Digital Migrants Summary
In Marc Prensky’s “Digital Natives, Digital Migrants, Part II: Do They Really Think Differently?”, he discusses the implications of living in a more modern or, as the author says, a “digital” world. Prensky claims that today’s students respond to a different learning process as compared with the prior generations of students. He suggests that teachers invent educational, yet fun, games in the place of old teaching methods to make the learning process more efficient and entertaining. However, this type educational practice is very unlikely to be implemented and adapted due to its overall absurdity. Since today’s generation grew up being surrounded by advanced technology, they have been accustomed to a much more convenient life unlike the prior generations of students. According to Prensky, teachers need to be “Digital Immigrants” in order
…show more content…
to better understand the “Digital Natives”. When they have understood the natives, they can begin to develop ways to make teaching more entertaining. An example of this, as mentioned in the article, is digital game-based learning or DGLB. Although some might argue that games cannot instill intellectual information, “a majority of people believe that games are engaging, that they can be effective, and that they have a place in learning” (Eck, 2006, p. 2). However, it is incontestable that professional game development requires a complicated process, and therefore is not an easy task. The cooperation of programmers and artists will be needed in order to make everything possible. Yet even with this, it will still take about two years before they can produce a single game (Eck, 2006). Although there may be no time limit for progression, there is however a budget constraint. First, we need to ask: Will schools be willing to take the risk of spending for a project that has the tendency to be unsuccessful? Prensky has overlooked in his article the fact that small schools, not to mention public schools, will not be able to afford to completely change their educational practices. Before schools can finally afford this, a new invention will probably be out, and another one soon after. It will take too much time and resources for them to cope up with the rapid progression of technology. In 2006, the University of the Philippines had a three hundred percent increase in their tuition fee. Also, just recently, the university received a budget cut of 1.43 billion pesos. Many people contested to these acts of the government. It is truly absurd for any school to exceed a hundred percent increase, let alone trice as much. Considering the fact that UP is a state university, the government should be making education more accessible for the students, and not the other way around. With the government’s lack of prioritization for education, how do we expect them to support DGBL? In addition to that, shifting completely to DGBL will include the purchase of several new computers and other gadgets, which will most probably result to an increase of tuition fees. It is important to take note how parents will react to this, considering that they are also part of the prior generations who did not need this kind of technology in learning. Since I am also one of the Digital Natives, I can very much relate to what Prensky is trying to say. There are several times wherein my mother mistakes my computer usage for leisure. Every time I explain that most of my teachers send assignments or give instructions online, she becomes skeptical. This skepticism will immediately be followed by an explanation on how things were not like that during her time, or how unprofessional teachers are starting to become. However, evidences like this are only contributing to the fact that some people from the prior generations may not be completely in favor of the DGLB, so there will be a small probability that they are to support it. Even if we set aside all these technical factors, shifting completely to DGBL will still sound completely absurd. If this educational practice where students play games in order to learn were to be implemented, would there still be a need for children to go to school? It is important to take note that “a balance between the needs of the curriculum and the structure of the game must be achieved to avoid either compromising the learning outcomes or forcing a game to work in a way for which it is not suited” (Eck, 2006, p.10). With the proposition of DGBL, some might assume that since “significant” lessons could be learned through games, there would be no need for educators, leaving the idea of secondary education and college to completely depreciate. Although it is believed that the Digital Natives have already won the battle, the issue still remains to be left unaddressed up until the present. Should we just wait until the generation of Digital Immigrants becomes completely obsolete? It sounds impossible, since there will always be people left behind; people who cannot cope up with technology’s rapid progression. If left unresolved, the struggle of teachers to educate students who have an entirely new language will result to ineffective learning. Students will go through the daily routine of attending classes, without completely understanding the lessons, because the educators’ teaching methods failed to capture their attention. They will fail to find the appreciation for school. They may start to think that learning is a bore, when it is in fact one of the greatest things a man could ever experience. As I always say and believe, it all depends on who the teacher is. For example, when I was in my fourth year of high school, I really admired my math teacher. He was a really good teacher. He made sure everyone in class was learning, but at the same time enjoying. He made us appreciate the subject in a way we would never forget. For a time, I loved the math, but when I reached college, I started to dread it. I believe the reason for this is because my current professor doesn’t make class as interesting as my high school teacher did. What I am saying here is that there is no need to completely shift to DGLB, since this is not the only way to catch students’ attention. Some might even respond better to interactive and interpersonal teaching methods. According to Eck (2006), “it is certainly possible for modern game design to cross multiple disciplines (art, English, mathematics, psychology), but not all teachers have the skill sets needed for game design” (p. 6). I am not saying that I am against progression. What I am saying is that for every decision that needs to be made, it is important to think of its implications. It is not an issue of being afraid to take on change, but rather a matter of weighing the consequences; of questioning whether the results are worth the risks. It is true that we should make the best out of what technology is offering us. After all, it is designed to aid us with life, whether that be with simple chores, or with relevant problems. However, we have to be constantly reminded not be too dependent on it. An example is when we do research papers. We may rely on the internet to give us full access to quality information, but we still have to do our part. To put it simply, my sentiments are the same with the famous Albert Einstein’s. He said, “I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots.”
REFERENCES
Eck, R.
V. (2006). Digital game-based learning: It 's not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 1-16. Retrieved from http://edergbl.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/47991237/digital%20game%20based%20learning%202006.pdf
Appendix 1
“A majority of people believe that games are engaging, that they can be effective, and that they have a place in learning.”
“If we continue to preach only that games can be effective, we run the risk of creating the impression that all games are good for all learners and for all learning outcomes, which is categorically not the case.”
Eck (2006) p. 2 “Professional game development takes one to two years and involves teams of programmers and artists.” “It is certainly possible for modern game design to cross multiple disciplines (art, English, mathematics, psychology), but not all teachers have the skill sets needed for game design, not all teach in areas that allow for good content, not all can devote the time needed to implement this type of DGBL, and many teach within the traditional institutional structure, which does not easily allow for interdisciplinarity.”
Eck (2006) p.
6
“A balance between the needs of the curriculum and the structure of the game must be achieved to avoid either compromising the learning outcomes or forcing a game to work in a way for which it is not suited.
Eck (2006) p. 10
Appendix 2 Source 1: R. V. Eck (2006) Digital game-based learning: It 's not just the digital natives who are restless Eck is the Associate Professor at the University of North Dakota. Since 2004, he has been the graduate director of the Instructional Design & Technology graduate program. He started his study on games, and finished a dissertation in 1999. Currently, he has been teaching a graduate course in games and learning for 13 years already. In addition to that, more than 500 authors of different scholarly discourses (ex. Clark & Mayer (2011), Dalgarno & Lee (2010), et al.) have also cited his article on Digital Game-Based Learning as a major source.
to better understand the “Digital Natives”. When they have understood the natives, they can begin to develop ways to make teaching more entertaining. An example of this, as mentioned in the article, is digital game-based learning or DGLB. Although some might argue that games cannot instill intellectual information, “a majority of people believe that games are engaging, that they can be effective, and that they have a place in learning” (Eck, 2006, p. 2). However, it is incontestable that professional game development requires a complicated process, and therefore is not an easy task. The cooperation of programmers and artists will be needed in order to make everything possible. Yet even with this, it will still take about two years before they can produce a single game (Eck, 2006). Although there may be no time limit for progression, there is however a budget constraint. First, we need to ask: Will schools be willing to take the risk of spending for a project that has the tendency to be unsuccessful? Prensky has overlooked in his article the fact that small schools, not to mention public schools, will not be able to afford to completely change their educational practices. Before schools can finally afford this, a new invention will probably be out, and another one soon after. It will take too much time and resources for them to cope up with the rapid progression of technology. In 2006, the University of the Philippines had a three hundred percent increase in their tuition fee. Also, just recently, the university received a budget cut of 1.43 billion pesos. Many people contested to these acts of the government. It is truly absurd for any school to exceed a hundred percent increase, let alone trice as much. Considering the fact that UP is a state university, the government should be making education more accessible for the students, and not the other way around. With the government’s lack of prioritization for education, how do we expect them to support DGBL? In addition to that, shifting completely to DGBL will include the purchase of several new computers and other gadgets, which will most probably result to an increase of tuition fees. It is important to take note how parents will react to this, considering that they are also part of the prior generations who did not need this kind of technology in learning. Since I am also one of the Digital Natives, I can very much relate to what Prensky is trying to say. There are several times wherein my mother mistakes my computer usage for leisure. Every time I explain that most of my teachers send assignments or give instructions online, she becomes skeptical. This skepticism will immediately be followed by an explanation on how things were not like that during her time, or how unprofessional teachers are starting to become. However, evidences like this are only contributing to the fact that some people from the prior generations may not be completely in favor of the DGLB, so there will be a small probability that they are to support it. Even if we set aside all these technical factors, shifting completely to DGBL will still sound completely absurd. If this educational practice where students play games in order to learn were to be implemented, would there still be a need for children to go to school? It is important to take note that “a balance between the needs of the curriculum and the structure of the game must be achieved to avoid either compromising the learning outcomes or forcing a game to work in a way for which it is not suited” (Eck, 2006, p.10). With the proposition of DGBL, some might assume that since “significant” lessons could be learned through games, there would be no need for educators, leaving the idea of secondary education and college to completely depreciate. Although it is believed that the Digital Natives have already won the battle, the issue still remains to be left unaddressed up until the present. Should we just wait until the generation of Digital Immigrants becomes completely obsolete? It sounds impossible, since there will always be people left behind; people who cannot cope up with technology’s rapid progression. If left unresolved, the struggle of teachers to educate students who have an entirely new language will result to ineffective learning. Students will go through the daily routine of attending classes, without completely understanding the lessons, because the educators’ teaching methods failed to capture their attention. They will fail to find the appreciation for school. They may start to think that learning is a bore, when it is in fact one of the greatest things a man could ever experience. As I always say and believe, it all depends on who the teacher is. For example, when I was in my fourth year of high school, I really admired my math teacher. He was a really good teacher. He made sure everyone in class was learning, but at the same time enjoying. He made us appreciate the subject in a way we would never forget. For a time, I loved the math, but when I reached college, I started to dread it. I believe the reason for this is because my current professor doesn’t make class as interesting as my high school teacher did. What I am saying here is that there is no need to completely shift to DGLB, since this is not the only way to catch students’ attention. Some might even respond better to interactive and interpersonal teaching methods. According to Eck (2006), “it is certainly possible for modern game design to cross multiple disciplines (art, English, mathematics, psychology), but not all teachers have the skill sets needed for game design” (p. 6). I am not saying that I am against progression. What I am saying is that for every decision that needs to be made, it is important to think of its implications. It is not an issue of being afraid to take on change, but rather a matter of weighing the consequences; of questioning whether the results are worth the risks. It is true that we should make the best out of what technology is offering us. After all, it is designed to aid us with life, whether that be with simple chores, or with relevant problems. However, we have to be constantly reminded not be too dependent on it. An example is when we do research papers. We may rely on the internet to give us full access to quality information, but we still have to do our part. To put it simply, my sentiments are the same with the famous Albert Einstein’s. He said, “I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots.”
REFERENCES
Eck, R.
V. (2006). Digital game-based learning: It 's not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 1-16. Retrieved from http://edergbl.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/47991237/digital%20game%20based%20learning%202006.pdf
Appendix 1
“A majority of people believe that games are engaging, that they can be effective, and that they have a place in learning.”
“If we continue to preach only that games can be effective, we run the risk of creating the impression that all games are good for all learners and for all learning outcomes, which is categorically not the case.”
Eck (2006) p. 2 “Professional game development takes one to two years and involves teams of programmers and artists.” “It is certainly possible for modern game design to cross multiple disciplines (art, English, mathematics, psychology), but not all teachers have the skill sets needed for game design, not all teach in areas that allow for good content, not all can devote the time needed to implement this type of DGBL, and many teach within the traditional institutional structure, which does not easily allow for interdisciplinarity.”
Eck (2006) p.
6
“A balance between the needs of the curriculum and the structure of the game must be achieved to avoid either compromising the learning outcomes or forcing a game to work in a way for which it is not suited.
Eck (2006) p. 10
Appendix 2 Source 1: R. V. Eck (2006) Digital game-based learning: It 's not just the digital natives who are restless Eck is the Associate Professor at the University of North Dakota. Since 2004, he has been the graduate director of the Instructional Design & Technology graduate program. He started his study on games, and finished a dissertation in 1999. Currently, he has been teaching a graduate course in games and learning for 13 years already. In addition to that, more than 500 authors of different scholarly discourses (ex. Clark & Mayer (2011), Dalgarno & Lee (2010), et al.) have also cited his article on Digital Game-Based Learning as a major source.