An RSS feed links people together by showing them the latest content on such media as blogs, podcasts, etc.
I use a few RSS feeds just on this blog...people around the world can see my new content as it is blogged, view who has seen my blog recently, view my pictures and my profile, and view my "delicious" sites.
I also subscribe to 43things.com, where people can see the latest feeds on my interests/life goals.
In the classroom, I can see RSS feeds being used in a number of ways. First of all, isn't the classroom environment an RSS feed in itself? Students learn from each other, the teacher gives new information as she sees it, and the students can interact.
The teacher could also give students the opportunity to create their own blogs, which would serve as an RSS feed. The students can also use social bookmarkings as RSS feeds.
Monday, February 26, 2007
What Education "Buys"
In the TIMES article, the author notes that the American colledge education seems to be highly overrated. Students pour way too much money into an education that will not give them any particular direction in life after school.
Caldwell believes that the push to lower the cost for a college education was a step in the right direction, but the college experience is only ideal for a certain amount of the American population. Some people ar right for college, and some are not, according to Caldwell.
Friedman would say that Caldwell's idea is a bit pessimistic. That only a certain amount of people can achieve success in college is subjective and does not show the endless possibilities and resources college can give.
Friedman would also believe that Caldwell does not embrace the globalized world. Caldwell references French culture and schooling. He believes that the French have a better understanding of education, and make more possibilities for French students. Friedman would oppose Caldwell because Friedman believes the world is connected. Through globalization and the "3.0" theory, all countries are connected and have the potential of using similar resources.
Caldwell believes that the push to lower the cost for a college education was a step in the right direction, but the college experience is only ideal for a certain amount of the American population. Some people ar right for college, and some are not, according to Caldwell.
Friedman would say that Caldwell's idea is a bit pessimistic. That only a certain amount of people can achieve success in college is subjective and does not show the endless possibilities and resources college can give.
Friedman would also believe that Caldwell does not embrace the globalized world. Caldwell references French culture and schooling. He believes that the French have a better understanding of education, and make more possibilities for French students. Friedman would oppose Caldwell because Friedman believes the world is connected. Through globalization and the "3.0" theory, all countries are connected and have the potential of using similar resources.
2.0 to 3.0
In response to Friedman's discussion of transforming from a 2.0 to 3.0 world, ELA teachers should be wary when we try to bring our students from one dimensional learners to three dimensional learners. Friedman explains that when we go from a 2.0 to a 3.0 world, we go from a "platform" of communication between people to a "platform" of communication between countries that would not have had the opportunities to communicate prior.
In the classroom, this idea translates to making the door open for opportunities of communication at all levels. Whether through literature, the internet, research projects, or blogging, the 3.0 world expands our imaginations on what we have to explore.
Students in the 3.0 world will be able to communicate on a wider range than a 2.0 world. They will be more effective communicators so that they can learn alongside people from other settings (ie different countries).
Students can involve themselves in pen pals through blogs or podcasts. They will be able to converse with students from other towns, cities, states, even countries.
My concern is that students are shown how to communicate with their peers around them. It is amazing to communicate with people via satellite (ie computers, podcasts), but students need to be able to have person to person interaction. I feel this component of communication is more important. Once students master the person to person skills, then the 3.0 world can be in the near future. But I do not believe that person to person interaction is below the country to country interaction.
In the classroom, this idea translates to making the door open for opportunities of communication at all levels. Whether through literature, the internet, research projects, or blogging, the 3.0 world expands our imaginations on what we have to explore.
Students in the 3.0 world will be able to communicate on a wider range than a 2.0 world. They will be more effective communicators so that they can learn alongside people from other settings (ie different countries).
Students can involve themselves in pen pals through blogs or podcasts. They will be able to converse with students from other towns, cities, states, even countries.
My concern is that students are shown how to communicate with their peers around them. It is amazing to communicate with people via satellite (ie computers, podcasts), but students need to be able to have person to person interaction. I feel this component of communication is more important. Once students master the person to person skills, then the 3.0 world can be in the near future. But I do not believe that person to person interaction is below the country to country interaction.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Matching the Standards
The NCTE English Language Arts standards are quite similar to the PLS standards. For example
"Students read a wide range of print and non-print texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works"
is just like the PLS standard that proclaims
"Media literacy is essential for the development of informed, reflective and active citizens in a democratic society."
Both of these standards show that literacy is about expanding a person's knowledge and understanding about the society around them so that they can be more effective citizens and individuals.
The NCTE standard that says
"Students apply a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts. They draw on their prior experience, their interactions with other readers and writers, their knowledge of word meaning and of other texts, their word identification strategies, and their understanding of textual features (e.g., sound-letter correspondence, sentence structure, context, graphics)"
is also like the PLS standard that says
"Media Literacy teaches critical thinking skills such as understanding bias and credibility through rigorous analysis of appropriate media documents."
Both of these standards show that critical analysis skills are used whether through media literacy or any other type of literacy.
Overall, the standards between the NCTE and the PLS principles are all interrelated because they are all aimed at improving the lives of students. When the standards are built upon a constructivist, educationally sound pedagogy, then the directions and aims of the administrators and "higher ups" will all be similar.
"Students read a wide range of print and non-print texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works"
is just like the PLS standard that proclaims
"Media literacy is essential for the development of informed, reflective and active citizens in a democratic society."
Both of these standards show that literacy is about expanding a person's knowledge and understanding about the society around them so that they can be more effective citizens and individuals.
The NCTE standard that says
"Students apply a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts. They draw on their prior experience, their interactions with other readers and writers, their knowledge of word meaning and of other texts, their word identification strategies, and their understanding of textual features (e.g., sound-letter correspondence, sentence structure, context, graphics)"
is also like the PLS standard that says
"Media Literacy teaches critical thinking skills such as understanding bias and credibility through rigorous analysis of appropriate media documents."
Both of these standards show that critical analysis skills are used whether through media literacy or any other type of literacy.
Overall, the standards between the NCTE and the PLS principles are all interrelated because they are all aimed at improving the lives of students. When the standards are built upon a constructivist, educationally sound pedagogy, then the directions and aims of the administrators and "higher ups" will all be similar.
Media Literacy
When I read the PLS media literacy principles, I remembered a class I took in high school called Broadcast Journalism. Like the PLS principles, we were taught to analyze the media, mostly television. We would pick apart news shows in order to see how messages are portrayed and the target audiences used for different shows.
The PLS principles are evocative and interesting. I believe that "Media Literacy teaches critical thinking skills such as understanding bias and credibility through rigorous analysis of appropriate media documents" is one of the most profound of the principles. As teachers, we strive to show our students how to use critical analysis when they view the world around them."
What better way than to critique the forums that they are confronted with every day (ie media)?
Hobbs' research shows that teachers are branching literacy to also incorporate "media" literacy. In this ever-changing world, students need to be able to interact and scrutinize the world around them. If they are constantly bombarded with television, then they should be aware of how television is being portrayed. More importantly, students should be able to find the faults with the media as well as embrace the positive advantages.
I believe that media literacy not only helps analyze the media, but it also prepares students to analyze other forums, such as their own behavior, literature, etc. The skills used in MEDIA literacy can be used for ALL literacy and ALL facets of life.
The PLS principles are evocative and interesting. I believe that "Media Literacy teaches critical thinking skills such as understanding bias and credibility through rigorous analysis of appropriate media documents" is one of the most profound of the principles. As teachers, we strive to show our students how to use critical analysis when they view the world around them."
What better way than to critique the forums that they are confronted with every day (ie media)?
Hobbs' research shows that teachers are branching literacy to also incorporate "media" literacy. In this ever-changing world, students need to be able to interact and scrutinize the world around them. If they are constantly bombarded with television, then they should be aware of how television is being portrayed. More importantly, students should be able to find the faults with the media as well as embrace the positive advantages.
I believe that media literacy not only helps analyze the media, but it also prepares students to analyze other forums, such as their own behavior, literature, etc. The skills used in MEDIA literacy can be used for ALL literacy and ALL facets of life.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Blue Man Group
I recently went to New York City to see Blue Man Group perform. What an amazing time! I certainly recommend everyone see this show if they have the opportunity to...I believe they are coming to our upstate area in March.
Viewing it from a ENG307 standpoint, I found the perspectives of the show's creators very interesting. The show is basically a music-based performance in which the "blue men" put on different skits, and many of the skits were a direct reflection of the changing technological times.
Most of the skits involved some type of technology, such as computer animation and such. Some skits were introduced by a video screen that talked about the ways in which our world is becoming more intertwined as the days go on, and that we are all connected through........PLUMBING. They made a complete pun on the internet by using the plumbing system as a metaphor...very funny, yet I interpreted this as almost a mock on the internet.
They also showed three posters...one of a fish painting created by an artist that put paint on an actual fish then put the fish paint side down on the canvas. This poster captures the "pain of the artist and the subject."
The second poster was a 3D image of a fish, made out of paper material. The artist for this poster wanted to capture the real life pain the fish went through.
The third poster was a computer screen that read "FISH." The narrator said that this painting is based on the necessity for the artist to get as far away from the subject as possible, and that this poster showed how people think today.
The point of this skit was to show that art is not about computers, but rather about AUTHENTIC artistic expression, such as the first poster. (I totally agreed with this, of course)
Paradoxically, the show used a lot of computer animation. I think the show's creators were trying to show that computers and technology can be fun and exciting to see, but that ultimately the real artistic expression is through personal thought and action.
All of the percussion was done without technology, just by the performers themselves (they are certainly masters of their craft...AMAZING percussion!)
Viewing it from a ENG307 standpoint, I found the perspectives of the show's creators very interesting. The show is basically a music-based performance in which the "blue men" put on different skits, and many of the skits were a direct reflection of the changing technological times.
Most of the skits involved some type of technology, such as computer animation and such. Some skits were introduced by a video screen that talked about the ways in which our world is becoming more intertwined as the days go on, and that we are all connected through........PLUMBING. They made a complete pun on the internet by using the plumbing system as a metaphor...very funny, yet I interpreted this as almost a mock on the internet.
They also showed three posters...one of a fish painting created by an artist that put paint on an actual fish then put the fish paint side down on the canvas. This poster captures the "pain of the artist and the subject."
The second poster was a 3D image of a fish, made out of paper material. The artist for this poster wanted to capture the real life pain the fish went through.
The third poster was a computer screen that read "FISH." The narrator said that this painting is based on the necessity for the artist to get as far away from the subject as possible, and that this poster showed how people think today.
The point of this skit was to show that art is not about computers, but rather about AUTHENTIC artistic expression, such as the first poster. (I totally agreed with this, of course)
Paradoxically, the show used a lot of computer animation. I think the show's creators were trying to show that computers and technology can be fun and exciting to see, but that ultimately the real artistic expression is through personal thought and action.
All of the percussion was done without technology, just by the performers themselves (they are certainly masters of their craft...AMAZING percussion!)
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Reading Skills Dwindling
In a recent NCTE article titled "Taking teens back to basics of reading," Karen Rouse describes a situation that is a reality in many high schools and middle schools across the country: students are reading at half of the age level they should be at.
Teachers find that they have to "reteach" students to read at the high school level. The students' level of reading competency is so low that they cannot produce the assignments and expectations that teachers have for them coming into 9th grade.
What to do about the dilemma? Some suggestions are to be more open to reading at home and to have reading instruction in the classroom. Of course, this would take away from actual instruction on more critical skills, but these students cannot function on a higher level if they do not have the basics.
Some attribute the lack of high expectations in the past. Whereas today teachers have higher goals for the students, years ago students were flying through classes without the proper skills. Now we have to back-track.
I personally also feel that some technology could be the source of this illiterate dilemma. For example, so many teenagers are sucked into television and computers that they do not learn to master skills that will get them farther in life. While certain technology helps students, an overwhelming amount of it will not do the students any benefit when it comes to getting a good job and securing themselves as stable adults and productive citizens. Perhaps we need a better split between technology and nontechnology-based instruction. It seems to be that we have too much of an emphasis on technology. Perhaps we can even the unbalanced see-saw.
Source: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_5148780
Teachers find that they have to "reteach" students to read at the high school level. The students' level of reading competency is so low that they cannot produce the assignments and expectations that teachers have for them coming into 9th grade.
What to do about the dilemma? Some suggestions are to be more open to reading at home and to have reading instruction in the classroom. Of course, this would take away from actual instruction on more critical skills, but these students cannot function on a higher level if they do not have the basics.
Some attribute the lack of high expectations in the past. Whereas today teachers have higher goals for the students, years ago students were flying through classes without the proper skills. Now we have to back-track.
I personally also feel that some technology could be the source of this illiterate dilemma. For example, so many teenagers are sucked into television and computers that they do not learn to master skills that will get them farther in life. While certain technology helps students, an overwhelming amount of it will not do the students any benefit when it comes to getting a good job and securing themselves as stable adults and productive citizens. Perhaps we need a better split between technology and nontechnology-based instruction. It seems to be that we have too much of an emphasis on technology. Perhaps we can even the unbalanced see-saw.
Source: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_5148780
Reality Check
In my observation experience this semester, I have found a strange dichotomy between the world inside our 307 classroom and the world inside a high school classroom. My ninth graders range in writing skills, but most of them can convey their ideas in a somewhat decent manner.
In a recent assignment, my host teacher asked my students to write about what they would do if they won a million dollars.
Some of the responses were quite funny. Some students wanted to get in good with the teacher, so they have her $50,000. Others, though, had strange understandings of a million dollars. I had some responses of buying countries and other extroadinary things that certainly exceed one million dollars hands down. These kids did not understand the meaning of money. This got me thinking. The kids are not in touch with reality. At 14, I would think most teenagers would know what a million dollars could get you (within reason. Obviously they don't have jobs or pay taxes yet). I felt that some students do not know how to function in the real world because they live inside this "other" realm. And a lot of this realm is defined by technology and brain-sucking video games.
Almost every boy's response had to do with buying video games. It amazed me! These kids are entertained by a false world, and yes, it is okay if they control the amount and type of games they play. But I can bet they have no monitor.
I just feel these kids are out of touch with a world that is not completely taken over my robots yet, but they are already missing the important parts of life, such as how to function in a world that will take advantage of their ignorance.
In a recent assignment, my host teacher asked my students to write about what they would do if they won a million dollars.
Some of the responses were quite funny. Some students wanted to get in good with the teacher, so they have her $50,000. Others, though, had strange understandings of a million dollars. I had some responses of buying countries and other extroadinary things that certainly exceed one million dollars hands down. These kids did not understand the meaning of money. This got me thinking. The kids are not in touch with reality. At 14, I would think most teenagers would know what a million dollars could get you (within reason. Obviously they don't have jobs or pay taxes yet). I felt that some students do not know how to function in the real world because they live inside this "other" realm. And a lot of this realm is defined by technology and brain-sucking video games.
Almost every boy's response had to do with buying video games. It amazed me! These kids are entertained by a false world, and yes, it is okay if they control the amount and type of games they play. But I can bet they have no monitor.
I just feel these kids are out of touch with a world that is not completely taken over my robots yet, but they are already missing the important parts of life, such as how to function in a world that will take advantage of their ignorance.
"The Machine Is Us"
On the youtube.com video, digital literacy was defined as expanding a world from html to xml. Xml allows for more people to link information together and have it instantly available.
The world that the youtube.com video showed is a world that connects people and information in the blink of an eye. It says we have to rethink how we do everything we have ever known...our family, ethics, governance, PRIVACY.
This part concerns me. Do I want the world knowing exactly what I am doing, what I am thinking, all the time? Right now, the answer is 'no.' I do not want to share that much of myself with people I do not know. That is why I am not an avid believer of myspace and other digital communities.
I understand what xml is trying to do and what is has already done. We talked about this topic of a changing world last class, and I had some resistance to it. I am just not comfortable with giving myself to the internet and allowing people in 'OshKosh' to know information about me that is private or personal.
Some people enjoy this type of freedom. They think it is an experience to have other people linked directly to them. Where if I press one button, I get 100 more hits of a related topic.
I like it for some of its advantages; speed, level of information, abundance.
But I am not taken by it. I especially do not like the idea that "the macine is us." Never did I think in my lifetime I would become a robot. And I do not want to become a robot. That is why I resist through it. If I can savor part of what I believe is genuine, then I will.
Touchy subject...
The world that the youtube.com video showed is a world that connects people and information in the blink of an eye. It says we have to rethink how we do everything we have ever known...our family, ethics, governance, PRIVACY.
This part concerns me. Do I want the world knowing exactly what I am doing, what I am thinking, all the time? Right now, the answer is 'no.' I do not want to share that much of myself with people I do not know. That is why I am not an avid believer of myspace and other digital communities.
I understand what xml is trying to do and what is has already done. We talked about this topic of a changing world last class, and I had some resistance to it. I am just not comfortable with giving myself to the internet and allowing people in 'OshKosh' to know information about me that is private or personal.
Some people enjoy this type of freedom. They think it is an experience to have other people linked directly to them. Where if I press one button, I get 100 more hits of a related topic.
I like it for some of its advantages; speed, level of information, abundance.
But I am not taken by it. I especially do not like the idea that "the macine is us." Never did I think in my lifetime I would become a robot. And I do not want to become a robot. That is why I resist through it. If I can savor part of what I believe is genuine, then I will.
Touchy subject...
Unlearning -- Richardson and Warlick
Will Richardson makes reference to 10 different ways that teachers have to "unlearn" so that they can make their classrooms more effective for their students as global citizens. Three of his most noteworthy are as follows:
"We need to unlearn the idea that every student needs to learn the same content when really what they need to learn is how to self-direct their own learning."
"We need to unlearn the premise that we know more than our kids, because in many cases, they can now be our teachers as well."
"We need to unlearn the strategy that collaborative work inside the classroom is enough and understand that cooperating with students from around the globe can teach relevant and powerful negotiation and team-building skills."
I chose these three ideas to focus on. In connection to Warlick, both of these people believe that need to have access to computers and technology they are interested in. Also, Warlick urges teachers to "take every opportunity to play with your computer" so that they can become familiar with the type of media their students are using. Then, students and teachers can be recipricol learners and teachers.
Richardson notes that students should not be confined to the world inside their classroom or even in their local community. Rather, they should engage with people aroung the globe using technology that allows them to view mutliple perspectives.
I feel this is important because students need to be able to function in a world that is not guarded by "four walls," as Richardson puts it. As ELA teachers, we strive to make our students more effective citizens, which extends from the local community to the global community.
"We need to unlearn the idea that every student needs to learn the same content when really what they need to learn is how to self-direct their own learning."
"We need to unlearn the premise that we know more than our kids, because in many cases, they can now be our teachers as well."
"We need to unlearn the strategy that collaborative work inside the classroom is enough and understand that cooperating with students from around the globe can teach relevant and powerful negotiation and team-building skills."
I chose these three ideas to focus on. In connection to Warlick, both of these people believe that need to have access to computers and technology they are interested in. Also, Warlick urges teachers to "take every opportunity to play with your computer" so that they can become familiar with the type of media their students are using. Then, students and teachers can be recipricol learners and teachers.
Richardson notes that students should not be confined to the world inside their classroom or even in their local community. Rather, they should engage with people aroung the globe using technology that allows them to view mutliple perspectives.
I feel this is important because students need to be able to function in a world that is not guarded by "four walls," as Richardson puts it. As ELA teachers, we strive to make our students more effective citizens, which extends from the local community to the global community.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
My iweb page
yes! I am finally done with my iweb project...here is the link!
http://studentweb.cortland.edu/tedrow97/Site/Welcome.html
http://studentweb.cortland.edu/tedrow97/Site/Welcome.html
Teachers Need to Catch Up To Media Literacy
In a recent NCTE article by ednews.org titled "Survey of Educators Finds Lack of Focus on 21st Century Media Literacy Skills," the site says that students today are connected to so many media technology tools, but 80% of teachers "have to learn about how to teach media literacy on their own."
Teachers want to be more well-equipped with the technology use their students are involved with because then the teachers can educate students how to use the tools wisely and to their advantage.
"While young people spend more and more time using all forms of media in and out of the classroom, teaching them how to be thoughtful about their media use, to recognize the overt and hidden messages in media and to consider the consequences of their own actions online is simply not a priority in most schools."
"Media literacy means knowing how to access, understand, analyze, evaluate and create media messages on television, the Internet and other outlets. It also means knowing how to use these and other technologies safely, productively and ethically," and teachers want to help students use these resources effectively...they cannot do this, though, without proper training in these areas.
We are taught, as teachers, to make our students literate and effective citizens in and outside the classroom. If we do not have the resources to involve ourselves with media, then we need to have the administration keeping us up-to-date with technology.
“Young people are immersed in technology, and the tools that help them create web sites, blogs, videos and podcasts also allow them to be authors and publishers. They can reach a worldwide audience, so we have to teach them to do this thoughtfully,” said Gallagher. “With a small but committed effort, schools could take steps to incorporate media literacy into their school-wide curricula.”
Source: http://www.ednews.org/articles/7474/1/Survey-of-Educators-Finds-Lack-of-Focus-on-21st-
Century-Media-Literacy-Skills/Page1.html
Teachers want to be more well-equipped with the technology use their students are involved with because then the teachers can educate students how to use the tools wisely and to their advantage.
"While young people spend more and more time using all forms of media in and out of the classroom, teaching them how to be thoughtful about their media use, to recognize the overt and hidden messages in media and to consider the consequences of their own actions online is simply not a priority in most schools."
"Media literacy means knowing how to access, understand, analyze, evaluate and create media messages on television, the Internet and other outlets. It also means knowing how to use these and other technologies safely, productively and ethically," and teachers want to help students use these resources effectively...they cannot do this, though, without proper training in these areas.
We are taught, as teachers, to make our students literate and effective citizens in and outside the classroom. If we do not have the resources to involve ourselves with media, then we need to have the administration keeping us up-to-date with technology.
“Young people are immersed in technology, and the tools that help them create web sites, blogs, videos and podcasts also allow them to be authors and publishers. They can reach a worldwide audience, so we have to teach them to do this thoughtfully,” said Gallagher. “With a small but committed effort, schools could take steps to incorporate media literacy into their school-wide curricula.”
Source: http://www.ednews.org/articles/7474/1/Survey-of-Educators-Finds-Lack-of-Focus-on-21st-
Century-Media-Literacy-Skills/Page1.html
Monday, February 5, 2007
A Moment Worth Framing
Do you ever have one of those "teachable moments?" A time when things just go so right, that you forget about anything bad that has happened to you that day? I had one of those moments today at my observation location.
It was my first day for observation this semester, and I was working with a group of 9th graders. The class was mixed with regular Regents level abilities and also a "collaborative" group that was just a little slower and needed more help.
I am doing a tutoring class as part of my observation, and one of the girls in this "collaborative" group came to see me during lunch.
We were working on a particular paragraph where she needed extra help. The teacher wrote on her paper to ask the question, "Why did the author do this?" in response to using a particular literary term. She just did not understand the question, or how to answer it.
She was stumped, and making herself more frustrated. So I tried to level with her. She was using the word "regret," and incorporated a quote to show the use of the word. But she did not explain what the use of the word did for the book or the reader.
So I asked her, "how does it make you feel, as a reader, when the part in the poem comes up about regret? What are your emotions?"
Well, the problem was that she was disattached to the poem. She did not internalize the poem or its contents because it did not relate to her.
So I tried to bring it to her understanding. I asked her to pretend that she had cheated on a test because she wanted to pass so badly, but then her teacher found out and she was given a zero on the exam.
I asked her if she would regret what she did...she said yes. Then I asked her, "why?"
She said "because I would not want a zero. I just want to pass the test."
I kept pressing her to get to the emotional part. How would you FEEL?
But she did not budge. She pursed her lips and made a "hmm..." sound. Something was going on in her head, and it was great, but I couldn't help her unless I heard it. I told her to tell me what she was thinking..."just think out loud. Don't be embarassed. Just pretend I'm not here. Think outloud."
So she did..."I would feel sad"
I said, "Why?"
She said, "Because I would get angry!"
Finally some emotion! I kept hitting her with "Why? Why do you feel that way?"
And then she hit it...she hit her breaking point..."Because I would feel so guilty for doing something that I did not want to do in the first place. Because I would be ashamed of what I did. I only did it because I thought I had no other choice!"
YES!!! Hallelujiah!
This got her thinking about the poem (which was about a soldier who was ordered to kill another soldier, but then the soldier felt so guilty about what he did...he did not want to actually kill the other soldier).
"Now, let's put those words on the paper and bring them to life. This is great!", I said. I knew positive reinforcement was key.
But to be honest, I was jumping in my seat. The boy who was in the group with us got startled because I started moving in my desk when she finally got it.
And this is my moment worth framing. I am so proud of it. This girl's smile could have been a mile long. She had finally done something valuable, with her own mind, and it was a success. She tried SO hard to get to that point. She could have climbed Everest at this point. I was so proud of her. Of course, I only let on with 50% of my enthusiasm. I did not want her to forget about her task of revision.
Nonetheless, I think I will see her back in my tutoring session, and I can't wait!
It was my first day for observation this semester, and I was working with a group of 9th graders. The class was mixed with regular Regents level abilities and also a "collaborative" group that was just a little slower and needed more help.
I am doing a tutoring class as part of my observation, and one of the girls in this "collaborative" group came to see me during lunch.
We were working on a particular paragraph where she needed extra help. The teacher wrote on her paper to ask the question, "Why did the author do this?" in response to using a particular literary term. She just did not understand the question, or how to answer it.
She was stumped, and making herself more frustrated. So I tried to level with her. She was using the word "regret," and incorporated a quote to show the use of the word. But she did not explain what the use of the word did for the book or the reader.
So I asked her, "how does it make you feel, as a reader, when the part in the poem comes up about regret? What are your emotions?"
Well, the problem was that she was disattached to the poem. She did not internalize the poem or its contents because it did not relate to her.
So I tried to bring it to her understanding. I asked her to pretend that she had cheated on a test because she wanted to pass so badly, but then her teacher found out and she was given a zero on the exam.
I asked her if she would regret what she did...she said yes. Then I asked her, "why?"
She said "because I would not want a zero. I just want to pass the test."
I kept pressing her to get to the emotional part. How would you FEEL?
But she did not budge. She pursed her lips and made a "hmm..." sound. Something was going on in her head, and it was great, but I couldn't help her unless I heard it. I told her to tell me what she was thinking..."just think out loud. Don't be embarassed. Just pretend I'm not here. Think outloud."
So she did..."I would feel sad"
I said, "Why?"
She said, "Because I would get angry!"
Finally some emotion! I kept hitting her with "Why? Why do you feel that way?"
And then she hit it...she hit her breaking point..."Because I would feel so guilty for doing something that I did not want to do in the first place. Because I would be ashamed of what I did. I only did it because I thought I had no other choice!"
YES!!! Hallelujiah!
This got her thinking about the poem (which was about a soldier who was ordered to kill another soldier, but then the soldier felt so guilty about what he did...he did not want to actually kill the other soldier).
"Now, let's put those words on the paper and bring them to life. This is great!", I said. I knew positive reinforcement was key.
But to be honest, I was jumping in my seat. The boy who was in the group with us got startled because I started moving in my desk when she finally got it.
And this is my moment worth framing. I am so proud of it. This girl's smile could have been a mile long. She had finally done something valuable, with her own mind, and it was a success. She tried SO hard to get to that point. She could have climbed Everest at this point. I was so proud of her. Of course, I only let on with 50% of my enthusiasm. I did not want her to forget about her task of revision.
Nonetheless, I think I will see her back in my tutoring session, and I can't wait!
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Iweb Progress
On Friday I decided to try to get most of my iWeb work done. The program is super-easy...anyone can really do it. I "finageled" around with the buttons, and found out things I had not seen in the help book. I finally came up with the end product. I was very excited because I thought, for my first time, it was pretty good.
I do not have the url yet. I have to publish it, and then I can send it to you all...but that is my update!
I do not have the url yet. I have to publish it, and then I can send it to you all...but that is my update!
Richardson -- Citizen Journalism
In Richardson's recent 1/31/07 podcast, one of the fascinating things I took from his speech was his idea of "citizen journalism," in which people use tools such as camera phones, download it to the internet, and can make it available to anyone in the world.
Richardson said that one example of the benefits of his "citizen journalism" idea is that a man was tazored (sp?) viciously, and someone put it through the internet to bring the social injustice to life. In a way, it was like a virtual newspaper article, and the nice part of it was that the story would never had gotten into the newspapers because it was witnessed by a typical citizen, not a newspaper journalist.
Richardson makes it clear that students should learn how to be social activists in the ELA classroom by becoming journalists themselves. They can be aware of social injustices and justices by using different technologies, such as blogs, podcasts, and wikis.
I believe Richardson's idea is great. The point of it is certainly beneficial to people all around the world.
However...and here is my resistance to the technology rise...
There are drastic disadvantages. The idea of "privacy" is completely different now with these technologies. In fact, I can make the claim that there is NO privacy anymore. Yes, camera phones can capture things like riots, beatings, etc. But they can also invade someone's life through a peeping tom, someone or people who want to bring to life someone's inner personal world.
Isn't that what the paparazzi is for? Yes...I understand their roles are very different...but just try to understand my path here.
I want my students to fight and be aware of social justice. Absolutely. Without a doubt. It is part of my Teaching Philosophy. But on a different grade than what Richardson is saying.
I see the benefits of technology...I really do! And I want to and will embrace many different technologies with my students...even though I may not want to or be equipped to. Yes, I will learn from my students as well as educate them.
But I want my students to think for themselves, not have a computer think for them. Podcasts, blogs, wikis, the students can all make these...wonderful! Now...can you use more critical thinking to use your resources (texts) to bring the ideas to your outside worlds? Or are you only trained to use your tools in an isolated way?
I understand...technologies, IMing, all of these things, bring communication to the fingertips. I see that! But I don't see how students are becoming any smarter using these concepts than with using Constructivist ideas that are not "paperless."
I will use paper in my classrooms...I will, and I want to. I will use technology...I will, and I want to. And I want to educate my students and follow the mainstream ideas (ie blogs, etc).
But ultimately, I am the authority and the educator. I can show my students that just because something is "innovative" does not mean we have to use it without using other ideas.
No...I am not going to use rote memorization and make my kids sit in rows without any collaboration at all. Of course I would not...but I think we are using students' inability to communicate effectively and lack of literacy and meeting these problems with easy solutions that really do not pin-point the bigger problems. The problems are still there!
Instead, I want to embrace multimedia content, but also make students understand that they can use their own brains to think. They don't need a button to make things happen. Their button is their mind...use it!
I like technology...it is helpful, exciting, and fun when you make it yourself. But there are other things we can do, too.
I will not go paperless...but I will use the best of both sides.
Richardson said that one example of the benefits of his "citizen journalism" idea is that a man was tazored (sp?) viciously, and someone put it through the internet to bring the social injustice to life. In a way, it was like a virtual newspaper article, and the nice part of it was that the story would never had gotten into the newspapers because it was witnessed by a typical citizen, not a newspaper journalist.
Richardson makes it clear that students should learn how to be social activists in the ELA classroom by becoming journalists themselves. They can be aware of social injustices and justices by using different technologies, such as blogs, podcasts, and wikis.
I believe Richardson's idea is great. The point of it is certainly beneficial to people all around the world.
However...and here is my resistance to the technology rise...
There are drastic disadvantages. The idea of "privacy" is completely different now with these technologies. In fact, I can make the claim that there is NO privacy anymore. Yes, camera phones can capture things like riots, beatings, etc. But they can also invade someone's life through a peeping tom, someone or people who want to bring to life someone's inner personal world.
Isn't that what the paparazzi is for? Yes...I understand their roles are very different...but just try to understand my path here.
I want my students to fight and be aware of social justice. Absolutely. Without a doubt. It is part of my Teaching Philosophy. But on a different grade than what Richardson is saying.
I see the benefits of technology...I really do! And I want to and will embrace many different technologies with my students...even though I may not want to or be equipped to. Yes, I will learn from my students as well as educate them.
But I want my students to think for themselves, not have a computer think for them. Podcasts, blogs, wikis, the students can all make these...wonderful! Now...can you use more critical thinking to use your resources (texts) to bring the ideas to your outside worlds? Or are you only trained to use your tools in an isolated way?
I understand...technologies, IMing, all of these things, bring communication to the fingertips. I see that! But I don't see how students are becoming any smarter using these concepts than with using Constructivist ideas that are not "paperless."
I will use paper in my classrooms...I will, and I want to. I will use technology...I will, and I want to. And I want to educate my students and follow the mainstream ideas (ie blogs, etc).
But ultimately, I am the authority and the educator. I can show my students that just because something is "innovative" does not mean we have to use it without using other ideas.
No...I am not going to use rote memorization and make my kids sit in rows without any collaboration at all. Of course I would not...but I think we are using students' inability to communicate effectively and lack of literacy and meeting these problems with easy solutions that really do not pin-point the bigger problems. The problems are still there!
Instead, I want to embrace multimedia content, but also make students understand that they can use their own brains to think. They don't need a button to make things happen. Their button is their mind...use it!
I like technology...it is helpful, exciting, and fun when you make it yourself. But there are other things we can do, too.
I will not go paperless...but I will use the best of both sides.
Wikipedia Put on the Back-Burner
In a recent NCTE article titled "A Stand Against Wikipedia," the history department at Middlebury College is trying to make it clear to students that Wikipedia is not a citeable source. Although the department does not want to completely ban the use and credit of Wikipedia (because they feel it is a violation of freedom of access as well as would be ignored by most people in retaliation), professors are telling students not to cite the website in any academic papers. They have not imposed any punitive measures if students do use Wikipedia occassionally, but they have stressed that overusing the site will result in reduced grades.
The department at Middlebury College is not trying to disseminate the use of Wikipedia completely. They feel that Wikipedia is a good footstool to information available over the web, especially for students looking to grasp certain material in a basic form.
However, Middlebury is stressing to students that they use more primary and "serious secondary sources" when citing, especially on the college level.
I agree with Middlebury's initiative to make students look outside the box of Wikipedia. Most students use Wikipedia because it is convenient more than for its illustrious and serious information. Most search engines will give Wikipedia as threads for information, and students find it so easy to type and click rather than to search for more credible sources.
I am not the biggest fan of Wikipedia. I find that other websites and book sources are more credible. I do not personally feel comfortable citing Wikipedia in any of my bibliographies because of the potential for that information to be either wrong or skewed.
Granted, the Wiki idea is wonderful in its ability to link people to various sites and information. However, it needs to be more carefully monitored if students are going to be held accountable for the information on it. That is why students must be trained in how to decipher credible from discredible information on websites. Hence, one of the reasons I am so pro-book. I love looking through a book for information rather than the web (yes, it is true, and yes, it is rare).
source: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki
The department at Middlebury College is not trying to disseminate the use of Wikipedia completely. They feel that Wikipedia is a good footstool to information available over the web, especially for students looking to grasp certain material in a basic form.
However, Middlebury is stressing to students that they use more primary and "serious secondary sources" when citing, especially on the college level.
I agree with Middlebury's initiative to make students look outside the box of Wikipedia. Most students use Wikipedia because it is convenient more than for its illustrious and serious information. Most search engines will give Wikipedia as threads for information, and students find it so easy to type and click rather than to search for more credible sources.
I am not the biggest fan of Wikipedia. I find that other websites and book sources are more credible. I do not personally feel comfortable citing Wikipedia in any of my bibliographies because of the potential for that information to be either wrong or skewed.
Granted, the Wiki idea is wonderful in its ability to link people to various sites and information. However, it needs to be more carefully monitored if students are going to be held accountable for the information on it. That is why students must be trained in how to decipher credible from discredible information on websites. Hence, one of the reasons I am so pro-book. I love looking through a book for information rather than the web (yes, it is true, and yes, it is rare).
source: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki
Friedman -- Uploading
In Friedman's #4 World Flattener, he references the various types of "uploads" we have been studying and working with so far in our own 307 class: wikis, blogs, and podcasts.
Friedman believes that it does not take a large corporation to make a significant contribution to the world wide web. Little companies, even individual people, have made their mark by experimenting with different technologies and taking risks.
I believe that is what Friedman believes our students should be learning (in response to Warlick's primary question). Students should be learning how to take control of their own learning. Become metacognitive (understand how you as an individual learn) and use that skill to produce genuine work.
Students do not have to be controlled by the teacher like they did 30 years ago. Instead, with this new wave of contructivism meets technological advancement, students can become their own sources of knowledge, and they can become the next global makers of technology.
Obviously I do not mean that a 9th grader is going to compose his own version of the internet. But, the internet did start with one person and an idea. The point is to take the idea and run with it. Become creative, use your resources. Students have a lot more resources today than they did 30 years ago. Some of these resources may not be ideal or even appropriate, but this is where the teacher comes in: to guide and show.
Students should be learning how to be makers of their own crafts, if you want to be cliché. Instead of letting other people do for them, students should use their imaginations, resources, and intellectual minds to devise their own art.
Friedman believes that it does not take a large corporation to make a significant contribution to the world wide web. Little companies, even individual people, have made their mark by experimenting with different technologies and taking risks.
I believe that is what Friedman believes our students should be learning (in response to Warlick's primary question). Students should be learning how to take control of their own learning. Become metacognitive (understand how you as an individual learn) and use that skill to produce genuine work.
Students do not have to be controlled by the teacher like they did 30 years ago. Instead, with this new wave of contructivism meets technological advancement, students can become their own sources of knowledge, and they can become the next global makers of technology.
Obviously I do not mean that a 9th grader is going to compose his own version of the internet. But, the internet did start with one person and an idea. The point is to take the idea and run with it. Become creative, use your resources. Students have a lot more resources today than they did 30 years ago. Some of these resources may not be ideal or even appropriate, but this is where the teacher comes in: to guide and show.
Students should be learning how to be makers of their own crafts, if you want to be cliché. Instead of letting other people do for them, students should use their imaginations, resources, and intellectual minds to devise their own art.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
