What Do We Expect From Tech?

This is a hard blog for me to write.  I don't like to preach (although I invariably end up doing so) and I try to tread the fine line that distinguishes venting from complaining, but this blog will probably end up sounding preachy and whiny.  For those of you who choose to read on, I apologize in advance.

I have to begin by saying that I did not want to attend today's class.  I reviewed the syllabus to find out what the attendance policy is for this class and didn't see anything, so I emailed Jeff and Kris.  In this communication, I explained my dilemma and asked to be allowed to submit an end-of-course reflection and excused from class.  Jeff emailed me back, saying that he expected to see me in class.

I respect Jeff.  I enjoy his teaching style and he models the type of instructor that I hope to be.  Additionally, I really want to learn how to teach with technology.  So I came to class.  I came to class with the expectation that maybe today I would leave class with a tangible skill.

For the fifth and final time this summer, I was disappointed.  Don't get me wrong.  I walked away with some things to think about and a couple of websites to investigate, and that has substantial value.  Yet I still walked away thinking: "I am not getting what I expected from this class."  That thought led me to deeper questions.    What do I expect from technology in education?  What benefits am I expecting and exactly who is the greatest beneficiary, me or my students?  What did I really expect from this class?

These are my answers:

I expect educational technology to save time.
I expect educational technology to work.
I expect educational technology to encourage creativity.
I expect educational technology to enhance communication.
I expect educational technology to provide a window to worlds my students might otherwise never see.

Students and teachers gain equally from using technology in the class room, but I believe that teachers pay a higher cost.  Technology does not always save time nor does it always work.  Technology can sometimes frustrate creativity and communication.  Technology opens up so many new, exciting and interesting worlds, teachers sometimes end up competing with it, rather than teaching with it.

At first, I expected this class to give me tangible skills that I could use with current educational technology.  At this point in the game, I guess I should have known better.  This is a graduate level course....so all they plan to do is teach me how to THINK about technology?  Nah, we do get exposure to some usable skills but the knowledge is very shallow.  I understand now that we are expected to play around with the applications, you know, failure-based learning and all that.  Ok.  I'll put that on my list.  Sure thing.

Ok, so no hard skills are really going to be gained from 504.  Ok.  So I focused in on our instructors to give depth and meaning to this course.  I wasn't disappointed there.  Jeff and Kris have dynamic and engaging teaching styles and I gain from hearing them speak, but I can't help but think that we are missing opportunities to gain more.

For example, we could have skyped today's meeting.  Or used a podcast, or chat session.  We could use some of this technology that we spend so much time talking about.  Hey, wait, the whole course could even be online huh?

Or maybe I expect too much?

Edublogging - Hmmmm

So I have made time to read four or five edu-blogs and my feelings are mixed.  I love the blogs that provide resources and lesson plans for teachers like this one.  I have already subscribed and I like being able to read about teacher's experiences with technology before I start searching around for helpful applications.

Other blogs like this one focus on specific teacher experiences and are more like journals.  These are truly interesting but require more back-reading to get a real understanding of the blogging conversation.  The blog above, titled "Learning is Messy" is really interesting because it details one teacher's struggle to incorporate useful technology in his classroom despite district limitations.

I found one edu-blog to be confusing, but I think that has more to do with my ignorance of terms like "plog" and "pencil integration".   This blog is an example of the type of edu-blog that I found to be slightly frustrating and a bit of a time-waster for me.

Replying to an edu-blogger's post was awkward.  No matter the anonymity and facelessness of the internet, it still felt like I was walking up on a perfect stranger and inviting myself to his/her conversation.   I know that people write blogs for an authentic audience and that they desire response, but it still just feels kind of rude.   It's not like talking to you guys, I'll say that for sure.

Organizing Your On-line Life (uhhh,,,,wait...Do I do that before or after I learn to use my new computer?

Diigo Groups.  Skype.  Dropbox.  Evernote.  Google Reader.  All excellent tools and well presented by our classmates. The information was entirely relevant although some of us were already familiar with one or more of these helpful programs. I would be remiss if I did not give the world's largest shout-out to my classmates for sharing not only their assigned handouts but for all of the incidental teaching that seems to go hand in hand with using technology.  

But....(and doesn't there always seem to be a but when you start working with new technology)

One of my pet peeves about technology is that it is always changing.  I can't tell you how many times I've purchased a new phone without ever fully understanding the old phone.  What I'm getting at here is that many of us haven't mastered our shiny new Macs yet, so the task of learning new software is doubly trying.  I know Dropbox, been using it for a couple of years now, but it looks and behaves differently on a Mac than a PC.  How could I have a chance at effectively teaching the program, when I can barely navigate the hardware?

In a nutshell, my issue is this:

I don't feel like I will ever be an "expert" in teaching with technology because it evolves too quickly.  All I have to offer my students is a glancing knowledge that can be easily stonewalled by a glitch or a just a question I have no ability to answer.  I know that teachers aren't supposed to know everything, but we shouldn't be offered so many opportunities to look stupid.  That's right.  I said it.  When technology doesn't work as planned or when we run into a techno-stumbling block...we look stupid.  

I know that teaching with technology is new.  I think the way we are approaching the task of integrating technology is old.  There needs to be a comprehensive way to learn and it has to start early.  We can't be expected to properly wield a tool that we are only passingly familiar with.  Situations like that are accidents waiting to happen.  

What do you think?

Until next time, I remain

Simply Serious

Angry Birds & Weeblies

Hey Guys,

Sorry for the late post, I got so busy counting up my comments, I forgot to post.

This week's class was interesting as usual.  Splitting the class and staggering the learning experience gave this session a new feel for me, as if it were actually two different classes.  Jeff and Kristen work well with each other but their individual teaching styles are still dynamic.

Angry Birds in class?  Groovy concept and I knew there was math to that game!  Sadly, I can't see a way to apply it to English, nor do I understand the math behind the game.  Still, I play it and I  can see how using it as a learning tool would engage students.  I wish there were an existing game that could segway so effectively into the learning experiences of my own students.  Or do I?  Nah...I don't.  I wish there was a game written just for teaching English.  You know, like a virtual newspaper game or something.  Something as challenging and addicting as Angry Birds, but introduced in and confined to an educational environment.  Can someone just whip this up for me please?

Ah..the Weebly, or more importantly, our Portfolios.  I have always been a fan of self-promotion (Hey, sometimes you gotta toot your own horn!)  An excellent resume, an outstanding cv, yes....I am familiar with these avenues of academic self-representation, but this Portfolio thing goes far beyond a listing of achievements and/or employment history.  Although I know it will be an excellent tool when it comes time to pay the piper and actually get a job, the idea of it still makes me kind of nervous.  

I guess it's because I feel that I have ultimate and perfect control over those few pieces of paper (the resume, the cv).  They may be one-dimensional, but I don't have to worry about people's perceptions of anything other than the facts as I choose to state them.  Cool.  I can handle that.  A web portfolio?  Weebly seems simple enough, but I am far from feeling like I am in an arena where I have perfect control over the finished product.  So much content invites evaluation on so many different levels.  Ok...ok....cool.  I can handle that.  I think.

Until next time...

Extra! Extra! Gamers Solve World Issues (while on a bathroom break from gaming ).

Ok....Ok....is this the same McGonigal from Harry Potter?  No..but she may as well be teaching principles of magic.  I will admit, she makes great points about gaming helping us to become collaborators, and positively motivated to trust and help each other, but all I can see is wasted time.

Gamers love their alternate reality because they know that the game they are playing was written and that there is a solution already written into the game.  They know that they can stop and take a bathroom break, or crash and burn, and come right back to the same situation.  Life is not written, at least not by anything human.  The problems that we face in day to day life may not have solutions.  Playing at solving real problems lacks that guaranteed solution, which is why so many people escape to a reality that doesn't have that obstacle.  Playing at solving real problems doesn't really require more than shallow knowledge.  Say for instance, their was a game created to help us figure out how to beat cancer, would the solutions found therein be valid, without deeper knowledge?

I agree that there is huge potential for gaming as an educational avenue.  The fact that most kids will spend at least 10,000 hours playing video games by their 21st birthday alerts us to the intrinsic motivation that moves these kids to spend that much time learning on their own.  If we could harness that, we could change the world, and not just on bathroom breaks.

Hello again to all,

This class session was amazing (as expected).  From the start of the day, with our wonderful Scarlett students; to our lesson planning groups (kudos to my cohort mates for their patience and creativity), with our learned librarians; to the end (mercifully early), with a new skill being added to my "Teaching With Tech" repertoire.  Generally, I try to keep my brown-nosing firmly in the "happy medium" range, (that shadowy area somewhere between necessary and annoying) but Jeff and Kristen make it hard not to gush with admiration and appreciation for their innovative and inclusive teaching styles.  I have yet to leave their presence feeling cheated or confused.

Today's session was an implicit lesson in the solicitation of opinions.  It was great to have the opportunity to ask the Scarlett students questions.  Following Jeff''s example, I tried to notate the student's comments, reminding myself of how valued and heard I feel as he jots down the various comments we make in class.  I tried to convey the same value and importance to the advice that our summer school students gave.  It is extremely validating for students to realize that teachers learn as much from them as they do from us and I sincerely hope that this is an attitude that I can cultivate in my future classroom.

Our lesson planning groups took the implicit lesson to a deeper level. As I've noticed in other group-work situations, our group got off to a rocky start, struggling to define a  objective lens through which to focus our collective intellects. Many times, I have tried to rein in my flapping tongue out of fear that I may be monopolizing the discussion.  This often proves difficult as I am passionate about my convictions and outspoken in manner.  Prior to Friday's planning session and subsequent discussion, fear of embarrassment and social conformity were constant reminders to limit my discourse. I believe the length of Friday's planning session lessened my fervor to be heard and gave me an altogether more positive view of the cacophony that can result from a group of brilliant minds struggling to give voice to their opinons.  It made me realize that shutting up was probably the worst thing I could choose to do.  Rather than limiting our discussion, the new time frame allowed for a more comprehensive interchange.  Rapid-fire interjections and long-winded explanations notwithstanding, each comment from my group members enlarged my understanding of our common goal as well as providing a general consensus on the validity of my own ideas..  I am firmly among the many students who wishes this type of collaboration could be available for every lesson plan I write.

And finally, I would like to respond to the "Dumbing Down" article.  In general, my use of technology falls squarely in the consumer range, but I am sure I am not alone when I say that I am often frustrated by my lack of knowledge about how computer technology really works.  As educators, I believe that we are responsible for ensuring that our students understand the processes behind events, why should technology be any different?  Upon reflection, with a few exceptions, my technological expertise really does amount to "secretarial" knowledge and I agree with the author's standpoint that technological consumers and secretaries are what we are grooming our children to be.  Schools are responsible for staying up-to-date on current events and translating and disseminating that knowledge for their student populations.  We are sadly remiss when it comes to technology.

Until next time...I remain

Simply Serious

Soda Ban

Hello my fellow McBloggers,

Gather round one and all and you will hear a tale of beverage deception that is so subliminally seductive that even the keenest eye may be fooled by the subtlety of its camouflage.  What I am talking about here is the American soda cup and our perception of how much of that delightfully carbonated liquid we allow ourselves to drink.


I don't know how many of you clicked the Well Quiz link at the end of the NYT article, but I did, and I think you should.  Even though I overestimated to compensate for the lack of perception that the author spoke about, I was wrong more often than not.  That simple quiz was enough to convince me.  Either by design or by default, people routinely underestimate the amount of soda they are subject to consume while leisurely mouthing those wonderful extra-long, extra wide straws that are so thoughtfully provided for thirsty customers.


The Well Quiz would be an excellent teaching opportunity that could encourage students to think about some of the automatic choices we make in regard to our diet.  I have a few ideas about teaching opportunities that emerge from the NYC soda ban, but I will save those bits of creativity for class.


Now let me take a moment to speak generally about my opinion on the NYC soda ban issue.  I think that the ban is nothing more than a spacer, artfully creating a three-way gap between consumer desire for satisfaction, corporate desire for profit, and community concern for public health.  In other words, this ban has the capability to give consumers pause.  A moment to consider if what we want is really what we need.  If there is truly a need for four or five servings of soda, it becomes a simple matter of choosing to purchase a 2-liter  and a cup of ice.  If there is no real need, (is there ever a real need for soda, beyond the type defined by addiction?), then what is the harm done by sipping, (or throwing away), a few less ounces?  The plain answer to that is "No harm done at all".  In fact, over time, it could actually help.

I think it is important to note here that there is an American culture of excess.  There is something slightly out-of-whack with our comfort level with waste and abuse in general.  Doesn't matter if we are talking about water (yup, that's in soda), or energy, or food, as a country we are estranged from conservation and/or moderation.  

It is a "Big Gulp" society.  

The NYC soda ban could be one tiny step towards normalizing the American perception of how much is too much.  People need a fair representation of normalcy.  Eight ounces is a serving size, it even says so on the can.  Yet almost every soft drinks choice begins with more than one serving.  The rest of the world consistently consumes (buys) soft drinks at serving size.  Only in America does our culture of excess permit the existence of a "Big Gulp".  Is it fair or ethical to represent 3, 4, or even 5 times a serving size as normal?  With the growing problems of juvenile and adult diabetes, as well as obesity, is it smart to continue to cultivate an attitude of "I can eat (drink) whatever I want"?  As a nation, we would be wise to recognize that there are already rules that limit the harm we can do to ourselves.  Speed limits, seat-belt laws, and smoking bans are all irritating reminders that we don't always act in our own best interest.  What's wrong with pointing that out about soda?  

I'm just saying.

Until next time, I remain...

Simply Serious