Old Rants: September 2006:

26 September 2006
Dewey This, Dewey That

"Dewey was convinced that the education of his day did not work. Why? Beccause educators have assumed education to be a preparation for future living rather than the experience of living now. You cannot prepare a child for the future because you do not know what the future will be like" (Castle 174).
In response to the Dewey quote:I think it is taught that teachers do not think about students' present lives, rather they think about what the student is to become (or who s/he is to become) in the future. Perhaps it is a little disconcerting for teachers to think about who their students are NOW, and it is easier to consider what they may be AFTER the teacher has had their effect on the student.
Posted by Dawn Larson at 3:34 PM 3 comments

Damage Control

Time to assess what I've done thus far:
- Podcast is done, burned, and ready to go. I can't wait for all of you to hear it. As far as I'm concerned, I am pleased with my efforts, and those of my willing comrade, my husband. What I attempted to do is to initiate a dialogue between the "Native" and the "Immigrant;" I think that the use of images rapidly speeding by are in-line with that of the Native, while the Immigrant is focused, stagnant, and looking backwards.
- Blogging is proving to be a bit bothersome, I'll admit, but now that I am done being sick and ready to be more active, I think I will be able to pick up speed in my posting and commenting on other people's blogs, and on the course blog.
- Wikis are interesting. Since I am the type of person who LOVES to start, to make progress, and to complete whatever I'm doing, wikis are trying my patience. I think the best practice I've had thus far is posting on Jack's SharedShortFiction. I added a paragraph or two, and can't wait to see where the story goes next.- Final Project projections are fuzzy. I'm not sure what I want to do, but I am intrigued by Flash Poetry, as suggestion on the course wiki. I am planning on taking a look at some of it during the next week to see if that is truly what I want to do. I love writing creatively, so I'm thinking it would be a great combination between the creative-me and the technologically-more-savvy-me. We'll see.
- Friedman and the Alvermann book are a lot when combined, but I'm finding that I think the two work well together, one source being a journalist and the others being educators/researchers. They provide both sides of the same angle, and that is helpful. More comments to come in future posts.Out.
Posted by Dawn Larson at 2:55 PM 0 comments

Print Control
According to the 3rd chapter in Alvermann, printed information is the source of control in the classroom:"The use of popular culture, represented by multimedia, may undermine the traditional control teachers enjoy when enacting prescribed curricula...The result is that intermediality, while overlooked by teachers ostensibly because it detracts from print literacy, is consequently enhanced in its subversive use by students...students' competence with digitized multiliteracies must be delegitimated because it has the potential to destablize teachers' control" (42).
If teacher control is derived from using the traditonal, canonical DWM texts to subdue and bore their students, then it is WORKING!
However, if a teacher's aim is to continuously learn and relearn their field, their content, and their methods, then maximizing student input, ideas, and technological aptitude is a no-brainer: we need to make use of our resources, including that of our students!
Alright, here's an example:If we decide as ELA teachers that WE are in control of the input-output flow of information, knowledge, and (perhaps even) wisdom, then it would be considered allowing students to "waste" time surfing when they could be doing...more important things like alternately reading Frankenstein and watching the movie version.
Better version of the above example (perhaps a bit more progressive):As ELA teachers, we realize that the students are the ones in control of their learning. If they don't want to, they won't. WHY waste their time and ours with mundane (though useful tools of assessment) essays, multiple choice questions, and all other traditional forms of understanding their knowledge? Perhaps, instead of the book/movie version, the students provide a set of presentations/podcasts/iMovies/etc. on their interpretation of Shelley's horror novel after reading the first half. Then, maybe it would be time to show CLIPS of the Hollywood versions, and do a compare/contrast between their versions and the expensive type.There are no limits to the ideas our students have. Why should we be the ones to put a cap on their imaginations??!
Posted by Dawn Larson at 2:23 PM 1 comments

Home Schooling
(Reposted from a comment made in Katie's blog)I knew a couple of people (for religious and personal reasons) that were home schooled in elementary and middle school, and then their parents enrolled them in high school to allow them to get "acclamated" to a social environment. This was outrageous! The people I knew were immediate outcasts to the cliches that had formed over the past 7 or 8 years, and though this changed slowly, and they were able to make friends, their social skills were definitely awkward and unrefined. It was as if they had spent the last decade of their lives in a secluded little cave...it was difficult to understand their weird behavior and unconformed forms of communication.Perhaps, it was a good thing to be in contact with them, but I am not sure it was entirely beneficial to them...it was definitely a rude awakening to the workings of the social world. Maybe the social web would help them to adjust to reality?
Posted by Dawn Larson at 2:21 PM 3 comments

19 September 2006
What, another blog?
I have done the impossible!I have created another blog, this time in beta, for me and my two siblings to communicate more effectively while we are all busy with college life. My sister is at SUNY Fredonia, my brother is at the Chicago Art Institute, and I am here.I'm hoping this will be a great new way for us to stay connected...when we have the time to.Just wanted to share the good news.Though they are the only ones able to comment, here's the site for fun: http://thegoodrichclan.blogspot.com/Dawn
Posted by Dawn Larson at 9:28 PM 1 comments
Labels: siblings

12 September 2006
Hello, beta!
Here is the link to the previous posts and comments from the non-beta blogger.http://creativewritingsenged.blogspot.com/
Posted by Dawn Larson at 4:53 PM 0 comments

"Negotiating and Creating Truth"

I am entirely intrigued by the idea of wikis. Having used Wikipedia numerous times myself to research online, I am a bit cautious about using it in the classroom. While needing to ensure privacy and other safety precautions is inherent, it also seems that the idea of ownership and validation through publication would be skewed a bit for both parties involved.

As Will says in his book: "Every day, thousands of people who have no connection to one another engage in the purposeful work of negotiating and creating truth" (62).

That is great in theory, but in a classroom where effort and application are measured by who does what work, the community effort challenges the traditional ideas of grades and the whole of the grading process.

How, for example, would using wikis in a literature classroom, where students are reading and writing creatively, give them an advantage over group discussion? I can definitely see the use of blogs, but wikis seem to be less of a tool and more of a reference. Or, would it suffice to say that wikis will eventually replace in-class discussion with the availability of more technology in homes?

It also seems interesting when considering ownership when asking about authorship and plagarism. Just because a student submits ideas and pages of information onto the wiki, that doesn't mean it was his work...I know, the same goes for papers and essays and such, but...it would seem so EASY to forge or borrow ideas from someone else, pass it off as his own, and then receive a grade for participation without repercussions. After all, how can you prove it was his work or someone else's?!

Too many questions.

"Nearly," "Many," and other ideas about technology

In reading Bruce's piece "Diversity and Critical Social Engagement," it was clear that this was written by a Digital Immigrant. While I myself am no Native, I am also not a full-blood Immigrant, and I was curious as to a particular statement buried in Bruce's writing:

"Today nearly every school in the United States has Internet access and many students have access at home, in libraries, or in community centers as well" (ed. Alverman p 4).

Okay, so one of the first things that I learned in English exposition and composition is that words such as "nearly" and "many" lack any conviction toward the argument at hand. Actually, they seem to demean his argument. Whereby, in the earlier portion of the paragraphs Bruce lists concrete numbers and stats, here there are none.

Technology is great, but it is expensive, and unless schools have funding or have great teachers to write for grants to help the schools out, I'm not sure "nearly" every school is there. I know I'm nit-picking, but one thing I've learned is not to trust every source I read. Sure, Bruce is discussing Internet access, but the questions arise exponentially: how many students are able to use the computers available everyday; how accessible are the computers; what is the ratio of computers to students; what about those students with no free time during the day or after school to use them; what type of community do these students live in and what type of funding do they have available at the school; how involved are parents in their educations and are they in support of technology; etc. etc. etc.

I'm sure that Bruce knew what he was talking about, and what he meant by his evasive statement, but this seems to support the "digital divide" we've discussed. If there are not any numbers to back his claim up, then maybe there are no studies that have been done, but I don't think that is it. There is a huge difference, economically, between students who have computers at home or have to go to libraries to use them; perhaps this should have been discussed as well.

If all of these schools, or a lot of them, have access to the Internet why are we not making greater use of them in classrooms? Is is because there are not computers in classrooms, but in labs that have to be signed out ahead of time?

Access does not equal availability, so the question is:
Who is the technology available to and when?

Curious Incident of Advertising

I was driving to work today, and a familiar advertising sign caught my eye. Usually this company puts up amusing, punny jokes that I laugh at, but this time it seemed more like a statement on the world at large. Since the company is in real estate, I hardly ever expected it to say:

Teen Motto:
To each his phone

Alright, I know. The nice little play on words to the adage "to each his own," where in this case the identity, the "owning," is wrapped up neatly in the cell phone. I thought this observation was highly astute, regardless of its one-dimensional humor(which I enjoy).

Teens are with their phones 24/7/365. The phone is their link to their friends, their family, their co-workers, while also being their safety net in emergencies, their address book, their daybook, their photo album, their reminder of birthdays/anniversaries, their mp3 player, their saving grace in boring classes (games, text mess, etc.), etc. etc.

It used to be: You are who you read.

Now, it is: You are what your cell tells the world you are.

Image almost speaks louder than words.

But, the question lingers: who are teens without their cell phones?!?

Teachers who learn AND teach??!

I just snuck over to see what W. Richardson's been mulling over...and found a great post that intrigued me, nonetheless, since the idea of "teacher" is changing constantly, perhaps everyday. This excerpt is from his latest post, 30 Aug, entitled: http://weblogg-ed.com/2006/teachers-as-learners-part-27/ (teachers as learners part 27):

In a world where knowledge is scarce (and I know I’m using that phrase an awful lot these days), I can see why we needed teachers to be, well, teachers. But here’s what I’m wondering: in a world where knowledge is abundant, is that still the case? In a world where, if we have access, we can find what we need to know, doesn’t a teacher’s role fundamentally change? Isn’t it more important that the adults we put into the rooms with our kids be learners first? Real, continual learners? Real models for the practice of learning? People who make learning transparent and really become a part of the community?
I hesitate to make blanket statements about teachers because a) they are seldom appropriate (the statements, that is) and b) they get me in trouble. But when I ask myself what percentage of the thousands of teachers I’ve worked with over the past two years are practicing learners, I have a hard time convincing myself that it’s more than half. Maybe even one-third.
I’m not saying this is necessarily their fault. We teach teachers to teach, we don’t teach teachers to learn. Even in professional development, we teach them stuff they need to be better teachers, but do we give them the skills they need to be better learners? Do we evaluate them on what they’ve been reading? On what they’ve been writing? On their reflectiveness?

I think this is one of the key issues that we are dealing with now: what IS a teacher?

Semantically speaking, s/he cannot only be someone who teaches because there is so much evolving in the world, technology, society, education, that what the teacher knows one day is "radically changed" the next.

So then, if teachers are suddenly (like this is a "new" concept...and it is for most) to become active teachers, aka active learners, then education is in for a rocky future. What about those teachers who have been at it for 20+ years, and it may be too late for those "old dogs"? What about their students...should we just say that they'll pick up the skills they should already have with the next teacher who is with the times? Or should there be specified refresher courses for all?

While technology is a huge factor in this question, since computers are the gateway to the future, I think that dramatically requestioning and reconfiguring what a teacher is would ultimately be the most important step in understanding the changes for education. I don't consider myself a teacher, probably because I lack the "teaching" experience as of yet, but also because I define myself as a perpetual student, always searching, reading, looking for answers...and I think this is what teachers need to do rather than just teaching.

Thanks, Will. You've put into words what I've already been thinking.

Teacher= learner

Intro

Here's my first post to this new blog. As I write this, I wonder how this experience is going to vary from my first couple of rantings on class blogs, and then the not so successful summer blog that I started with friends. I'm hoping that with the proper motivation (class) and the necessary interest (readings/ideas/etc) this blog will be AMAZING.

Alright, so already, my expectations are torn between optimism and realism. Story of my life.

Some goals for myself and the prolific future of this blog: maintenance, comments from classmembers to further it along, avoiding stagnation, using new tools, and when in doubt, falling back on the loads of new information/technology I will be receiving this semester.

Sounds good.