Clio Wired (History 696)

I feel there are some very real benefits to a digital classroom as long as we can survive the technology is working properly. At its best though there is know denying that digital mediums provide greater accessibility of research and sources, which probably results in a greater efficiency in problem solving by reducing what Pace referred to (Paragraph 46) as reinventing pedagogical wheels. Digital assets are constantly expanding, and many of these are very worthwhile. As we discussed in class, the electronic stage provides greater opportunity for collaborative learning; when you combine the individual’s pride with their own contributions with the accountability/embarrassment factor the results of these team efforts is often more creative and of a higher quality than if individuals work on their own.

Through our World History Matters map assignments, most of experienced first hand the type of enthusiasm and excitement that result from on-line educational games, and the value of student engagement is certainly favors the continued use of technology. By making historical documents and syllabi available electronically, there can be greater accessibility for disabled, handicapped, the organizationally challenged, or for anyone for that matter who has a computer. I also firmly believe that people have different learning styles and that needs to be addressed within the digital classroom but often for expediency or due to lack of resources it is not considered.

But just as there are benefits in learning digitally, there are also negatives. As Professor Kelly pointed out in his article, students often have difficulty judging the quality of websites. It is easy to post misinformation and mediocre history. In a fast paced world, where information is expected to be instantaneous, answers are also expected to be immediate, and errors are bound to occur. I think the digital environment can be so focussed on products that there is little time to be inspired or to sit and ponder a problem or thesis. Also, students rely so heavily on the electronic medium that they often neglect the more traditional library sources as I can attest through my experiences as a National History Day judge. Students often neglect actual primary sources and historical evidence found in material culture because the computer makes it easy to use a 2 dimensional representation (images) in place of artifacts. While many teachers now make homework assignments and syllabi electronically, they often have limited skills to take advantage of teaching with technology. While collaborative efforts may work quite well in some situations (We live for mentoring), I have also seen historians withholding research results for the very reason that technology can make them instant celebrities in their field and they are not comfortable enough with their results to be held accountable to the international community of the Internet.

I agree with David Pace that digital teaching and learning can be both more interesting and effective and less so than more traditional methods. The general use of the Internet is still relatively new and still full of unrealized potentials and challenging in its use. I don’t believe anyone who has used either pen and paper or manual typewriter and then gone on to use a word processor can deny the advantages that technology brings to the technical production of historical information and documentation. But that same technology is a double edged sword, a mixed blessing that amounts to two steps forward and one step back. We live in a world where we are rapidly loosing our linguistic heritage and our children use instant messenger punctuation, rely on spell and grammar check, and in increasingly more cases can type 90 words a minute but barely are able to write. This while many of our seniors struggle to use E-Mail to communicate but mainly use their computers -if they have any- for Internet shopping, and not for intellectual stimulation. If Weinburg is correct in his premise that historians think differntly than the rest of the general population, than perhaps future historians will have a bright digital future. I tend to think though that it will take a lot of hard work by current members of the profession to get to that there. As the number of digitally available sources continues to grow exponentially, and accessibility and comfort level in technology usage becomes less of an issue, the main challenge in teaching will continue to be how to help students work with and analyze these readily available sources, and how to apply the knowledge in a meaningful way. I think it is useful to remember that the early computer mantra "Garbage in -garbage out" can apply both to budding historians and the digital resources they rely on. I often remind my students that the technology is only a tool; it's what you do with it that counts, particularly in terms of the quality and usefulness of the information. Electronic media can be a help or a detriment because even with intelligent data mining techniques there is still the human factor of input and at some point judgment and analysis in both using and producing quality digital assets.