The second class started on a lively note: we sang happy birthday to Débora and then got a bit of a scolding from the professor 😃. Jokes aside, what he asked from us was more depth in our research and more international reading. It was a direct kind of feedback, but necessary at the same time.
I definitely took that to heart, because my week had been chaotic with my family visiting and I ended up only doing the required readings. Still, it made me realize how urgent it is to go after more references, because I need to build my repertoire better and not rely only on what the course already provides. After all, two years go by so fast.
Another point that really stayed with me was his suggestion that we should follow our classmates’ blogs, comment, debate, and talk about what is being produced. That made me think that we are, in fact, in a different stage of education now. It is no longer the logic of undergraduate studies, where discussion often only happens when the professor pushes it. In a master’s or PhD program, that movement also has to come from us, because the exchange among colleagues is not just a detail. It is part of the very construction of knowledge.
And that was especially interesting because it connected with something I had already been feeling since the first class, which was the desire to form a study group. That same week we also had the opening sessions for the master’s program, and in one of those moments, after the students’ presentation session, I stayed with Martone to talk about the professor’s latest blog post, because we both had some doubts about what we had read. Without much ceremony, we just started discussing it right there. We grabbed the classroom whiteboard, a marker, and started building a mind map together, and it was incredibly productive. Nobody had to tell us it was time to discuss. We simply began.
That moment was really valuable because we started organizing what we were understanding about the concepts of ICT, DICT, and DT. One of us would bring an interpretation, the other would agree, disagree, add something, and that is how the conversation moved forward. For me, it made very clear how much studying together makes a difference. When we debate, ideas start moving in a different way. What sometimes feels blurry when you are alone starts to take shape in a group. And I found it really beautiful to see that happening so naturally.
From that debate on, it became much easier to finish the week’s readings, because the concepts already had some structure.
Going back to Monday’s class, another important discussion we had was the idea that whether technology is or is not a tool depends a lot on the epistemology of teaching, as the image below shows.
It may sound obvious, but for me it was an extremely important insight for my research to understand that the way we name technology already reveals a conception of teaching. In other words, it is not just a choice of words. It is a theoretical, epistemological, and even political choice about how we understand the process of teaching and learning.
From the middle to the end of the class, we worked on the next problem, which led us to discussions about innovation in teaching, what changes when technology enters the classroom, what the difference is between information and communication technologies and digital information and communication technologies, what exactly we mean when we talk about digital technology, and even how all of this connects to digital culture. It was a class that raised many questions, and to me that is always a good sign, because when a class leaves too many questions in your head, it means it is still working inside you.
I left that second class feeling that it was very important, especially because it placed me in front of a truth I already knew but did not really want to face just yet. I need to expand my repertoire. It was one of those moments when you realize you cannot keep putting things off, you cannot keep staying only in the realm of intention. It is time to really get to work, study more consistently, and make this knowledge grow alongside my research.
Your reflection clearly shows how postgraduate education requires a more active role from the researcher. I found it particularly interesting how you connect the professor’s feedback with the need to expand your theoretical repertoire and seek more international references. The study moment with Martone also highlights an essential aspect of graduate studies: knowledge is constructed through dialogue. The discussion about ICT, DICT, and digital technology demonstrates how conceptual choices are closely linked to conceptions of teaching, which is fundamental for research in technology and education.
ResponderExcluir“It is true; it occurred naturally. We discussed the activity proposed in the last class and mentioned the professor’s post related to the terminologies and the conceptual and epistemological foundation of the research group in adopting the term Digital Technologies (D.T.). However, we realized the need to deepen other readings in order to better understand it, since this choice is aligned with dialogical, socio-interactionist, and connectivist perspectives.”
ResponderExcluir