Pedagogy and digital: Insights, impact and implications

This article is excellent for attempting to provide leadership in how to think about technology in schools. The suggestion that teachers be aware of different types of screentime (passive, transactionary, developmental) is useful. The notion of pedagogical alignment, too, is proposed. It involves alignment between beliefs, intentions, approaches, practices.

However, the article raises a few questions. I am not clear why teachers should be expected to define pedagogy. Definitions are often worked on by lexicographers and philosophers. I’m not sure we would expect Mo Farah to be able to define sprinting nor Picasso painting. Perhaps the claim is that if only teachers understood what pedagogy was, they would make more productive the use of technology. A second issue is that no argument is presented to support the claim that “pedagogical alignment” is necessary. A vivid example of a lack of pedagogical alignment would be helpful. Finally, this claim is made: “A pedagogy-first mindset matters because every single decision made within or about a school is ultimately a pedagogical decision.” This is surely false. If a teacher decides to exclude a pupil for bad behaviour, this is not a pedagogical decision. For the teacher is not deciding amongst ways of teaching. If a teacher offers guidance to students relating to spirituality or virtue, this is not a pedagogical decision. Pedagogy is the study of how to teach, and how students learn. Teachers probably make few “pedagogical decisions” within school. For in school they are teaching, and you cannot teach and think about ways of teaching simultaneously. It would be like asking Simon Rattle to rattle through the chapter headings in his book on classical music as he conducted in front of an audience. He would sweat profusely. Perhaps you can. But there is no reason to suppose that most teachers do this. It would be bizarre and use excessive cognitive resources. I see no reason to suppose that every decision made within a school is a “pedagogical decision”.

I think this article’s claim is that whenever technology is used in the classroom, the teacher should have a clear intention about what they are doing with it. For example, a teacher might set a computing task with the aim of students making the technology meaningful to themselves. For example, write a program that makes your life easier. Students have to think what area of life needs improving etc and thus bring their own value judgements etc. If this is the article’s claim then investigation is needed into how this could work, especially since most teachers cannot define “pedagogy” and have differing pedagogies. If cognitive challenge is desirable, and we can achieve this without tech, then why use tech?