Being Taught

Teaching or, more accurately, being taught, is only one way to learn. Let's not knock teaching, or teachers, though, because I believe it is also one of the most effective ways of learning and improving teaching is one of the best ways of improving results four learners.
I say teaching is only one way to learn because there are other ways, such as studying, being coached or mentored, being an apprentice, or learning from experience. Traditionally, these other approaches have been used in later learning, after school in college, university or workplace learning. However, for several years, studying has been increasingly seen in schools, initially high schools but also, nowadays, in primary institutions. Sometimes this has been self-directed study by the learner but it has more often been directed study set by the teacher.
Some people may argue that I am quibbling over semantics but I disagree, I believe that studying, coaching etc. are quite distinct from teaching. I accept that we often use the term teaching as a generic term to cover all that goes on in the classroom and beyond in schools but still, I believe that closer examination can determine differences in learners studying and being taught.
My point here is that if schools or teachers are going to increasingly require their learners to study, then they, the schools, need to ensure that the learners have access to quality study materials. It can be argued that technology allows learners greater access to a wide variety of learning resources to support their study but are all of these of equal or suitable quality? A rhetorical question, of course, because they are not.
On the one hand I am arguing for schools allowing access to quality resources and sources, while on the other hand, I would also argue for allowing learners access to a wider range of sharing and collaborative services, which may be less authoritative and less accurate, not to mention carry more risk. The onus here is upon schools/teachers, to vet sources, perhaps, to ensure that learners can be directed to a range of known reliable sources. If the learner then seeks to supplement these with knowledge garnered from other sources, then so be it, let's praise such a learner.
To my mind, this access to quality sources for study in schools could be a role played by a VLE. Now I am not suggesting here a return to the closed garden approach of old, though I admit, even to my ears, it might sound like it at first. What I am suggesting is that the VLE allows or guides access to quality sources/resources as a first port of call or as a minimum baseline. Other sources can be accessed as the student sees fit.

Myth

Teachers need training before they can use technology. The key word in that sentence is before. It cannot be denied that teachers can benefit from training and that training can produce benefits for education. However, the notion held by some that teachers need training before they use technology is somewhat erroneous, especially when the excuse is one used by those teachers themselves who are not using technology. Did you receive training in using a washing machine, a television, a radio, a video recorder (remember them?) or mobile phone, before you started using them, almost certainly not. Electronic technology is different in that it is more versatile and significant than any one of those other devices but you do not need training before you start to use it. Indeed, training in education technology use is often more effective when taking users beyond the basics of operating the device(s)/service(s) and developing their use in the curriculum.