A frequent objection I hear from Digital Immigrant educators is “this approach is great for facts, but it wouldn't work for "my subject.” Nonsense. This is just rationalization and lack of imagination. In my talks I now include “thought experiments” where I invite professors and teachers to suggest a subject or topic, and I attempt– on the spot – to invent a game or other Digital Native method for learning it. Classical philosophy? Create a game in which the philosophers debate and the learners have to pick out what each would say. The Holocaust? Create a simulation where students role-play the meeting at Wannsee, or one where they can experience the true horror of the camps, as opposed to the films like Schindler’s List.

The holocaust reference jumped out at me as a really tacky way to make a point, so I googled it - and you know what?

Eternity's Child Creator Attempts to Tackle the Holocaust

Yes, somebody did, and for educational purposes too:

Luc Bernard, the mind behind the upcoming Wii-Ware title Eternity's Child is already hard at work on a new and what is sure to be a very controversial game or the DS. Imagination Is The Only Escape is the story of a young Jewish boy living in France during the occupation by the Nazis in World War II. In order to escape the horrors around him, he imagines a fantasy land that becomes the basis of the game's world. The adventure platformer will attempt to educate players on the atrocities experienced by many children during the time of the Holocaust.

Here is a screen shot of the game:

Not that this validates Prensky's argument, or makes his parlour trick, I'm sorry, 'thought experiment' more impressive.  It just surprised me that the concept of a holocaust game, which struck me as a (rarely) inappropriate use of a game in education was actually on the market for that very purpose.  Maybe Bernard read Presnky.

Who did Prensky read?  John Perry Barlow's A Declaration of Independance of Cyberspace (1996) maybe?

You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants [my italics]. Because you fear them, you entrust your bureaucracies with the parental responsibilities you are too cowardly to confront yourselves. In our world, all the sentiments and expressions of humanity, from the debasing to the angelic, are parts of a seamless whole, the global conversation of bits. We cannot separate the air that chokes from the air upon which wings beat.

How long has this face-off between impotent un-plugged adults (parents, teachers) and potent wired kids been going on? Since the 60's? Or did it all begin with Oedipus Rex?

Anyway, I am not going to accept the label of immigrant (and I am certainly too old to be a native) because almost all of my experience with technology in learning and teaching has shown me that you cannot measure technological skill against a demographic like age, social class or even economic background, it is too complex.  Rodger's (now rather dated) Innovation / Adoption curve is more meaningful in explaining those who embrace and those who are repelled by web technologies in an educational context, and explains why many 'immigrant' aged educator / innovators embrace what 'native' aged student / laggards avoid.

Turning 'it' (learning) into a game has been the bread and butter of EFL teachers for at least 20 years.   But often the aim has been no more ambitious than to motivate students to remain engaged through for the duration of a single lesson, rather than the kind of Weschean 'pervasive' engagement we touched upon in our Second Life chat, edited extracts below:

Hirondelle Sciarri: I suppose the interactive aspect of web 2.0 is key to engagement

Dagma Kiranov: 'the narrative must become pervasive in the learning environment' Welsch

Klara Otsuka: Again i think we need to think about we use a word like "enagement" - we're not just saying activity, we're saying really committing (as Dagma said very much earlier) to something

Hirondelle Sciarri: yes, engaging.... meaning contributing, buying in, negotiating content

Klara Otsuka: also - that kind of engaging usually has a social element - which I think we can draw even from our own course is quite key at times to learning!

Marieiram Dubrovna: i really liked the concept of the students then taking over with their learning, even covering topics outside his knowledge

Marieiram Dubrovna: and him being in a wondefully awkward place

Klara Otsuka: So - if we had appropriate support, and engaging, meaningful, technologically appropriate materials - would it matter if our students were "native" or "digital"?

Allowing ourselves as educators to divide our intention to inspire into 60 minute game filled chunks is just as much of a crime as digital (illegal?) immigrancy - and, from my frequent observations of the EFL classroom, far more commonplace. What is the purpose of the games, role-plays and simulations that Prensky proposes? Are they to enable our students to discover or create content for themselves? Or tools to glam up rote learning and memorisation of facts? Even with simulation and role play allowing for some student creativity games, unless supported by a holistic and fully realised (by the teacher and student) learning purpose, are often merely useful accessories. 

In my centre just gave our students a questionnaire to gather feedback on a variety of areas, from classroom management to use of technology.  Feedback has been, on the whole, positive - however our students score us consistently poorly on two points:  'The lessons on the course link together well', and 'I am making progress on the course'.  This I feel is because we approach our teaching from a discrete lesson to discrete lesson perspective.  I would guess that it is our focus on materials and activities that is behind this.  We create fun and motivating lessons as opposed to enabling fun and motivating learning.

Back to Prensky:

It's just dumb (and lazy) of educators – not to mention ineffective – to presume that (despite their traditions) the Digital Immigrant way is the only way to teach, and that the Digital Native's “language” is not as capable as their own of encompassing any and every idea.

Other than suggesting web2.0 inspired activities, games and speaking 'their' language and the "just do it" language of mass marketing (Nike? Please, that's immigrant footwear I am sure) Prensky highlights a divide and yet seems at a loss as to which methodology will breach it.  The point Prensky misses is that passion for the "subject" combined with a willingness to experiment and take risks (with web2.0 technologies or whatever) with our students is what makes inspirational educators like Michael Wesch so successful.  Wesch's world simulation doesn't work because it is a game, or because Wesch has learnt the lingo (and the gizmos) of his 'native' students. It works because he is passionate; he has worked to understand his learners' holistic needs and developed a personal "anti-teaching" methodology accordingly.  He experiments and learns with them - in a world of digital pirates he is the pirate king.  Web2.0 technologies, the supposed tools of the digital native (though developed by immigrants), with their focus on interaction and collaboration, user generated content and continual revision, process over product are a means of bridging the gap between teacher and learner - such a combination render the boundaries (temporal and spacial) in the native / immigrant divide meaningless.

The second moment of teary joy was over Juan Mann's Free Hugs camapaign. Here I recognised myself as an educator.  The first time I got a group of students to create a community blog it's name was Towards World Peace etc.  I had a group of bright but fractured Thai Teens and the blog brought them together and created a creative energy that transcended by far the original English language learning dynamic and became an essential connection for living life.  Wesch mentions, in relation to Mann's video, the sense of "people trying to reconnect with humanity in some profound way"and this spirit is what both myself and my partner are about as educators (and personally as an educational manager).  The lesson content is almost incidental, the empowerment and relationships (student/student, student/teacher and ultimately student/world) is what drives me.

Final tearful moment was with bnessel1973 who said, "Some people have said that the videos we have made on You Tube should be created in hopes to change the world. I've made mine to help me live in it".  Once more that is a powerful message for me as an educator - almost a mission statement.  If I can use the tools of web2.0 to help people live in the world, I will be happy.

A final whimsical connection: As I watched the Wesch's video and experienced that surge of emotion I was reminded of a very early memory. Watching the TV advertisement for Coca Cola from the early 70's (hey I was 3 or 4 years old, I was allowed to be cheesey).  Unburdened by distrust of marketing and a dislike of multinationals (cynicism came later) I used to watch it and want so bad to stand on that hill and sing with them.  I think (judgement on the tooth rotting product aside) there is a spirit in that clip that lives on in the best of our web2.0 connections.  We will always yearn to connect and embrace the learning and growth comes through those connections.  The technologies we have at hand which (quoting Welsch talking about the Numa Numa meme) evokes "new forms of expression, new forms of community, new forms of identity" allow us connect more widely than ever before and in doing so maybe we will understand ourselves better.

Come on Clara, sing along - you know you want to!

I'd like to build the world a home
And furnish it with love
Grow apple trees and honey bees and snow-white turtle doves

I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms and keep it company

I'd like to see the world for once
All standing hand in hand
And hear them echo through the hills "Ah, peace throughout the land"

(That's the song I hear)
I'd like to teach the world to sing (that the world sings today)
In perfect harmony

The whole class seems excited and energised by web2.0.  It’s a little like Christmas!  J

But as exciting and empowering as this interactive / integrative technology is, what use is power if you don't know how to wield it?

This is a really good point.  Though I am a little uncertain about calling it “power” – what do you mean by that?  To me it seems more like “tools”.  Then again, I guess you could argue that the tool encapsulates particular potentials and possibilities, and it is those that are the “power” of the tool [in the Latin origin sense of ‘potency’].  Thus knowing what tool to select, how to use it and for what purposes becomes vitally important.  So what are the implication for teaching and learning?  How do we equip learners to choose and use an appropriate tool for their needs?

Yes, I think the power comes from the use of tools.  In the case of our studies it can lie in what you have called "high stakes"reflection, effective communication with tutors, and the networking we do with our peers. Power also resides in the tools we choose for personal organisation, research and transmission of ideas.  I call it power because I am focussing on the product or outcome rather than the process.  We only need to watch the video talk given by Michael Wesch to see that the process of uploading video to you tube, is the tool - but my interpretation is the power is the result, a worldwide audience, new relationships, career making fame or career breaking infamy - if only for 15 minutes.

How can we as educators help our students to make appropriate educational choices about which of these tools with enable their growth and development if we aren't able to make those choices ourselves.

Another good question.  For me, the answer will always come back to purpose – what am I trying to achieve and what best enables me to achieve it?  Perhaps in one learning context social bookmarking is more useful, in another a wiki.  Of course, I am always up for the path we’ve taken in IDEL - let the students loose in the sweetshop and see what they choose for themselves.  :)

Yes as I said needs analysis has never been so important.  I have always used needs analysis in my teaching to discover more about my students: their motivation level, reasons for learning English, preferred learning style, previous experience and exposure. When using technology in the classroom I imagine it would be useful to have a parallel learning technology needs analysis to discover their preferences, current knowledge base, research interests, organisational ability, and even basics like computer access at home, internet speed and keyboard skills.

Me and choices don't sit well together.

And how well do you and no choices sit together?  :)

Valid point.  :D

The pic you’ve included is fascinating – are you suggesting the web2.0 services are broken scraps and leftovers that only work when they come together?

The image is (I am sure you know) M.C. Escher's 'Order and Chaos' I chose it to illustrate how for me, the two are still side by side, the order being far more beautiful, but yet there is humanity in the chaos.  Interestingly Escher chose as chaos human detritus; the jetsam of everyday life, as opposed to natural flotsam twigs, bones, leaves etc.  And the order is represented by a crystal.  It is a more natural symbol, but still faceted and therefore imposed or 'tooled'.  But imposed by whom? It could be human - but I see a more supernatural quality in it.  It is no man-made diamond, but an uncanny supernatural thing (a star in a sphere).  Escher spoke the language of geometry and mathematics so I suppose his order comes from the laws of maths and physics.  I am hoping for divine intervention - deus ex machina? Or more probably synergy of connectedness.  I hope by participating in web2.0 technolgies the world and I will come to some agreement on a portfolio of tools which will survive the intitial flurry of early adoption and avoid the crash and burn of fad-death. Yes this portfolio will be in constant flux, but by careful selection I would like to think I can choose (for myself and with my students) tools that will be relied on to have value now AND in the future.

One final thought, in Escher's image chaos finds itself reflected in order - maybe that is all we need order for, chaos is infinitely more creative and inspiring, but sometimes we need order to act as a mirror, a reflective devise to organise the chaos into something we can use.

But as exciting and empowering as this interactive / integrative technology is, what use is power if you don't know how to wield it?   There is too much out there.  Maybe the point I am missing is you are meant to embrace some of it rather than all of it. But what to embrace?  I need a digital equivalent of a financial adviser.  Extrapolating into education... need analysis has never been so important.  How can we as educators help our students to make appropriate educational choices about which of these tools with enable their growth and development if we aren't able to make those choices ourselves.

I should add that I can stand in the supermarket aisle for 10 minutes trying to decide which  breakfast cereal to buy.  Me and choices don't sit well together.