Post #1

The Hobbs and Moore chapter that details how a teacher’s motivations can predict what type of digital content they are likely to teach was fascinating and eye-opening.  In reflecting on my own pedagogy, I most likely fall in the “motivators” category, which is defined as “using digital and media literacy activities as a catalyst for their students creative energy, expression, and student voice” (Hobbs & Moore, 2013, p. 31). In any lesson I create, my goal is to make the lesson resonate on a personal level so the students (hopefully) feel ownership and inspiration to go forward. I recognize the choices I’ve made in integrating technology to fall in the “motivators” category for their evocative imagery or ability for students to express themselves or their group with programs such as Padlet. Farthest from my digital identity/motivation is the “techie” category, and I’m thankful to find myself surrounded by plenty of folks who do fall into that niche. I’m not there yet, but the category I most aspire to belong to is the “Teacher 2.0.”  This teacher weaves multiple texts, websites, and media with curriculum content and the students’ funds of knowledge and social media experience to create a holistic approach (p. 44). I’m hopeful in upcoming classes or discussions in this forum that we have the opportunity to see where our peers are in the spectrum of digital motivation.

As a digital immigrant, technology in the classroom inspires me and I genuinely want to incorporate it in the classroom, however, the content must align with the goals of the lesson. The Warschauer & Ware article touched on this point repeatedly, as supported by numerous studies (2008, p. 218 - 219). However, I have a desire to incorporate relevant technology because my students respond so well to it, and technology is such an integral part of their world. Warschauer & Ware mentioned that  “in the United States, 75% of the population now has access to the Internet (Nielsen/Net Ratings, 2004), and more than half of home Internet users have broadband access (Belson, 2005, p 222). As those numbers were released in a study conducted more than a decade ago, I’m curious to what the percentages are in 2016?