By Martin Horejsi
The simplest distinction that separates traditional teaching from digital teaching is found in the presence or absence of molecules.
Digital components—documents, pictures, audio, or video—exist entirely as ones and zeros. Physical components, on the other hand, include such things as dyes soaked into compressed wood pulp, ridges carved on spinning vinyl disks, or celluloid film chemically altered to affect transparency. Although digital data can be stored on many types of media, its major advantage is that it can be copied an infinite number of times with absolutely no degradation of quality.
When compared to molecular versions, the digital data presents some challenges. For instance, consider primary sources. Is there such a thing as a primary-source digital artifact? I once met the “Father of the Internet,” Vint Cert, who was speaking at a NASA luncheon. I asked him for his autograph and, instead of pen on paper, he signed my iPad with his finger. The result is pictured below.
Frankly, I cannot remember which of my iPads he signed, and the image produced was actually a screenshot from the iPad. The process for the screenshot included three different applications: 1) a screenshot from 2) an iBook/PDF enlarged page from the conference catalog, and 3) a PDF reader app with finger/pen annotation tool. All of these applications were used before the autograph was recaptured as a screenshot to be emailed, posted on Facebook, and turned into desktop wallpaper.
It’s one of my favorite autographs, but it also reminds me of that old story of the farmer’s favorite axe: Over the decades, the axe handle had been replaced three times, and the blade renewed twice, but according to the farmer it was the best axe ever made.
Creating and using digital objects in education does require a pedagogical shift in both products and interpretation. For instance, most traditional teaching practices dictate making paper copies of a worksheet in a one-to-one ratio of students to worksheets. The papers are then distributed to the students only to be collected for grading later.
However, when completely digital, the number of worksheets could range anywhere from one to infinity. One worksheet would represent something like an interactive web-based worksheet that the student can access, but never actually “owns” or can print (you could argue that is actually zero worksheets). An infinite number of worksheets could be represented by a digital worksheet document that can be printed, emailed, completed on-screen, or even stored in multiple ways. This would create a synchronized version accessible anywhere with almost any Internet-connected device that could even be worked on collaboratively.
So what is a teacher to do? The path of least resistance is to embrace the digital and enjoy educating in the 21st century. To begin, consider the three main aspects that make digital tools and products so effective. These are:
- The absence of molecules
- Massive archiving
- Unlimited retrievals
First, truly digital products must be 100 percent digital. If the ultimate intent of an assignment is to print it, then some of the digital potential is lost due to a molecular end product. Making a digital book that will later be printed loses all of the potential of being digital. You cannot print sound, video, 3-D motion, or interactivity, so the desired outcome may limit the ultimate power of the resource.
Second, massive archiving is the ability to have the digital products stored, allowing near-unlimited access and sharing. Examples of this include webpages, cloud storage, online digital photo albums, streaming video, and downloadable digital documents.
Third, massive retrieval is the recapture of archived digital products for inclusion in a greater overall purpose. Examples of this include embedding photos and video in blogs, collaborating within digital documents and presentations, adding photos to Google Earth data layer, and creating digital books.
By incorporating the above three considerations of digital design into the tools of education, it quickly becomes obvious that most of the limits we place on our digital teaching tools can be found in the imagination of those using them.
Dr. Martin Horejsi is associate professor of Instructional Technology and Science Education in the Phyllis J. Washington College of Education and Human Sciences at the University of Montana, Missoula. He was previously a middle and high school science teacher, and his areas of specialty include mobile technologies, collaborative applications, digital creative expression, standard and nonstandard digital assessments, wireless data collection, hybrid and blended learning environments, and innovative classroom uses of consumer technologies. Dr. Horejsi is a board member of the Northwest Council for Computer Education (NCCE), writes a column and blogs for the National Science Teachers Association called Science 2.0, and has been blogging about meteorites and space science since 2002 in his Meteorite-Times.com column titled “The Accretion Desk.”
