In the article Static and Dynamic Technologies by Leslie Moller, Static technologies are described as technologies that do little to help learners build their own knowledge and dynamic technologies allow individuals to synthesize and present responses that reflect the initiating idea (Moller, 2008). Moller gives examples of each type of technology by suggesting technologies like video casts or web pages do little in terms of allowing individuals to formulate their own knowledge, while technologies like virtual simulations and mind tools allow individuals to construct their own thinking (Moller, 2008). Although I agree with the concept that some technologies do more in terms of allowing individuals to create their own responses, I also agree that static forms of technology can be constructed in a way where the individuals can construct their own knowledge and build information. One example that Moller suggests is a static technology is a podcast. While I agree that podcasts are used primarily for listening to lectures I also feel that lectures or discussions can ask stimulating and thought provoking questions that have the learner think and internalize the information being presented. Moller also states that Web pages are static forms of technology because what you see is what you get, but there are countless times where I might have been looking for something on a website to get an understanding of a concept, but once I found the information, I was able to create a new idea. The other day I was looking for room ideas. I wanted to put built-ins in my living room. I found a lot of great looking built-ins, but none were quite right. After reviewing several, I was able to design and create my own version of built-ins that would be perfect for me.
I think that Moller really did not give enough credit to those "static" forms of technology as being useful for constructing knowledge. One thing I think we often make the mistake of is assuming that the more extravagant forms of technology always mean that they are better. Many times I find that the simpler and less extravagant, the more the mind has to work in order to make it better. We must be careful not to assume that a virtual world means that an individual is creating a more meaningful situation. In terms of today, a person participating in a virtual world is doing no more than picking backgrounds and settings from a prefabricated model and designing characters from a list of options. They are not really constructing any of those characters from original thought. Yes, it is true that you can "choose" your own path in many of the games, but again your choice is limited to what has already been programmed into the computer.
Looking for additonal information on static and dynamic technologies? I found a really great slide share
http://www.slideshare.net/Brown41/static-and-dynamic-technologies-1820009
Reference
Moller, L. (2008).
Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].
Static and Dynamic Chart
I think you are on track with your thinking about not all static activities being unproductive for the student. If every lesson we do is considered dynamic, we are missing out on the student who learns better with less interaction. I firmly believe that all students can benefit from reading for knowledge, searching a website for information, or listening to a podcast. I think the key is what they will do with that information. If the answer is nothing, that's static, but if they make meaning in some way such as a chart,or a journal, that moves it towards at least the center of the diagram.
ReplyDeleteI noticed on your organizer you have blogs as static. I think if done the right way they can be a dynamic interactive activity. Having students create a blog, and be responsible for their own content, as well as responding to other's posting can be a great dynamic tool. Just like we do here!
I do agree that some blogs can be very powerful. I have begun to read more blogs and they do provide information and provoke thought. Blogs can be dynamic. I don't know how much I agreed with the article this week. I feel that the author is into the flash of some of the newer technologies and just assumes that those technologies are more dynamic.
ReplyDelete