Once again, this was a great debate question. Both sides argued their points very well; I found myself agreeing with Amanda, Jacquie, AND Ramsel all at the same time. Kudos to Ramsel for taking on this debate by herself. All three debaters did an awesome job.

I AGREE

I voted for the “agree” side in the pre-vote. The topic closely aligned with the arguments made by JR and myself in our debate. At the risk of sounding redundant, technology is not inherently good or bad. It is a tool that can be used for good or for bad. Teachers in the Yukon have a responsibility to use technology and social media to promote social justice because it is in the curriculum.

Teachers need to use their position of power and influence to promote social justice. The article “Teaching Social Justice in Theory and Practice” outlines ways this can be done. It also highlights reasons it MUST be done. As I read the article. I was reminded of a book I read in another course. Has anyone taken EDL 829 Supporting Indigenous Success? If so, remember this book?

The article mirrors much of what is represented in the “Model of effective teaching for Indigenous students.” Information from the headings “Fostering a classroom community of conscience” and “Helping students see each other as co-learners rather than adversaries” greatly overlaps with the model of effective teaching. (see below)

This is not an add-on to the curriculum, it IS the curriculum. I have found that being open to the possibility of engaging students in social justice issues allows the teacher to see opportunities when they arise.

AN EXAMPLE

This story goes back a few years. There is a protected area in the Yukon called the Peel Watershed.

Stunningly beautiful and one of the last areas that have not been open mining development. It is also traditional territory for four Yukon First Nations. The Yukon Party, the government in power then, held a referendum to determine if some of the Peel should be open to mining. People voted and said no. The government said they would do it anyway, and things got heated politically. The decision affected my junior high students as many were Frist Nations and part of the Peel was in their settlement lands.  I was upset because the government was not listening to the people; VERY undemocratic and not okay. I created a project to help the students advocate for the Peel. This was not planned or in my year plans. Stakeholders and politicians visited the class and answered questions. The local biologist came to the classroom with a pile of maps; each highlighted an area of the Peel that was important for a specific species of plant or animal. The students did their research and wrote letters to politicians from every level of government. The letters outlined their opinion of what should be done with the Peel Watershed, backed up with facts from their research. After completing the project, I checked off learning objectives from the English, Social Studies, and Health curriculum.

I DISAGREE

I had to side with Ramel’s argument as she focused on the word “neutrality.” This is a very important point and can not be discounted. Remaining neutral is part of the responsibility of the teacher. To repeat a previous point, teachers are in a position of power. What we say and do influence our students. I discussed the civics unit made by Elections Canada in class. My students wanted me to tell them how I voted in the federal election, but I waited until AFTER they voted in our mock election. I did not want to influence their vote with my way of thinking. It is important that we teach our students HOW to think, not WHAT to think. I agree with Jessica when she pointed out in the class discussion that she wants to teach her students to be good human beings.

The article “Social Media Use and Pathways to Protest
Participation: Evidence From the 2019
Chilean Social Outburst “shared by the agree side helps me make my point. The authors stated that “As a large number of studies demonstrate, social media use is closely linked to political participation, especially “unconventional” forms of participation such as protests.” (Scherman & Rivera, 2021, p.1). This was also seen in Canada during the Trucker Convey protests in Ottawa in February 2022. Many people who participated in the protests received their information from social media and primarily through Facebook posts. The Freedom Convey protests also had no defined leaders, a point made in the article by Scherman & Rivera. But I digress. My point is that social media is used by our students and is a vehicle to promote protest participation. Teachers have a responsibility to engage their students in discussions of social justice.

CONCLUSION

There is one debate left and I am looking forward to it. I honestly have no idea how I will vote in the next debate….. I will be sorry to see the debates and this class end.

Just to be clear…..

I argued for the “agree” side of this debate with JR, voted for this side in pre and post-vote. I would have voted “agree” side even if I didn’t actively participate in the debate. In spite of this, I agree with Kennedy on a couple of points. Kennedy wrote in her blog post that we must use the same definition of digital footprint. Agree. I also agree with her following comment:

 “ Anything good comes with responsibility and if I choose to incorporate technology into the    classroom as a learning tool, then I am also taking on that responsibility of making sure my students know that it is there to enhance our learning experiences and it is to be respected.”

A bit further in her blog, Kennedy wrote:

“However, this debate also made me think of my own classroom and how I could maybe have some more discussions and/or teaching points to help my students become AWARE of their digital footprint. Maybe educating our students on the fact that they will always have a digital footprint is helpful enough.”

Again, I agree. This was exactly the point JR and I were making. This is another way of connecting with our students and building relationship with them. I commented during the debate that building relationships with students s the #1 responsibility of the teacher, and I stand by that comment. Jessica demonstrated this in her post-debate video. She created connections with the 2 students in her video when she asked for their opinion and thoughts.

It may be ironic that I argued for the “agree” side and sided with arguments from the “disagree” side in this post. This shows that this was a great question for a debate. It also shows how complicated and nuanced this argument is. Neither side can give a straight “yes” or “no”. 

Educators do have a responsibility

Again, I am going to use an argument from the “disagree” side to make my point that schools DO have a responsibility to help students develop a digital footprint. (The Tedtalk by Paul Davis has now found a place in my Top Ten favorite Tedtalks.) 

Each time Paul Davis said he went into a school, it was through a discussion with a principal. Not once did he say a parent initiated the invitation; it always came through the school. He also gave presentations to parents in schools. Therefore, if the school did not invite him, there would not be a presentation to parents. This is an example of how schools can support parents in helping their children develop a digital footprint, a main point in my and JR’s video.

Parents and Educators

Paul Davis was clear that it is the parent’s role to teach responsible use of technology to their children. It is parents who give the devices (and sign the contract) that enable their children to use the technology. It is parents who allow the children to bring the devices to school. In contrast, teachers do not sign contracts and pay the bills. Devices such as computers, Ipads, etc, that are used in the classroom are owned by the school district and stay at school. I do not disagree with him on this point. The issue is bigger than who signed the contract and paid the bills. The issue is about how to help students become responsible. It is an attitude, a value, a belief about the kind of people we want our children to become. This is NOT an add-on to the curriculum for as Kennedy said, discussions and talking points may be enough.

In conclusion

Take a look at this Tedtalk.

The presenter is an Early Childhood Educator. She works with our youngest learners and believes the main job of Early Learning is to teach children how to become a member of society. Parents can not do this alone. To quote an overused cliché “It takes a village to raise a child”. Teachers are a part of the village. Technology, as it is a tool now embedded in our society, is also a part of the village.