“What changes in language are being forced by these new technologies? ~ Neil Postman

Recently, Lee Kuan Yew suggested that Singaporeans should learn American English because of the rapid spread of that version of English due to globalization. This is for a country that was once ruled by the British. I believe that American English has become even more pervasive today because the Internet. Most often the language we used is decided by the default language set by our computers. All too often it is American English. While we hear it spoken for years on TV, it is on the Internet that we really begin to use it because if we spelled it the British way, we will see a red underlining which will disappear only if we re-spell it using the American spelling. Even for Internet marketeers, they would be wise to follow the American spelling on their websites for “anti-ageing” products will not appear as often on search engines as “anti-aging” products. That is the power of SEO.

The above is related to the fifth question that was asked by Neil Postman with regards to the use of technology. Has ICT made changes to language?

With the widespread use of ICT, certain terms have become replacements for everyday English. When we search for information, we say “google it”. When we say this, we accept the impact of the giant search engine on our lives. It conveys  sense of the instantaneous availability of information. This gives rise to the question as to how we value information that is so easily obtained? Has the easy accessibility to information also blurred the difference between information and knowledge? Do more of us think that the knowledgeable man is the same as the one who has Google at his finger tips?

One of my favorite books

Has the meaning of “education” also changed even more profoundly with the rise of ICT? To be sure, the meaning of education has changed with the Industrial Revolution. This is itself proof that meanings change with technology use. It has shifted to a greater emphasis to the acquisition of skills that is useful at the workplace. In other words, when we say “education”, we actually mean training for employable skills. Has this worsen with ICT? What is the meaning of “education” when it is prefixed with “online”? In fact, often it is now usually termed as “online learning”. “Education” has been dropped. Why? Or in the Facebook era, what does it mean to “like” a post? Or to be a “friend”.

What other terms can you think of that has its meaning changed (or may change) due to the pervasiveness of ICT? What is the impact of this to (dare I say the word?) education? Share your thoughts.

“Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts; nothing else will ever be of any service to them.”

Mr. Gradgrind

From Charles Dickens’ Hard Times

Does this sound familiar to you? Many schools all over the world have as their educational philosophy something similar to that of Mr Gradgrind’s. The sad thing is that when Dickens wrote that it was for an age long gone, namely, the Industrial Revolution.

Yet such a view about what schooling should be all about is still very much prevalent, even in a country like Singapore, which is often lauded for its “good” education system. The emphasis is on stuffing the brain. Just fill the brain with facts. The teachers’ job is to fill the brains with facts, or more accurately, as David Perkins has pointed out, with “factlets” or disparate bits of information with little relevance except for the great Trivial Pursuit game that most high stakes examinations are.

Never mind if the facts make little sense to the students. What is important is that they pass their examinations which for many is just a ticket to a place in a university or a job. For many, they will never see the relevance of the thousands of bits of information that they have learned in school. Makes one wonder if all that learning has been a monumental waste of time and money?

“For any subject taught in primary school, we might ask [is it] worth an adult’s ‘knowing, and whether having known it as a child makes the person a better adult.”

from The Process of Education by Jerome Bruner (1960)

Our school or education system is often inundated with all kinds of agendas. What needs to be taught in schools becomes a mess of often conflicting goals. There is an even more urgent need today for schools to be clear about what ought to be taught.

What would be the result if we were to seriously pursue what Jerome Bruner had proposed above to what is being taught in schools today? Would we still have the gargantuan-sized curriculum that we force students to go through each year? Would we still be teaching for discrete facts? More important perhaps, would we still be assessing for discrete facts?

If we want to respond positively to Jerome Bruner, schools would have to undergo a revolutionary change. Teachers would be teaching for enduring understanding rather than just teaching discrete facts. Teaching for enduring understanding means that the focus would be, to quote Wiggins and McTighe, “focus on larger concepts, principles, or processes”. The focus will be on big ideas rather than disparate bits of facts.

Big ideas that can will be useful to the students in their later years of life. Big ideas which would have real meaning for the students rather than just bits of information useful only for end-of-year school examinations. Big ideas that that students can use to apply in differing contexts within or even beyond their subjects.

We will do well to avoid the following 19th century, Industrial Revolution Age view of what education should be:

“Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts; nothing else will ever be of any service to them.”

Mr. Gradgrind

From Charles Dickens’ Hard Times