Teaching History in the Digital Age

(I’m sorry that this blog post is late. I’ve fallen a little behind this week, and now I have the time to get caught up.)
This week’s readings largely examine the strengths and weaknesses for using digital web-based media in the teaching and learning of history. With that in mind, the web is a fascinating tool for students and educacators alike. However, like with any source of information, one needs to know how to use it in the right manner to encourage the right way learning.

A good reminder of how the web can be used as a wonderful tool for learning is exemplified in the article: Who Killed William Robinson? Race, Justice and Settling the Land: A Historical Whodunit. In this article, written by Terry Crowley of the University of Guelph, she (possibly a he?) examines a website created by Ruth Sandwell and John Lutz that seeks to give students the tools for solving the 1868 murder of William Robinson, an African-American man who was in the process of returning to the states to see his wife and children before his untimely death. A Penelekut Indian was then tried and hanged for the murder. The website then asks students to try and solve the case based on the primary and secondary sources that are provided by the website. The students are then able to draw their own conclusions based on what they have gathered from the details of the crime. This type of research project is successful in many ways. First, the students seem very excited to take part in a project that allows them to think for themselves, rather than having somebody else dictate what they should or should not believe. Second, the project seems fun, which keeps the students focused and ready to work. Third, the assignment also raises a larger issue of imperialism and race relations in America during the mid-nineteenth century. The end result places students right at the center of the investigation and after the assignment has been completed, the students are dumbfounded as to why they cannot come up with a clearcut verdict of whodunit. This gives the students an idea of the challenge for historians who study the past, which is: The information presented to historians is often confounded and sometimes does not serve the truth. Even so, students were allowed to present thier side of the story, without the intervention of the professor. This is the beauty of studying history in a web-based environment.

Another aspect of the web, as shown through Dr. Kelly’s article For Better or Worse? The Marriage of the Web and Classroom, is that most students who surf the web try to answer questions that they have in mind, rather than what questions their professor would like them to answer. This can be quite beneficial, or detrimental, depending on how one views it. Should the students need for learning supersede the way the class ought to be taught from the professor’s viewpoint? This is, I believe, the proverbial question that we must ask our educators, and I believe this question is of great importence due to the fact that many students are now finding most of their information from the web. In a sense, students now have the ability to teach themselves. Should this be a concern among educators? My answer is both “yes” and “no.” I completely agree with Dr. Kelly when he draws this conclusion: “A second positive finding is that exploring on the web does seem to encourage original thinking about the past.” This is a very noteworthy finding for the reason that it is my belief that most students do develop what we call “original thinking” about the past, but how do students distinguish between the good, bad and the ugly ways of using the web? This is a drawback for learning from a web-based environment, and one that educators should be particularly aware of.

Are we giving students much more credit than they deserve? Is the web an averse tool that should be locked away in a shed somewhere in rural Kansas? No, but if we don’t teach our students how to use the web, then Kansas may not seem like such a bad idea.