And so it happens . . .
The last post of the term.
But do not fear, fearful ones . . .
The Digital Hall Pass will return . . .
Maybe.
Depending on whether I am curricularly forced into maintaining it.
But for now . . .
It will make one last final dance of the summer . . . and a glorious last dance it will be.
(Whenever I saved this blog post, I was forced to think of Julia Stiles).
Sooo, I was reading Abby G's post and something she said about one of the former sMACers going to Ghana reminded me of something else she said.
She said that one of the things she learned while in Ghana was that you don't need much to be an effective teacher. This is something I also believe and I imagine will always believe. Now, this is no bash against technology - as it create possibilities for learning opportunities that otherwise would be missed . . . But basically, I believe it is superfluous - however it is a superfluosity that should be used as often as it can enhance learning. And it can enhance learning - greatly. It just isn't necessary for highly effective teaching. I suggest all who are interested more deeply in my thoughts along these lines to check out my podcast. It speaks to my belief in human relationships and their importance in the classroom. I state that one of the main benefits of technology is how it can connect people.
But people can still make connections without technology, clearly. We haven't yet reached the world of surrogates.
I don't believe that high tech savvyness is not extremely high on the list of desirable teacher traits. I think creativity is high up there and a creative teacher can make connections and get their point across through several different means - including potentially through the use of tech.
Speaking on the second part of class, let me just say that I fully trust Jeff and Kristin to guide our class and the content that
we cover. I'm happy to have learned what I have and I feel confident that
what I haven't learned is because class time was spent covering what two
ed tech experts have deemed to me more important.
I don't know about you, but I've definitely enjoyed 504. J & K 4eva.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Edublogging Molly
So, after having read Abby G's post and recommendation of Ewan McInosh's blog, I decided to check it out. (This was after browsing through a couple of other blogs, mostly english teacher blogs from ladies - they did not catch my interest. Huff English didn't seem to have a lot of thought recent provoking content) I started to catch the edublogging fever and found a couple of super interesting sites - Ewan's as mentioned and also Bill Ferriter and Lauren Fardig - the previous MACer. I advise everyone to check these sites out.
At McIntosh I watched a short video on his home page created at an international education conference. It was really cool to see that people from all over the world can get together to try to work on these problems. I then explored a little and found my way to a TEDx talk that McIntosh had done. TEDx is not the same as TED, basically the x indicates it is an unofficial event. Though unofficial, he still had a substantial audience, clearly this guy is quite prominent in some circles.
His talk was about striving to produce students that are "problem finders" instead of "problem learners." He argues that when kids can decide their own problems they have a vested interest and are therefore more involved. He mentions that many problems that we ask students to solve are problems that they have no vested interest in. For most cases, this seems to be true. This type of practice had been performed in a classroom and he states that the students were so involved in solving these problems that they were standing up and cheering for each other. Clearly, this type of learning is desirable however he makes no mention of how to control what content they learn. If the students are deciding, then the students are deciding.
Would this practice mean the elimination of a practice altogether??
More to come . . .
So I also browsed through Bill Ferriter's blog and I must admit, aspects of it were somewhat depressing. He speaks to being bogged down by curriculum standards and teaching for the test rather than encouraging real creative student thought like he used to. He says he had to change because his students were scoring too low. I won't completely understand this situation until I become more familiar with the tests my students will be taking and how what I think is good practice either does or does not translate to these texts.
For example, promoting intellectual character is one thing that I really value. Will this show up on any test? Likely, no. This is a pretty discouraging notion. Even in my own studies, I've never been someone that values achievement - I value learning. I realize that they are closely linked. I hope this link will show up on the tests.
At McIntosh I watched a short video on his home page created at an international education conference. It was really cool to see that people from all over the world can get together to try to work on these problems. I then explored a little and found my way to a TEDx talk that McIntosh had done. TEDx is not the same as TED, basically the x indicates it is an unofficial event. Though unofficial, he still had a substantial audience, clearly this guy is quite prominent in some circles.
His talk was about striving to produce students that are "problem finders" instead of "problem learners." He argues that when kids can decide their own problems they have a vested interest and are therefore more involved. He mentions that many problems that we ask students to solve are problems that they have no vested interest in. For most cases, this seems to be true. This type of practice had been performed in a classroom and he states that the students were so involved in solving these problems that they were standing up and cheering for each other. Clearly, this type of learning is desirable however he makes no mention of how to control what content they learn. If the students are deciding, then the students are deciding.
Would this practice mean the elimination of a practice altogether??
More to come . . .
So I also browsed through Bill Ferriter's blog and I must admit, aspects of it were somewhat depressing. He speaks to being bogged down by curriculum standards and teaching for the test rather than encouraging real creative student thought like he used to. He says he had to change because his students were scoring too low. I won't completely understand this situation until I become more familiar with the tests my students will be taking and how what I think is good practice either does or does not translate to these texts.
For example, promoting intellectual character is one thing that I really value. Will this show up on any test? Likely, no. This is a pretty discouraging notion. Even in my own studies, I've never been someone that values achievement - I value learning. I realize that they are closely linked. I hope this link will show up on the tests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)