Neil Postman uses the term “pedagogical peace” in his book, Technopoly. This term nicely describes one of my main teaching aspirations which is to provide my students with a harmonious balance between the many things they need in order to succeed. This is particularly complex in the Yukon as teachers are expected to use the digital technology provided to them while also carefully considering the way in which this technology contributes to, or rather hinders, our goals to decolonize education and allow our students to engage in relevant curricula and content. The need for this pedagogical peace is brought to light in many of the critical perspectives we have explored over the past two weeks of EDTC300. My next blog post will focus on the part that First Nations knowledge and traditions play in this pedagogical peace, while this post looks at educational technology in a broader sense. 

In 1992 Postman wrote that “it is a mistake to suppose that any technological innovation has a one-sided effect” (pg. 4). 27 years later, as we live in a society with such a strong presence of digital and communication technologies, this sentiment is incredibly important for teachers to know and understand. While these kinds of technologies can be hugely beneficial in increasing student engagement and opening up a world of new possibilities for teaching and learning, we must not only think about what is being given. We must also ask ourselves what the introduction of new technologies in a classroom may be taking away.

I attended high school in a rural community and hope to teach in rural communities, so I often find myself relating ideas, concepts, and thoughts back to this kind of school environment. Shortly after I graduated, my high school switched to mostly online classes. The benefit of this technology was that students could have a larger range of electives to choose from and could take courses at the correct time based on their grade level rather than whenever they were being offered (as some courses might not be offered again before they graduate if not enough students needed that required course). This is arguably quite logical, however, imagine a high school experience without any discussion. A student sitting in front of a computer and learning in solitude is not gaining skills in critical thinking as they have no opportunity to ask questions. They are also robbed of any opportunities to have human interaction and form deeper connections with their classmates, teachers, or environment. We have spoken in depth this week about how technology is ideological in that it changes the way we think and interact with one another. I would agree and venture to say that a high school student who takes mostly online courses would in fact think and interact differently than a student who attends classes with other living and breathing human beings.

Looking at just this one example, we can already understand Postman’s reason for saying that “when we admit a new technology to the culture, we must do so with our eyes wide open” (pg. 7). When digital and communication technology is used in a classroom, we as teachers must first think deeply about the benefits and the detriments, the positive and the negatives. I hope that with the knowledge and understanding gained from this course I can be teacher who uses technology intentionally and effectively as a supplement to my teaching and certainly not as a replacement.