I am not your enemy. I’m the mug who has been thrown into the lion’s den covered in rump steak, to demonstrate the VLE. I don’t know what I’m walking in to. I do not make decisions. I do not create policy. Frankly, there are times I don’t care if you use the VLE. I’m just here to show you. I am not the enemy.
I should be clear that strong anger and hostility is rare.
VLEs are a bit disappointing
To be fair VLEs are a bit of a disappointment. Actually, let me qualify that. Technology is a bit of a disappointment. As David White says “if you go to technology to be the solution…everyone will be disappointed”.
I think we all hope that technology will just work with very little/no interference from human beings. At least sometimes that’s how I think academics hope it works. I may be being unfair here but there are times I see the “oh I have to do something with this to make it worthwhile” look in their eyes. Sadly the VLE does not know what you want to teach. It cannot absorb your teaching materials through osmosis and organize them correctly for you. It cannot create a quiz for you. It can’t facilitate a forum for you. It can’t decide the best way to present your learning materials and activities to best aid student learning. Unfortunately, like all technology, it requires some human intervention. More importantly, it requires human intervention to make it meaningful. Technology on its own is meaningless.
Technology gives the impression that anything is possible. That’s true to an extent. Technology has opened up endless possibilities. In a way that is a blessing and a curse. Reality does not always live up to expectation. I hear “surely it can do this”, “surely they can do that” but the reality is there is a LOT of work behind even the simplest idea. You don’t see that, perhaps we ought to show you more?
VLEs are designed to do a job. You might be able to plug stuff into it. You might be able to adapt it but on the whole, it does what it does. Can they be better? Oh of course. But they serve a purpose and do that adequately. I hold out for something better but I can guarantee no matter what comes I’ll still be asked: “can it do this”.
Can it do…
Whenever I demo the VLE it get’s compared to other systems. Can it do x? Can it do y? Can students see z in here? I find myself saying no a lot in these situations. Usually because rather than looking at the VLE for what it is and what it can offer, it’s compared to existing systems, some wholly incomparable. I sometimes wish I had that device on Men in Black so I could remove their memories of whatever system they were using previously so they could look at the VLE with fresh unprejudiced eyes. I don’t have that.
I should add that I always want to hear these questions, as they feed into ongoing developments.
We’re doing everything we can…
Sometimes I feel like people assume the reason it can’t do something is that we can’t be bothered to make it do that. We can. We want to. But what they don’t see is the huge amount of thought and work that goes into every decision around the VLE. Even seemingly simple things like turning on plugins. Although sometimes the functionality just isn’t possible or doesn’t exist. We have to consider each request on its merits. It’s not like switching on a light switch. I wish it were quicker. I wish it were simpler but NOTHING about technology is simple (despite what the marketing people would have us believe).
I promise you it’s added to the list. We’re trying to get through the list but it only gets longer. That’s the problem with technology the work never stops. Everyone wants something, because “surely it can be done”.
Don’t shoot the messenger
Unfortunately, we often become the focus of anger for decisions that we have nothing to do with, made by people we have nothing to do with over which we have absolutely no power. Do I think you should use the VLE? Yes because it can do great things when used well and consistency is something students want and deserve. Do I care if you use it? Ultimately no, that’s your choice but you’re missing out on something. Or more accurately your students are.
I didn’t say you had to use the VLE. Someone else did. Sorry. I’m just here to show you. Am I really the person you should be angry with? Do you really think I can do anything about what’s happening to you? Do you think making me feel uncomfortable will help? Do you think talking down to me will help? Do you think it will help to make me feel small?
No. It won’t help.
Why are people still hostile?
The world of ed tech seems to believe that everyone wants to use technology. That it’s obvious that people should and those who don’t are Luddites and dullards. Often anyone who dares questions the use of technology in education is met with much belligerent, disapproving responses. They are an enemy of the state who must be indoctrinated.
The reality is there is still resistance. People do not believe in the use of technology without question. Unlike the majority in the Ed Tech world, they look at it with a critical mind. There is legitimate criticism of the VLE (not that anyone can agree on the perfect alternative). They are bloated and feature heavy. They never quite work how people want them to. There’s always something missing. Put enough academics in a room and they will find a reason to dislike it. I believe there is legitimate criticism of the use of technology in education. In fact, I think we are obliged to consider every aspect of technology positive or negative.
I suppose we need to change our sales pitch from “you can do a quiz” to “you can scaffold student learning by creating a formative test each week and displaying feedback and content based on their results. The data can also be used as an indicator to show which concepts are proving difficult to understand and may need to be covered again the following week”. There’s a longer blog post in the “can do, should do vain”.
So what do we do?
We grit our teeth and we bear it. If there was universal acceptance they wouldn’t need people like us. Try to always be their champion. Listen, really listen. Respond when they ask you a question. Remind them that you’re here to support them, not get in their way. Smile. Respond kindly. Be patient. You don’t know what might be driving their behaviour, it could be wholly unconnected with you or what you’re there to talk to them about.
Always, always remember:
Technology is not neutral. It's emotive. It's affective. It touches people's lives #ussc17
— Kerry Pinny (@KerryPinny) July 5, 2017
Hello, apologies if this comes through twice – the browser crashed first time I submitted it.
We have been able to turn this negativity around at GC. My coaching team are universally loved and admired and actively sought out for support and training. The approach we took was two-fold – firstly in acknowledgement that teachers don’t have much time we transitioned from a model of spending an hour talking about a tool, to spending 20 minutes talking about a specific thing that could be done with a tool. The focus was then less about the technology and more about the practical application of the technology and gave an opportunity for more of a discussion group where academics can contribute their own suggestions.
The second step was in recognition that for staff to come to a classroom for 20 minutes took out a good chunk of their day, so where possible we relocated the training to their office space. This immediately made the training less formal/ didactic and more obviously supportive. As there are a lot of shared offices at GC, it also led to a natural percolation of knowledge. At first, when the coach arrived, everyone would ignore them. After a few weeks, they started to get help requests – because the academics knew someone would be there at that time, they began to prepare for their arrival. And then we noticed the eavesdroppers. Each 20 minute slot always culminated in the academic having something practical they could do and the next one began with a review of the activity and a chat about how it could be more impactful, so it became a valuable use of time for other academics to listen in and, over time, participate more. We also began to receive comments from our coaches (who had by this time a very good relationship with our team) about the amount of interest being expressed by other academics.
TL:DR; by focussing on teaching and giving short burst training, the digital sessions can become much more valuable and less overwhelming to teachers. If it helps, here’s a link to a SCORM programme we developed as part of a project after identifying the skills gap among teachers https://gcdigitech.wordpress.com/2017/07/07/digital-pedagogy/