Are you an evangelist? No? Think again. Most of
the people in this educational technology game have a quasi-religious zeal that
is almost palpable. You don't even have to go very far to see it -- no further
than your desk, in fact. Just look at the latest posts of any blogger, and it's
odds on that at some point in the last week he or she has waxed lyrical about
some new application they've discovered, or a new website that will change the
world.
Leaving aside the fact that, in my opinion at least, these flights of
fancy are rarely thought through properly (see, for example, my post
about the use of Twitter in the classroom, which potentially breaks several
rules), they are likely to succeed in convincing only those who don't need
convincing. The real challenge is this: how do we convince others of the
benefits of educational technology, and get them to the point where they will at
least entertain the idea of trying it out, even if an act of conversion (there's
that religious talk again) is a bridge too far.
The first thing that we need
to do is select our target, for want of a better term. There are three groups of
people, broadly speaking: those who are convinced of the benefits of technology,
those who have no real opinion one way or the other, but who are getting good
results and therefore see no urgent reason to change, and those who won't touch
technology with a bargepole.
You can ignore the first and third groups, and
concentrate on the middle one. Then what you have to do is hone in on
individuals, and here is where people make the classic mistake. They try to
convince the teacher concened that technology will allow them to do what they
already are doing, but more effectively.
If you're wary of technology, that
sounds suspiciously like a coded message:
"You're not doing as good a job as
you could be doing, but don't worry, I can help."
If you happen to be younger
than the teacher concerned, the message is likely to be even less warmly
received. So what is the answer?
Firstly, forget about doing the same stuff
better. What is really interesting is doing stuff that you simply can't
do in the normal classroom. It isn't only technology that can widen horizons, of
course. One way of making children aware of what schools were like a hundred
years ago is to arrange a trip in which they are immersed in a school
environment of a hundred years ago, even down to the clothes an the curriculum.
Technology can help you widen children's horizons too, and thereby enrich their
educational experience.
But there is another aspect too, and that is the
psychological one. Stephen Potter, author of the one-upmanship books over fifty
years ago, understood this very well. His books, whilst humorous, had a serious
side to them too. Predicated on the axiom that if you're not "one up" then
you're "one down", the books are full of psychological insights into human
behaviour, and quite often recommend a course of action that is the exact
opposite of that which one might naturally adopt.
To give you a quick idea of
what I am talking about, take just one idea from Gamesmanship (subtitled: The
art of winning games without actually cheating"). Potter says:
"... it is
unsporting, and therefore not gamesmanship, to go in, eg, for a loud nose blow,
say, at billiards, or to chalk your cue squeakingly, when [your adversary] is
either making or considering a shot."
He goes on to say, however, that it is
perfectly legitimate to whistle a tune whilst taking your own shot -- especially
if you keep getting the same note wrong. That would be virtually guaranteed to
get your opponent so agitated that he or she would start to make silly
mistakes.
So, back to the subject in hand, and I think that a pertinent
section from Lifemanship (the application of the principles of Gamesmanship to
everyday life) is Woomanship, which is about how to attract a member of the
opposite sex. There's a section called "Triangulation, or Third Person Play",
which recommends the following, if you are in a situation in which the person in
whom you are interested is being suited by another:
"The wooman if he knows
his business will, as soon as he knows the identity of this Second Man, leave
the girl almost unattended, if necessary for days on end, and make a thorough
examination of this person, observe, make discreet enquiries at his place of
employment. And then, once he is thoroughly acquainted with the Second Man's
character, he can woo with a clear mind and heart. For he will know what to do.
He must be sure that his character, habits, hobbies, tastes and mannerisms are
the precise opposite of his rival's."
Now, if you stop to think about it,
this is brilliant psychology. What's the point of trying to be like the girl's
current suitor or boyfriend? She already has him! The only sensible course of
action (assuming you accept the basic premises of this situation in the first
place, of course!) is to be the complete opposite.
I would contend that the
same applies when it comes to winning someone over to the joys of technology.
There is little point in trying to convince them that they will get better
grades, if the grades they are getting are already good. There is no point in
being incredibly exuberant, because that just turns people off: there is nothing
worse than a friend who has just discovered a new religion/holiday
resort/musician/health food, because they just never stop going on about it. In
the end, they achieve the reverse of what they intended.
A far better
approach would be to adopt the opposite attitude, which in this case would be
almost complete indifference. Yes, be available to help people, lower the
barriers to entry, as it were, but don't go overboard. For example, rather than
say:
"I've seen this fantastic new program that will transform your teaching
of geography overnight",
say:
"I don't know if you're interested, but I've
come across this geography program. I don't even know if it's any good. I was
wondering if you could look at it and let me know what you think, like is it
worth getting? But if you're a bit busy, it doesn't matter."
In other words,
place him/her in the position of the expert (which they are, actually) whose
advice you are seeking. Most people respond well to being approached in that
sort of way.
Although this is not ostensibly the same as the romantic
situation described above, there are similarities. The teacher already has an
attachment (to traditional ways of teaching). You are trying to woo them away
from all that. It's a clear case of needing to understand a little bit of human
psychology, rather than a great deal about educational technology.
Subscribe to article summaries
"educational technology"
"ICT in Education"