Blog Quiz: Teaching in Global 3.0

Task #2 - What a College Education "Buys"

Apparently a college education isn't something for everyone - and at the risk of offending someone, I tend to agree. Yet, I wonder why saying that would offend anyone at all. Look at Will and the fact that he doesn't want to go any further in his education (am I saying that he feels that his education up to this point was a waste? Absolutely not!). He simply feels there are other ways of educating students besides putting them in a classroom surrounded by four walls. A great number of adults from my parent's generation were self-taught - maybe not in the realm of technology, but their classroom was their life. And now today with all the means of learning at someone's disposal the kind of education all of us need has drastically changed.

At the same time. I question whether it's students who do not possess the "intellectual capacity to reach basic achievement levels" or teachers who do not teach in a way that makes the education our children are getting useful - are we teaching them to be consumers of information who know what information they need to know and can navigate the technology at their hands to obtain this information? Freidman would agree it's important for them to be able to navigate the information network - knowing how to find the information they need to know.

And having said all of that, the graphics in this article say that one of the occupations with the most job openings for college graduates is post-secondary teachers. So, if college is not for everyone I would guess the numbers in this category would fall dramatically. We certainly don't need lots more college professors if our children are not really capable of a college education. If everyone decides this is true, then many people could find themselves without jobs when they get their diplomas. Scary thought!!!

Task #3 - RSS: A "Killer App"

I added several RSS feeds to my blog - it was fairly easy to do if you followed the directions that Will gave (it must be easy if I thought it was)! I also found something interesting in our text - he talks about "vanity feeds" so you can track what other people are saying about your blog and "being alerted whenever someone is linking back to you". I guess this must be how Will found Savannah's blog and has come to be such a big fan. I think I'll create my own Technorati and see who is checking out my blog.

I would use the RSS with my students to help them with their research papers - great idea having things come to you 24/7 about a subject you are interested in researching. You could also set up a website and have your students use the RSS to access all of the information in their blog. I want to do it myself with eSchool News - right now I have all of the current articles e-mailed to me at my Cortland address. Who knew that I could simply have access to this website on my blog? I learn something new every single day in this class. I can't wait to try this and see if I can make it work - freeing up e-mail space on my Cortland account.

Get Rid of People Who Aren't Any Good?!!?

Yes, this article is talking about us - those who want to be teachers. However, at the risk of offending anyone I guess I understand about concern about teachers having their jobs for "life". Nowhere in corporate America - at least to my knowledge - can someone have a job for life. So, why should we be surprised when corporate America doesn't think we should have that privilege. Maybe our kids would be learning more - you know the whole "rigor" concept - if teachers weren't so secure in their jobs. If we constantly were required to reassess our teaching methods in order to keep our jobs maybe our students would be doing better in school - or maybe not. It's just a thought.

Maybe I have a different opinion on all of this since the possibility I will get in enough years of teaching to qualify for tenure are almost impossible. However, I don't think we should become complacent in our jobs just because we can. It's time for all of us to step up to the plate and take some type of responsibility for the fact that students in this country do not do as well as those from other countries. Whose fault is that? I'm not sure - a little bit of parents, a little bit of the student, and maybe even a little bit of their teacher's fault (yes I said maybe their teacher holds some ownership in all of this).

I suppose my opinion is not a popular one - anymore than the one expressed at this convention. However, it's my opinion.

High Schoolers Learning Less

I can honestly say that I am not surprised by this new study. I am a firm believer that "better" test scores do not necessarily mean that our students are actually learning more. I have no doubt that some classes do "dummy down" their curriculum and I am also certain that some teachers curve test scores to make it appear as if their students are doing better than they actually are - I have been in courses like that myself (one very recently in my educational career). It is hard for teachers to look at our classes who may not be doing that well and admit that perhaps we need to examine our teaching methods, etc. for the answer to the problem.

I have heard so much lately about "teaching to standardized testing" that I wonder how kids can actually do poorly on these tests. Is it just an excuse when teachers ask how they are supposed to teach their students when they have to be so concerned about the standardized tests? If the students aren't doing well on these tests, then what are they learning? Or are they simply learning things that are not included on these tests? I really don't have an answer to those questions. Maybe someone else knows and could enlighten me.

When I graduated from high school I know that there were some who graduated at the same time that I did that - surprisingly or not - could not read or write. How can these things possibly happen in today's schools? I wonder if we, as educators, parents, or students, place enough emphasis on the importance of school and learning and what it means for our future and the future of generations to come. This whole study leaves me wondering if it's "No Child Left Behind" or "Every Child Left Behind". In a generation when it is important for us to be prepared to take on two or even three careers over the course of our lives, education becomes of even greater importance.

Musings on Podcast Project

I can honestly say that I learned alot when I did our podcast, and that most of that learning came from sitting down with the rest of the members of my team and "playing around" with garage band. I still don't feel that I am anywhere near as savvy with this as I could be, but I also understand that all of that takes time and practice and that I will not be an expert with one project.

I think it's important that students be given the chance in our classrooms to "work with their hands" and to have team members that they can count on for help and encouragement. If I had been required to do this project alone, I highly doubt that I would have been able to. However, having others to help and explain things to me really was a plus. I am sure that they pulled more weight than I did in this project, but the important thing is that I really do feel that I learned something, and I am in a slightly better position to be able to put together a podcast at a future date.

I don't think that this project changed any of my thinking as a future educator. I have always been a fan of the classroom where students get to try their hands at things and I am a firm believer that that is a great way to learn. It is something that I did not have in classrooms in my educational career, and maybe that's why I feel it's so important. I really don't know for certain, but I just want to give my students the best of all worlds and if that means that I have to become a sort of "media expert" then that is what I will strive to do.

Reading the World in the Word/Image!

#1 -- When I looked at the six core assumptions in PLS, I found at least three that coincided with Renee Hobbs research project. The first one was that "media literacy teaches critical thinking skills such as understanding bias and credibility through rigorous analysis of appropriate media documents". In Renee Hobbs research she is trying to find out how Latinos in North Philadelphia analyze tobacco advertising, etc. She is trying to to find out how such bias as that from which the tobacco industry creates their advertisements are understood by those reading the ads in magazines.

Secondly, in her research on students at Montgomery Blair High School she is trying to find out the impact of media on students outside relationships - family, community, etc. This is in line with PLS's #6 , which says that "media literacy is essential for the development of informed, reflective an active citizens in a democratic society".

Last, her articles that she publishes on lesson plans and curriculum materials gives teachers the chance to look at these materials - and these materials are materials that "integrate media literacy into K-12 instruction". PLS's #2 says that "media literacy can and should be integrated across the K-12 curricula at all grade levels and in multiple subject areas".

It would seem that Renee Hobb's research and work falls right in line with the work being done by Project Look Sharp.


#2 -- Renee Hobbs is studying the effects of media on the outside lives of people as those of students and teachers in the academic setting. Her research takes on the media influence at all age levels and in different schools. It encompasses both the students as well as the teachers. I think from reading the article that she understands the need for students to be able to read the media and understand and critically analyze what the media is saying. I think that is so important since so much of what students access today comes from media sources. I also feel that her work falls right in line with Project Look Sharp. Both understand the impact of media on the lives of today's students and their need to be able to adequately assess the material that they are reading.

#3 -- ELA Standard #3 says that "Students will read, write, listen and speak for information and understanding - using knowledge generated from oral, written and electronically produced texts". I think that her book clearly addresses this standard from the very beginning when she talks about her students being engaged in assessing "reality shows" and where they fall on a real/unreal line. She used this media (television) which most kids are very much into and used that media to assess information (finding out things about her students) as well as involving them in critical thinking and assessment. I had never really thought about something this simple as a means of getting kids to think critically. I was amazed.

Bonus -- The article "Literacy for the 21st Century: The Hope and the Promise" was extremely interesting. It addresses the issue that in today's world information comes to us through multi-media as much as through the written words on a page, and how that fluency in reading and writing now means fluency in the "language of printed communications" as well. I really hadn't given that much thought before, but it is definitely so true.

The article talks about "creating a response so that others can know what I now know": we do this in our class with the blog - as I sit here writing I am sharing with others what I know (and sometimes what I don't know as well).

I guess the most important thing is that I am slowly beginning to realize how today's student is not as much involved in knowing everything as they are in knowing how to access what they don't know. When I attended school the teacher was the expert who shared the knowledge with us and what I learned came directly from that person. Now that is not the case. The student doesn't need to learn all of the things that I did because they can access it through a range of media that was not at my disposal. They can access the information - they don't need to memorize the facts, but they definitely need to know how to access that information. I guess that I would call this the "access generation".

My only fear remains one that I find constantly nagging at me. Megan had written in her blog that we as teachers must make sure that the technology is available to our students - writing grants, etc. to see that the computers and internet are available in our classrooms. I agree with that, however, my biggest concern is for those who do not have that access at home. It's really difficult to assume that someone who is struggling simply to feed their family is going to take the time to drive their children to the library to use the computer to do their homework. I wish that we lived in a society where everyone has computer access, but I simply do not believe that is the case. I don't have answers to that part of the problem, and I know that I am probably worrying needlessly. However, I cannot help but rely on my own experience, and I know how deeply frustrated I was at the beginning of this semester when financial concerns kept me from having internet access at home for the first two weeks of classes. I just don't want us as educators to be put in a position to put more pressure on families that are already overwhelmed with the everyday struggles of feeding and clothing their kids.

We were just talking last night about Wikipedia and some parent's concerns about the content on this website and then I read an article about a new site being launched. You can go to the site and read about this if you would like. The article was in eSchool News and it tells how the new site will be more authoritative and will use experts to edit the postings on this site. I thought the article was really interesting. Amazing how we discuss something in class and the next day I read something about that same thing.

In the article on educational technology trends to watch for in eSchool News, I was interested in the prospects of there being educational games for students. I think that is a wonderful idea. All we need to do is look at the success of LeapFrog/LeapPad for young kids and how much it helps them learn (all the while they are having fun), and I can see how learning with games is a great idea.

I know that in our World Politics class last semester with Dr. Hull we used the game Civilization III to learn about what goes into the makeup of countries and got to develop our own society and create our own foreign policy and determine which things were most important to our country's survival. It was a great game, as well as a great learning experience. Most importantly, it is also historically accurate - what a great teaching tool. However, the most amazing part is that I still sit down at my computer and play a game every now and then, even though I'm not a history major or anything remotely similar. I just find the game fun - and I am learning at the same time.

This sort of technology can be a great tool - especially for students who are not motivated learners in certain subjects. I have never been a history fan, but playing this game was something that captured my attention, and I had a great time learning.