I’m taking part of this amazing experience.
In e-Learning and Digital Culture we’re discussing about utopian and dystopian views in technology.
Nowadays, does make technology us better as a human being? Either it doesn’t? Do we communicate much better? Instead, we don’t?
A couple years ago an Italian enterprise released this spot. The last message seems to me wonderful (Feelings don’t change. The way of communicating them, it does) and suitable to our present discussion:
Comparing advanced social community of primates and human being, we share a point: chimpanzees, for instance, use tools, so they have technology and they have a culture, see Jordi Sabater Pi and Jane Goodall studies.
But human being made evolve technology in order to preserve knowledge and to facilitate the broadcasting. So, we are writing, pressing and using ICT.
What is it good for? It is good for preserving our culture as a social species. It’s a fact: technology determines not only our personal lives, but our evolution and survival as a species.
But we have to keep on learning ant that means adapting to new technologies. Dahlberg points out 3 present orientations to the internet:
- Uses determination
- Technological determination
- Social determination
Which one is the most important? In my opinion, we have to keep one eye on each one of them when we talk about learning.
You can’t success with a learning strategy without having clear your mind about which pedagogical purposes you’re looking for.
You can’t success with a learning strategy without knowing that digital natives are not watching the world like U (digital immigrant)
You can’t success with a learning strategy without having the support of infrastructures that will make sure your aims of making true a real learning.