Blog Sān

It's Not about the Technology

I thoroughly enjoyed Mrs. Hines' thoughts on technology and her subtle sarcasm to why it is oh so essential in the classroom.I was interested from the beginning of the article with her emphasis on the word "need" in the second paragraph ("What do we need to bring us into the future? What will our children need to know..."). In any situation, I believe that "need" is a strong and usually unnecessary word, especially when talking about technology. If we "need" computers and all of this evolving technology using blogs, twitter, Skype to be effective teachers, isn't it a wonder how anyone survived before computers were invented. Similarly, I agree with Tfry19's (2/2011) comment that said teachers should be more focused on using what they have and making the most of it rather than complaining that they are not provided enough resources/technology.

I really like Mrs. Hines' # 1 and 2 ways in which teachers can effectively impact children (relating to the need to be teachers and learners). I, too, am confused how teachers who were taught how and what to teach 50 years ago and those who finished school 3 months ago teach the same children. It was always a bragging point in school if your teacher didn't assign work dealing with current subjects because obviously the work was always easier. Work that didn't involve analyzing social issues or a news articles impact on society. More so, it was an even better competition to see who could text the most in front of the older teachers. I am not putting down older teachers in the least, just that it is important for all teachers to be on the same learning/teaching level. However, I think this balance of old and new methods is good for a school district. It teaches children to be flexible learners and better problem solvers when the problems can be presented in a variety of ways.

Is It Okay To Be Technologically Illiterate?"

Wow. Mr. Fisch clearly states that he wrote this after a frustrating day of work, but his comments are still extremely extreme. And I guess most people need to be that want their opinions to mean something, get a response. (I would say almost 600 comments and winning an award confirms that.) I think his comparison of being technologically literate and reading literacy makes a strong case for readers. It helps that he backs this with facts and the gradual difficulty in finding a job being illiterate rather than an extreme divide. I also agree with his claim that students will not wait for teachers to catch up with the technology of this day, we only have so much patience and time in a classroom before being sent off to live on our own. However, I think he overlooks the idea that because people my age grew up with it, we could, and should, be the ones teaching our teachers. I know my parents were always amazed when I could do their computer work (sending e-mails, etc.) so quickly. In contrast, I also know my teachers were frustrated when I had finished an online assignment before they explained how to use the program.

I also know there are many reasons why there is this divide between the technological literacy of teachers, old and new, and between teachers and students. In addition, I think Frank (the 1st comment on the post) sums it up quite nicely. Fear. Growing up, children aren't afraid to make mistakes, whatever it is- making un-edible cookies, hitting a tennis ball against the house (and through a window...unfortunately coming from personal experience), and contracting computer viruses. Everything to a child is fixable. However, when you're an adult, and all of your work is expected to be done on a computer, the evident room for error is enormous. You don't know whether making a mistake won't affect the work or cause your whole computer to crash. So, I believe it's not whether teachers need to be technologically literate, but technological experimenters. The difference between giving them a computer and saying "don't break it," or going out on a limb and saying "try to break this, see what it takes, and learn your limits."

A picture from the movie Short Circuit. (The cheesiest video, but also quite funny). The robot cannot get enough information, flying through every book in Stephanie's house, and always asking for "Mooooore input Stephanie. INPUT Stephanie." in a typical robot voice. Maybe this is what Fisch expects teachers to say when presented with more and more technology...


Social Media Counter

Double Wow. Aside from the fact that this is probably based off daily/some kind of average, these numbers are unfathomable. Beyond my comprehension. I cannot imagine 300 billion of anything, let alone that many emails sent globally in one day. These numbers (although Facebook and many YouTube videos are blocked in schools) obviously have many implications for educators of any kind. I think the idea as a whole relates well back to the Did You Know 3.0 video and the statement that the information we are learning in college will be irrelevant in the "real world" in 2 years. In one sense, what a waste of thousands of tuition dollars, right?

On the other hand, it is a challenge to teachers of any kind. A challenge to be able to teach young minds in a way they can understand, the same methods society is teaching them. I can just imagine in the next 5-10 years a student saying, "these videos are dumb; nobody uses YouTube anymore, don't you know?" Or, "Facebook? That's for old people...or young kids." Who knows. A better way to accept this challenge is not only to learn the information, but to learn how to teach problem solving so that the students can go out, explore, and learn more about different things that can be contained in a classroom. Cultivate a desire for learning rather than accepting a book-ful of information as true just because the teacher says it is.

A Vision of Students Today

The main message that comes to mind after watching this video is boredom. Kids today have the capability to do so many different things, think different things, and learn different things, but what help is listening to one person speak for over an hour. Call it ADHD or not (I would rather not- one less over diagnosis and one less excuse to do poorly on classwork. Another issue, another time), but I personally cannot keep my mind that focused for even an hour. If I can be reading a book, doodling, or working on other homework while a teacher is lecturing, I retain so much more of the information. If these things are taken away by the teacher, I fall asleep. Amidst all of the television, computers, advertisements, magazines, and etc., society has taught us to embrace stimulation. If our brains are not stimulated and prodded to learn- more importantly to want to learn something- they shut down. It's not worth the time.

Teachers know that college students spend more time looking at Facebook than at the whiteboard in a class period; that's not any secret. I believe the challenge on their part should not be "how do I keep them off Facebook?," but "how can I interest them enough that they would rather look at me than their computer screen?" Hard tests or tests with information coming from only the lecture can certainly do this. So can stimulation and entertainment. Funny teachers or teachers that tell stories certainly catch my attention- really anything that is not classroom material. Finding a way to work useful information into these stories, unbeknownst to the student, is even better. Have a student teach; or have the other students critique someone's work that is shown on the board. Admit it, everyone likes to be a know-it-all and put someone else down every once in a while.


.