"Today's workplaces need citizens who can think independently and analyze complex information. Information available is changing so rapidly that it is not so important that students memorize as much, but instead be available to locate the most current information on a topic and analyze and synthesize it. They must be able to locate information from multiple sources and perspectives. Collaboration skills are essential, as very little work is isolated and discrete. Technology has turned us into a global economy, and we must now understand and compete with the entire world." (http://coe.west.asu.edu/students/rberger/tech.htm)

As my understanding of the role of an educator grows and expands, I can't help but realize that my career of choice is not so much about us teachers as it is about the young minds that are entrusted to us. These students who, though they sit in their seats staring at us with the blank stares of boredom, chewing gum they're not supposed to have in class and secretly listening to their ipods when they should be turning to page 46 of their workbook...these students are the citizens of tomorrow, those who will run the world. The difference is that while 50 years ago, people ran the world from the podium, the pulpit, the fields, the stage and the factory, today more and more, it is being run from in front of a screen. Times are a'changing, and so, as educators, we must be prepared.

I am not sure how I feel about this change. I have my misgivings. It seems so backwards that students need to be able to access information more than they need to know it well or understand it deeply---is that not what we always learned was essential to pass exams? And if knowing what there is to know today is more or less important, because tomorrow, or in a few hours, it will be different---are we not losing the depth of knowledge to the shallow, unsatiable race for information? I always thought that knowledge was important, that things like old books and well-worn pages and oft-told stories were the real jewels of education, that what was passed down from generation to generation had value and meaning because it had stood the test of time. How can anything be considered meaningful and valuable if by tomorrow it will be old news, or if there are so many other pieces of information vying for young minds that those age-old truths are swept away and lost? If we feed their already-shortened attentions spans with the lightning-speed information that they are used to getting everywhere else, are we still being true to the traditions of teaching?

But what do I know...I'm only beginning my career.

What I do know is that in everything, there must be a balance. There must be a way to shape young minds for the future, equipping them to take their places as the future citizens of the world that they are meant to be, while still imparting them with knowledge, and things of substance that they can chew on, wrestle with, think deeply about, and grow on. I also know that to do so it is essential to meet students on their own level. We will never reach the digital generation unless we speak...digital. Maybe it is a question of stretching the traditional methods of teaching to fit the mould of the world today, and not at all a loss of any kind, but more of an adaptation of what is and always will be the role of an educator.

What do you think?