Reflection of the IDZ Program
When starting I Dig Zambia (IDZ), I had no idea what to expect. I did not feel confident in my ability to facilitate on a virtual world to which I had only just been introduced. However, when students arrived, I was inspired by how excited our students were about IDZ however perplexed at how little they knew about it.
When starting I Dig Zambia (IDZ), I had no idea what to expect. I did not feel confident in my ability to facilitate on a virtual world to which I had only just been introduced. However, when students arrived, I was inspired by how excited our students were about IDZ however perplexed at how little they knew about it.
Overall I was glad to see the infusion of science into the Global Kids curriculum as a main component to a program. It was great to go to the fossil library at the Natural History Museum and watch students ask questions and reflect on the entire process of fossil excavation. Our students were clearly excited about the museum visit, and were interested in many of the key biological concepts they had to learn throughout the program. Finally, our students discussion of global warming from a scientific perspective was wonderful, as it is a rarity within Global Kids programs.
I was pleased with many of the other of the non-technology based programs as well. These are easier for me to judge, as I am more experienced in traditional facilitation. Many of our activities during IDZ were familiar to our students and allowed them to show their expertise. The soccer activity, where students facilitated soccer drills designed to teach about the AIDS pandemic to each other, was a particular success. Our students are well versed in discussing global issues with each other through experiential activities.
My reflections on the technology aspect of IDZ were a bit harder. While I could appreciate that our NYC students were working with students in Chicago, the teamwork and communication were not at the same level as our students work in real life. However, my ideas were solidified during a conversation with my mother and sister (both educators as well) about SmartBoards, a replacement for chalkboards that hook up to computers and internet. Both my mother and sister agreed that while SmartBoards are helpful, especially with their special education students, all the functions of a SmartBoard are replicable without the technology. It's the application of old methods and new technology that mark a good teacher, or in this case, a good education program.
As for technology in this case, I think at first our students were understandably more excited about the fun aspects of Second Life than the educational ones. Furthermore, communicating via second life versus was a challenge for them. Learning to interact with people from different backgrounds and communicate across new technology is obviously important. Our students are already proficient in the former and their cell phone usage would suggest they are experienced in the latter as well. However, the mix of both skills in Second Life did not work as well their previous experiences (both at communication across backgrounds and new technology) would suggest. However, Second Life did a good job of masking the different backgrounds of students so that learning opportunity was lost. Furthermore, our students never took full advantage of the communication possibilities that Second Life offered. That being said, our students have a better idea of using both skills than they did at the beginning of the program.
Coming in a new user of Second Life, I think it has a lot of educational potential. However, I think in the future we have to plan more for how students can best learn to use its communication for its maximum potential. That being said, our students clearly got a lot out of it and were excited throughout the process. IDZ went well and I am glad to have been a part of this program.
