Reading - FUNES, V. (2008). CHAPTER TEN: Advertising and Consumerism: A Space for Pedagogical Practice. Counterpoints, 338, 159-177. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.uproxy.library.dc-uoit.ca/stable/42979227
While we continue to discuss the difficulties in integrating technology into classrooms today, technology has faced many of the same challenges for ten plus years now. It is questionable how much ground we have actually gained over that time. There may be “more” technology physically in schools, however it is arguable whether this technology is actually being used effectively, or at all, in many cases.
In exploring advertising and education the pedagogies of Google and Microsoft come to mind. The what? you might ask? Although schools have (and continue to) reject being branded through advertisers like Coke and McDonalds, they have done just the opposite when it comes to technology companies like Google and Microsoft.
Funding is a response as to “why” a school/board etc would brand itself Google or Microsoft. This argument loses ground quickly when one considers that McDonalds and Tim Hortons fund hockey and soccer, amongst other sports, so why not technology? I have not invested much time into investigating why one type of branding is OK, however it would be of significant interest to do so.
From a pedagogy perspective, many learners see technology as an “app” and associate what they know about technology to their knowledge about companies they have experience with such as Google, Apple and Microsoft. These companies have done very well in advertising why their product is the one which offers the tools to support game based learning, inquiry based learning, problem based learning, differentiated learning and the like.