³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Julian Chapman's comments at the NASUWT conference in Bournemouth have received a lot of media attention this week. The idea that , and making it harder for teachers to deliver an in-depth lesson seems odd to me, given that I work in a department who, amongst other things, make educational television programmes.

We're moving towards a curriculum that puts the learner increasingly at the centre, so why shouldn't learning evolve to meet the new demands of learners, who are used to technologically advanced and engaging materials? I know that, for example, we've moved towards the shorter 'clip' based way of accessing our resources. This isn't just a response to the YouTube generation - it also allows teachers flexibility. Want to illustrate something in five minutes, keep your class engaged and then have plenty of time left for activity and discussion? Use an audio or video clip. Better still, have the class make their own media clips to illustrate their understanding.

It's my opinion that instead of , teachers could look at ways of using it in lessons â€" helping both their own delivery and the learners' engagement. A great example of this is the use of games in class, which I've written about before. I went to see on Tuesday and the work that they have done in bringing games into learning is remarkable. Instead of seeing children playing video games as a hurdle, or as something that stops them doing their homework, Derek and others have , combining that enthusiasm and engagement with real and active learning. Can't television help get the point across, to reinforce learning? I believe strongly that it can. We can't continue to draw this line between what the learner needs in order to be 'switched on' and what the teacher can deliver. Resources have to enable both learners and teachers to share experiences (and yes, outcomes!) that can be as engaging and entertaining as they are educational.

Comments

you have to distinguish between good educational programming and bad quality programming, it is like comparing fruit to sweets. Some bad programming is very addictive rotting "brains" instead of teeth but it is harder to make good educational content addictive, the games industry are probably further down the road with that rather than terrestrial tv educational programming. Teaching style have to change to suit their learners rather than serve their "teaching comfort zone". We are not teaching 1980's children even though teachers are of that generation.
John Heffernan
Fri Apr 17 14:50:24 2009