ICT Critique

 The decision to employ ICT in any classroom bears ethical, intellectual, social and legal 

responsibilities. A teacher must only undertake this duty when he or she may understand, 

address and define the relationship between digital technology and improved learning. We 

must enforce that, “the legitimacy of what comes across the internet needs to be observed 

with vigilance,” (Ottawa, 2003) and ensure that our students are not only creators and 

participants of this digital network, but are also discriminators of Media Literacy.  

 “To ignore...the staggering rate on innovation in ICT would be to fall behind.” (Yelland, 

2001) However, research by MD’s such as Norman Doidge, and journalists such as Gary Small, 

reiterate that digital networking, “is not only changing the way we live...it is profoundly 

altering our brains.” (Small & Vorgan, 2008) Whilst digital technologies and high school 

education are no longer two mutually exclusive concepts, their relationship and integration 

must be monitored with vigilance. To deny the potential pitfalls that ICT could unveil in 

development of the curriculum, facilitating a students learning potential or even in determining 

a students distinction between media and reality would be naive. The benefits of ICT however 

demonstrate, “deployment of innovative thinking, delivering personalised learning.” (Cocentra, 

2011) So at what point may we determine that ICT will influence the curriculum in a manner 

that will further engage and perpetuate learning in students without creating a, “digital 

divide” (Poore, 2011) and consequently an educational divide amongst students, schools, 

states and countries. 

 “The Australian Curriculum identify the importance of technology in school music 

education.” (Southcott & Crawford, 2011, pp 1) Currently the presence of ICT in a nation-wide 

music curriculum is two fold; including software as , “tool to support instruction,” and as a, 

“platform for collaborative and creative learning.” (Southcott & Crawford, 2011, pp 1) Whilst 

ICT and Music have conversed and influenced each other evolution for nearly 3 decades, the 

exponential increase in technology use in the twenty-first century has made their relationship 

problematic in my opinion. Primarily ICT functioned as a supporting tool to music skills, for 

example in music notation software which allowed for mass produced, universal and standard 

music composition, or recording software. The current array of technology based resources 

such as, “hardware interfaces, electronic keyboards, MIDI interfaces, multitrack recorder, 

iPods,” (Southcott & Crawford, 2011, pp 1) create new platforms from which students may 

create, share and perform in new dimensions, however the threaten to devalue and even 

destroy the fundamentals upon which music learning was born. A year 6 Music exam from 

Kingsford-Smith School in the ACT asked its students, “what is sound the result of?” (Williams, 

2011) to which the correct answer was, “vibrations in the air.” Another question asked, “What 

creates tone colour?” to which one would respond, “the way the instrument is played and what 

the instrument is made of.” (Williams, 2011) However in a curriculum that calls on its students 

to create a pop song on Garage Band and burn it to disc to play for the class, how could we 

even expect our students to understand the most fundamental knowledge of what music 

actually is? A music curriculum that is overrun by Information and Computer technologies will 

create a sector of students that are literate in programming, designing and broadcasting 

music, but lack the theoretical and philosophical basis of Music, the information that made 

music a credible subject in the humanities to begin with. The Year 8 syllabus for this same 

school aspires for a unit outcome that questions, “Global Music, what makes our music 

Australian?” Likewise, Year 7 is told to ponder, “How does music affect change?”(Williams, 

2011) Music is essentially a timeless, universal and social medium which is being bastardized 

by the expectations to be translated into and dominated by digital mediums. On the other 

hand, author Philip Alperson suggests that, the philosophy of music consists in the sustained, 

systematic and critical examination of our beliefs about the nature and function of 

music...concerning the production, nature of musical works, the appreciation and evaluation of 

music and the status of music as a human activity.” (Alperson, 1987) If this is the case, then 

ICT in the music curriculum would be the optimum facilitator to perpetuate the absolute 

essence of what is music. 

 A formidable tension in education assessment, is Process Vs Knowledge. The delicate 

balance between these two categories determines how we assess a students  progress and 

thus their aptitude. As ICT infiltrates school curricula, the tension becomes more prominent, as 

the shift has occurred in evaluating a students factual knowledge to evaluating their 

“procedural knowledge.” (Anderson, 1983) This transition in how we determine our students’ 

overall intellectual progress directly influences how the music syllabus is constructed, allowing 

us to focus on the, “process rather than the product.” This concept is concisely illustrated in 

the ANU MEP Music Curriculum drafted in 2011. 

 The Music Education Program reinvigorates, “age-old, socio-musical enculturation 

processes.” It draws on the fact that music is a human and social activity and that, “musical 

impulse is innate and compulsive.” (ANU, 2011, pp 2) Rather than focusing on musical 

achievement as an intellectual endeavour, its primary goal is peer-to-peer music making, 

where the students are facilitators , “who can encourage music making in others” (pp 2), and 

thus influencing a wider community. Whilst this curriculum is exempt from ICT, one feature of 

this new paradigm, “The three I’s”, encourages the same process-based approach to the music 

curriculum as ICT does. The shift from the 3 P’s to the 3 I’s mirrors the shift that ICT has on 

the music curriculum, from assessment of knowledge to the assessment of process. 

 “The three P’s” of traditional music education was based on principles of Practice, 

Performance, and Perfection. Progress is, “sequential requiring regular practice...directed 

towards exhibition of skills...increasing skill development and excellence.” (pp 2) Primary 

school teacher Bob Crisp recalls that these were the pressures he faced in his school 

experience. The focus on an, “end product” (Crisp, 2011) was a deterrent from the subject and 

added to his already palpable, performance pressures. “The three I’s” of the MEP approach 

encourage Involvement, Intent and Identity. Like the potential, “personalized learning 

experience,” (Ferguson, 2001, pp 7) proposed in the use of ICT, this principle enforces, 

“voluntary engagement...encouraging shared social music making...individual music 

persona.” (ANU, pp 2) Whilst this is an, “over-arching fundamental program” (pp 3) it is a 

basic philosophy of musicianship that grounds Music as a subject in its fundamental social and 

human roots, whilst catering to and encouraging individual learning styles. 

 It is impossible to deny the array of technology-based musical activities available 

through ICT. The new digital opportunities for collaboration, such as reading, composing, 

theorizing and analyzing music, increases students’ exposure to more facets of Music. Rather 

than researching, composing for or performing on conventional instruments, technology allows 

us to utilize compositional software, record live music, synthesize music, spin/mix/remix 

music, play music off sound systems instead of performing live, webcams, youtube, video 

recording, MP3 uploads, the list goes on. Not only does this “soup” (Woolsey, 2010) of learning 

opportunities cater to individual learning styles and demands, but it also provokes and 

encourages peer collaboration as well as peer-to-peer learning. (Boud, 2001) Potentially 

conversly, software such as IMTCP, (Manzo & Dammers, 2010) demonstrate how multimedia 

can revolutionize music theory and musicological research. As mentioned previously, this 

digital understanding of music changes the nature of how students will understand what music, 

(i.e. sound) essentially is. What is unique and fascinating about the potential “digital 

divide” (Poore, 2011) that could surface as a result of music education becoming digital, is that 

rather than being problematic, it would further perpetuate the notion that music is a reflection 

of, and is comprised of its social, economic, political and historical context. It is, “more or less, 

straightforward reflections of the society and culture in which they were produced.” (Wainman, 

2009) 

 “To ignore...the staggering rate on innovation in ICT would be to fall behind.” (Yelland, 

2001) ICT has the ability to revolutionize music education by personalizing the learning 

experience and offering an abundance of new, engaging and exciting mediums through which a 

student may learn. It is the duty of the teacher however, to recognize the potentially 

catastrophic effects that overrunning the Music curriculum with ICT would have on the greater 

philosophical possibilities that music beckons. “Music affects change” (Walker, 2007), “Music 

affects people,” (Sherman, 2011) and “Music affects the mind.” (O’Donnell, 1999) To forget the  

social and physiological origins of Music in an attempt to keep up with the “digital 

revolution” (Poore, 2011) would be to bastardize and neglect what music fundamentally is. 

Bibliography: 

O'Donnell, L. (1999). Music and the brain. Available: http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n15/ 

mente/musica.html. Last accessed 30th April 2011. 

Yelland, N. (2001). Teaching and learning with information and communication technologies 

(ICT) for numeracy in the early childhood and primary years of schooling. Available: http:// 

www.dest.gov.au/archive/research/fellowship/docs/Nicola_Yelland/Yelland_report.pdf. Last 

accessed 30th April 2011. 

Sherman, M. (2011). How does music affect people. Available: http://www.catalogs.com/info/ 

books-music-dvd/how-does-music-affect-people.html. Last accessed 30th April 2011. 

Poore, M. (Personal communication, March 10th 2011) 

Walker, R (2007). Music Education: Cultural values, social change and innovation. Illinois: 

Charles C Thomas. (p18-43.) 

Boud, D (2001). Peer learning in higher education. London: Kogan. 

Prof. V.J. Manzo, Dr. Rick Dammers . (2010). http://www.imtcp.org. In IMTCP. Last accessed 

April 10th 2011. 

Katrina Woolsey. (2005). New Media Literacies: A Language Revolution. http:// 

archive.nmc.org/summit/Language_Revolution.pdf. Last accessed April 15th 2011 

Australian National University, (2011). Music Education Program: Draft Curriculum. (Catagory 

3), Australian National University 

Crisp, R. (Personal Communication, April 2011) 

Williams, R. (Personal Communication, April 2nd 2011) 

Ferguson, D (2001). Designing personalized learning for every student. (pp 1-10) ASCD 

publications: Unites States of America 

Anderson, J.R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, (pp 320 - 323) MA: Harvard 

University Press.

Alperson, P (1987). What is Music? An introduction to the philosophy of music. Pennsylvania: 

Haven Publications. (pp i-x.) 

Ottawa Council meeting. 2003. The role of ICT in learning. http://www.icponline.org/ 

index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=86%3Athe-role-of-ict-in- 

learning&catid=27%3Aeducation&Itemid=47&showall=1, Last accessed March 5th 2011 

Small, G, Vorgan, G. (October 2008). Your iBrain: How technology changes the way we Think. 

In Scientific American. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=your-ibrain. Last 

accessed 10th April 2011, 

Cocentra. (2011). Transforming learning. Available: http://www.cocentra.com/cocentra/ 

aboutcocentra/. Last accessed 30th April 2011 

Southcott & Crawford. (2011). The intersections of curriculum development: Music, ICT and 

Australian music education . Australasian Journal of Educational Technology . 1 (1), 122-136. 

Wainman, V (2009) The reflection of society in music. http://plattsburgh309.blogspot.com/ 

2009/10/reflection-of-society-in-music.html. Last accessed 30th April 2011

Education Foundations Poster

Fleur's Top Ten Teaching Tips:

PPLE Reflection

PPLE Reflection

Case study of Madeline Foster

Madeline Foster is an exemplary Year 10 student at a private girls college in Sydney. Despite being diagnosed with Glandular fever, and subsequently chronic fatigue in 2010, her classroom and assessment grades have remained above average. 

Whilst Madeline is a formidable and proactive participant in the school’s music program, a gap in her academic transcript was discerned when a college application that she submitted in New York was rejected on the basis of, “subpar grades in Religious studies.” (Foster, 2011) As this standard of work was contained to the one subject, an investigation was carried out to identify if this was possibly the result of her frequent absences from school and consequently the limited interaction with her teachers, from tension in the classroom environment or perhaps stemming from potential intellectual toil regarding the course content. 

In experiencing Madeline’s educational journey as her vocal tutor, and reflecting on her experience throughout this investigation, I was provoked to reflect upon my own philosophy as a pre-service teacher, the identity I hope to assume as a music teacher, and the classroom environment I aspire to create in order to promote positive, motivational and engaged learning. A classroom which confirms that, “communities of the mind are collections of individuals who are bonded together by natural will and to a set of shared ideal.” (Sergiovanni)

Legally, ethically, logically and philosophically, Madeline’s situation has impacted on my evolving thinking and understanding of the questions in the Nine provocations, but arouses some very demanding and problematic concepts with regards to four provocations in particular.

What will my students want and need from me?

In 1974 Malcolm Knowles suggested that in order to cater to students’ individual needs, we must adopt a three-fold approach that seeks to teach the students as if they were adults rather than children. Andragogy over Pedagogy. (Knowles, 1974) This includes “self-directed learning, problem-centred learning as opposed to content based learning, and finally co-operation rather than supervision”. (Knowles 1974) Not only do these techniques address personal learning styles exclusive of the subject matter, they also enforce independent learning of content material that the students need to know. In Madeline’s case, her days at school should not be approached by teaching, “declarative knowledge” but rather, “procedural knowledge,” (Goodyear 1991). By “Mapping out subject matter” and facilitating her problem-solving skills as she approaches it, Madeline is not only absorbing content material at her own pace, but also in a learning style that she herself has chosen.

What kind of teacher do I want to be?

(Lanier & Little, 1986) propose that a teachers background, philosophy of teaching and ideas about themselves as teachers are what construct their methods of teaching. Peter Goodyear terms the job of a teacher as, “multidimensional”, in which we face numerous demands and have to, “make decisions which are compromises among various costs and benefits.” (Goodyear 1991) Whilst my background as a student never entailed a situation similar to Madeline’s, it prompts me to question my own philosophy as a teacher. What elements of the profession do I consider valuable and valid, and how would I apply this philosophy in Madeline’s context.

My philosophy as a teacher has evolved and has been inspired and formulated based upon my school and university career. Particular to this course we tend to reminisce about that special teacher or two that struck a chord (pardon the pun) in our education, and as a result had a profound effect on our learning. I encapsulate two main philosophies as a music teacher that I feel have flourished as a result of the regimented lifestyle of the high school I attended, those teachers that impacted my learning profoundly, and my experience of teaching, which included Madeline as a student.

A teacher that demonstrates humane qualities; humility, humor and availability, are the most relatable in my opinion. A teacher should be approachable, not only about their subject matter, but about any issues a high-school student may be facing. In discussion with a dutch Art history teacher, (Van Den Berg, 2011) I came to the realization that in the time frame of a lesson, you do not have time to contemplate the syllabus or your subject matter, this should already be innate. “From the moment you step into that classroom, its all about behavior management.” A teacher that can control their classroom, no matter what demography of students, is one that can relate to them because they are not afraid to be personable. If Madeline’s time is already restricted, it becomes even more imperative that she can rely on her teachers for moral, as well as academic, guidance. 

My second main belief as a music teacher, is that a profound and solid theoretical understanding of fundamental musical concepts and terminology must be instilled. This was the case of my music learning, and I feel it gave me an incalculable understanding and appreciation of music culture and musical styles. In order to understand the effect music has on individuals and on a grander scale, society, we must have this basic music knowledge ingrained. Lanier & Little’s ideal mentioned previously, is not achieved through didactic pedagogy or rote learning. Rather a student-centred learning approach to musical tasks encourages students to problem solve and develop “deep understanding” as well as “significance...deep knowledge” (QTE, 2003), and in doing so their learning is process-based rather than knowledge-based. For Madeline, it is rare that we can assess the process by which she is learning in her home environment, we can only formally assess her knowledge at school. Therefore it is crucial that we instill solid foundations in her, “learner-based learning.” (Anderson, 1983)

Am I teaching a student or a subject?

Throughout my limited on-the-job practical experience I have encountered a Year 8 music class that has demonstrated a variety of behavioral problems. The majority of the student body comes from a low socio-economic background and often have life stories that, “will just make you cry.” (Wentworth, 2011) I discussed with the teacher, her tactics when it came to controlling this class, to which she responded that there was no hope of carrying out structured lesson plans, “just to have the kids stay within the walls of the classroom is a major breakthrough.” (Wentworth, 2011) This is a prime example where teaching a subject isn’t even an option. Characteristics of a music class such as keyboards, manuscript and videoclips serve as mere distractions to the students. In this scenario what a ‘music teacher’ is ultimately teaching her students is discipline and respect. Music is simply the medium through which they do this. From this experience i realized, in this age group, I will rarely ever be teaching a subject. Especially amidst the digital revolution that is enveloping the education system, specific course content and subject matter is obselete. Information and knowledge is something we now have an abundance of thanks to Web 2.0. What students lack, is the ability to learn. Teaching a student to learn means harnessing and facilitating their unique learning style, that is, teaching the student. Kenneth Kiewra's paper ‘How teachers can teach their students to learn,’ (Kiewra, 2010) suggests that, 'Classroom teachers can help students learn.’ Whilst students may harbor the techniques to rote learn information, they lack the ‘deep understanding’ and ‘deep knowledge’ (QTE, 2003) of course material, rendering them, deficient learners. He names the duty of the teacher to be a, 'good strategy instructor' (pp 8) in order to produce an efficient learner. Considering that Madeline spends a significant portion of her education learning independently, “learning to learn” (pp 1) would be a valuable tool to teach the student in order to teach themselves the subject.

To what extent is this an intellectual pursuit?

Madeline has a distinctive learning style that is musically and linguistically orientated, and it would be foolish not to embrace this. Rather than perpetuating a content-focused approach, as her Religion teacher does, I would attempt a “learner-centered”(Anderson 1983) approach to her education. Her limited face-to-face time makes it all the more pronounced that she must be equipped with the knowledge that she needs for her assessments, but more importantly that she is equipped with the skills that enable her to be an efficient and independent learner. As suggested by M Harrington, “knowing where the students are and where they want to go,” (Harrington, 2007) is fundamental in establishing their own goals when studying independently. Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom, 1956) illustrates that the highest level of the learning hierarchy is to create. That is asking a student to go beyond evaluating, engaging with and analyzing a piece of information, and to create more. A rare opportunity presents itself in Madeline, in which her strongest attribute is her innate and natural ability to create. As her teacher I would embrace and encourage this aspect of her learning style in order to motivate her in her problematic subjects, and hopefully inspire her to engage with her course material even more so when studying independently.

Bibliography:

Anderson, J.R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, (pp 320 - 323) MA: Harvard University Press.

Bloom, BS. (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the classification of educational goals: Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, New York: McKay

Foster M, (personal communication), April 15th 2011

Goodyear, P. (Ed.) (1991). Teaching knowledge and intelligent tutoring. (pp 260-275) Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Harrington MR, (2007) Managing student Diversity, (Retrieved April 17th 2011) http://www.englishaustralia.com.au/index.cgi?E=hcatfuncs&X=getdoc&exp=6&Lev1=pub_c08_07&Lev2=c07_harring

Jairam,D., Kiewra,K (2010) Helping Students Soar to Success on Computers: An investigation of the SOAR Study Method of Computer-Based Learning. Journal Of Educational Psychology Vol.102,(3), pp.601-614

Knowles MS, (1974) Human resource development in OD. Public Administration Review. (pp 115-123)

Lanier, J., & Little, J. (1986). Research on teacher education, Handbook of research on teaching (pp 168-191) Macmillan. New York

NSW Department of education, (2003), Quality Teaching elements, (retrieved March 25th 2011), http://www.newcastle.edu.au/Resources/Schools/Education/Pedagogy/2006/SummaryofQuality-JanPoona.pdf

Poore, M. (Personal communication, March 10th 2011)

Pederson, S. (2003). Motivational orientation in a problem-based learning environment. Journal of interactive learning research. pp. 51-77 

Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think. (pp 1-61) Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Sewell-Smith A, (2007), Teachers and Teaching: What is happening in my classroom?, (Retrieved April 15th 2011), http://www.eqa.edu.au/site/whatshappeninginmyclassroom.html

Williams R, (personal communication), April 5th 2011

Education Foundations: Reflection 2

Two blog posts that I will be commenting on for my second set of Education Foundation reflections include;

ANNE:

http://matthewamcdonald.wordpress.com/tag/anne/

This was a really well-structured post Matt, well done! You brought up quite a few issues I didn’t even think to consider while reading Anne’s situation. In particular, your reference to her ‘essentialist’ approach to teaching as opposed to a holistic approach is the quandary I’m sure a lot of us will face in our schools. (Particularly those in an old private college) I suppose this notion would also draw on the provocation, ‘who am I accountable to?’ Coming from a similar school structure myself, I would assume the traditions, conventions and academic expectations of an old and reputable college would also influence Anne’s essentialist approach to teaching.

One aspect of this situation that was really well articulated in this blog was the provocation, ‘what kind of teacher do I want to be?’ And how much of our teaching philosophy is influenced by our own school careers. Upon reflection of my own teaching philosophy, I can very easily decipher characteristics that I have appropriated from teachers that shaped my high school experience. As well as this, I have adopted the highly regimented assessment methodology instilled at my school. Finally, whilst I don’t necessarily agree with the concept, the ‘teacher-centred’ (Anderson 1983) learning style that was employed has been the style of teaching that I have instinctively adopted.

Considering that Anne’s student and teaching experience has all come from the same social and educational context, can we assume that her teaching philosophy is sufficiently developed? Whilst she has, ‘Developed a reputation as a great teacher,’ and is clearly facilitating their academic learning career enough, is Anne really giving her students what they need?

Australia in particular offers numerous travel grants and scholarships for teachers to travel abroad in order to, “gain insights about different peoples and cultures…This invariably helps students and schools who are benefited by the richness of their experiences.” (Buzzle.com, 2010) In fact, “Experience itself is the oldest teacher…no human can escape experience.” (Tal, 2010)

In this situation I believe that not only would an overseas endeavor be beneficial for Anne to forge an evolving teaching philosophy, but it is a necessity in order for her to become a more cultivated and educated educator.

References:

Tal, (January 2010), Experience is the best teacher, (Retrieved April 17th 2011)http://www.essayforum.com/writing-feedback-3/essay-experience-best-teacher-feedback-please-15249/#msg72084

Pandey K, (December 2010), Travel grants for teachers, (Retrieved April 17th 2011),http://www.buzzle.com/articles/travel-grants-for-teachers.html

Anderson, J.R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, (pp 320 – 323) MA: Harvard University Press.

WAYNE:

http://gdestellalee.tumblr.com/tagged/ed%20foundation


Ella, well done on a very pensive and personal blog. I think it's amazing how each of us seem to have that one teacher that revolutionized out perspectives of education. For you it was a chemistry teacher, for me it was a violin teacher. Needless to say its amazing how someone can shape your education without realizing it!


There was one concept in your reflection that I found particularly interesting, mostly because I am still unsure of my position on it. You mention that, "the role... is not to force all students to engage with the teacher, but rather to learning," which to me would indicate that discovering a students 'niche' within a subject is more effective than trying to engage them on a personal level. Does this mean that you are in fact teaching the subject rather than the students, an idea that you mentioned would be, "impossible."


I was intrigued by this notion however, because like you, I was adamant that the most successful behavior management technique and route for academic success in a classroom would be to address a students personal learning style rather than enforcing factual information. If the role of the contemporary teacher is in fact as a facilitator to ones learning, then surely one would assume that, "knowing where the students are and where they want to go," would be key to classroom success. (Harrington, 2007)


In 1974 Malcolm Knowles suggested that in order to, "manage student diversity" and cater to individual needs, (i.e. teach the student rather than the subject) we must adopt a three-fold approach that seeks to teach the students as if they were adults rather than children. Andragogy over Pedagogy. This includes self directed learning, problem-centred learning as opposed to content based learning, and finally co-operation rather than supervision. (Knowles, 1974) Whilst these techniques address personal learning styles exclusive of the subject matter, they also enforce independent learning of content material that the students need to know.


Perhaps the tension between the importance of student needs and subject requirements are obsolete, and the two in fact are not mutually exclusive.


References:


Harrington MR, (2007) Managing student Diversity, (Retrieved April 17th 2011) http://www.englishaustralia.com.au/index.cgi?E=hcatfuncs&X=getdoc&exp=6&Lev1=pub_c08_07&Lev2=c07_harring


Knowles MS, (1974) Human resource development in OD. Public Administration Review. (pp 115-123)