From recreational to educational

As Hockly (2009) expresses, it is a completely different matter to use technologies in our everyday lives in contrast to using them in the classroom. Teachers need to know what to do with the equipment in the classroom. In order to implement different learning paths, teachers need to be thoroughly aware of the students’ language skills and develop more diverse teaching practices. They also need to be able to comprehend and evaluate the effects achieved by using different technologies and how to combine them to acquire effective results (Levy 2012). This demands a great deal of knowledge from teachers and therefore educating the teachers is critical for development. Sharma (2009) lists a few key principles for successful implementation of new technologies. Firstly, making clear the roles of the teacher and the technology, that is to say the technology does not replace the teacher but it is there to complement and enhance the teacher’s

actions. Secondly, keeping an open mind and not giving up before even trying something new.

There are several different types of training available for teachers, for example, formal courses, workshops, In-house Teacher Development programmes that include long-term mentoring and varied online training (Hockly 2009). Taalas (2007:420) reports that during the years 1995-2004, there has been a multitude of technological training for teachers but unfortunately the problem with these courses has been their inefficiency to generate lasting practises. According to Setälä (2012) schools should always acquire training when purchasing the IWBs to ensure their successful integration to the classroom practices.

Sharma (2009) presents some challenging factors concerning technology training for language teachers and its success. Firstly, the teacher’s attitude determines the change produced by the input. Without a positive or at least a neutral attitude towards new technologies, there cannot be a change in the teacher’s practices. Secondly, every argument has their positive and negative sides which vary according to the teacher’s views on the matter. Thirdly, each teacher has their own views on the pedagogical issues involved with the technology. Their opinions vary on issues such as what for is the technology used and what purposes it serves. Fourthly, there is a lot of heavy jargon related to technology and some terms have multiple meanings. Therefore, it is important that the trainer training language teachers is careful in selecting only the relevant terminology for the trainees, and that they are in agreement with the meanings behind those terms. Fifthly, it is essential that the level of knowledge or skills of a training session meets the needs of the trainees. The needs of a digital native new to teaching are different than those of an experienced teacher not so well acquainted with the latest technology. Lastly, we can expect there to be a certain amount of resistance from the teachers due to the fear of technological problems and relinquishing control. So, what to do when technology fails?

Teachers may also be concerned about complicated copyright issues that do not seem to be clear for the students either. There is constantly news of various copyright infringement cases, invasion of privacy, monitoring, censorship etc. Perhaps because publishing and acquiring information is so easy and can even be done anonymously, it seems often unclear whether something is legal or appropriate. Today, more than ever,

the issue of media ethics is important, when employees are being fired over their actions on the internet and students are involved in cases of internet bullying and defamation.

As Rivoltella (2012: 27) mentions, new media seems to give the youth incentive to misbehave. One example being a recent phenomenon in Finland of students posting on Facebook notes that their teachers have given on Wilma (web-based school administration software) on their behaviour. Rivoltella (2012: 27-28) states that teachers today need to educate their students not only on critical thinking when it comes to new media but also on their accountability in the public space. He further notes that scholars and governments are faced with a challenge of equipping the digital natives of today and educators with what he calls digital wisdom i.e. the knowledge on how to use new technologies and media responsibly. He divides this concept of digital wisdom into two categories: digital skilfulness and digital stupidity. Skilfulness means the ability to use technology but also the ethical and critical knowledge relating to its use. One can be skilful in operating technology but stupid (irresponsible, harmful, unethical) in the way they use it and vice versa.

Yet, successful integration of technology into the classroom is not merely a question of inducing teachers to adopting the technology and training them into using it. It also requires getting today’s “diginative” students to viewing it as a natural part of classroom work. Yes, this new generation of learners is very adept at using the newest technology and gadgets for entertainment purposes, but given a task involving the use of word processing programs or PowerPoint, their knowledge of technology does not necessarily help them to complete the task. Or the idea that social networking sites, such as the Facebook, could be used for academic purposes, for example sending school assignments to one another, goes beyond their imagination.