roles, 40 (9/10), 745-766
Gee, J. P. (2007). What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy. New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan.
Johnson, L. F., Smith, R. S., Smythe, J. T., Varon, R. K. (2009). Challenge-Based Learning: An Approach for Our Time. Austin, Texas, USA: The New Media Consortium.
Kilpatrick, W. H. (1936). Foundations of Method. Informal Talks on Teaching. New York, USA: The Macmillan Company.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York, USA: McGraw Hill).
Mithen, S. (1996). The Prehistory of the Mind. The Cognitive Origins of Art, Religion and Science. London, UK: Phoenix.
Mithen, S. (2001). The Evolution of Imagination: An Archaeological Perspective. SubStance, 94/95, 28-54.
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and Literacy. The Technologizing of the Word. New York, USA: Routledge.
Parkhurst, H. (1927). Education on the Dalton Plan. London, UK: G. Bell and Sons.
Roediger III, H. R., and Marsh, E. J. (2005). The Positive and Negative Consequences of Multiple-Choice Testing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 5, 1155-1159.
Sadler, P. M., & Good, E. (2006). The Impact of Self- and Peer-Grading on Student Learning. Educational Assessment, 11 (1), 1-31
Vial, J. (1982). Histoire et actualité des méthodes pédagogiques (Paris, France: ESF).
Washburne, C., Marland Jr., S. P. (1963). Winnetka: the history and significance of an educational experiment. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., USA: Prentice-Hall.
