Richard Miller This is How We Dream
Am I ready to write with multimedia? In considering the videocast from Richard Miller, I would say that I will be conscious of the response of my writings by students. I think the gist of this is to not focus so much on cool pictures and movement, but depth through data and display. The example he gives about the 2008 Presidential Election Data is fascinating. Not only was it real time data, but the demographic data was presented on many levels, real time.
I think students are in an information climate that provides them with a lot of depth. Is it absorbed or researched? It would be interesting to me to know how many kids read much more than that required by school. I also wonder how many just sit at the computer and browse the web for whatever comes to mind. It is our job to provide the depth to whatever it is we are conveying. So I would take the message of this videocast to be to provide the depth and charisma in the material we present to our students that will convince them to explore and learn.
The Networked Student by Wendy Drexler
When children are networked, why do they need teachers? I am of the opinion that teachers should be the experts. Not all are. There are even some that really shouldn’t call themselves teachers. But for those that are wonderful teachers, I feel there will always be a place for them. It’s not a competition of teacher versus information network. Certainly the challenge to the teacher is providing guidance on the base skills that students should posess developmentally while providing an environment for independent discovery and vast exposure. Maybe the “traditional” teacher and classroom become less of a lecture hall and more of a fast paced, integrated lesson style where the depth variety of information offered on the web are a large part of that. Throw in independent discovery, and there the teacher has allowed them the networking aspect while providing guidance for appropriate development.
I think this may be the fourth post that I mention this, but what I propose above sounds a whole lot better than a curriculum centered around standard testing. Another case for eliminating it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You made an interesting point about depth. I have not really thought about how much we can learn if we go into depth with the details. Hearing this has made me think about what I do. I never try to go into depth because I am always trying to find the most important facts that will benefit me. I never really cared for the details supporting the facts. Now, I think I need to start doing that. It could help give me a better understanding of things. Thank you for that point. Great blog!!
ReplyDelete"...how many kids read much more than that required by school." My guess/ <10%.
ReplyDelete"I think this may be the fourth post that I mention this, but what I propose above sounds a whole lot better than a curriculum centered around standard testing. Another case for eliminating it?"
Absolutely. Expect another blast from me soon. But will we succeed?
The number of tests these students are required is unreal, especially Mobile County. I definitely agree our schools are just skimming the top of education and not exploring the depth variety that technology offers.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your post, Jennifer C.
How do we fix this ridiculous problem??? I agree with Jennifer. Dr. Strange, how do we fix this?? Where do we start?
ReplyDeleteI have a friend (important position in a very important foundation) who says we must let the schools collapse before we can fix them by replacing them. That may be correct. I keep hoping, but I don't know how. In 1972 I suggested abolishing the degree granting power of educational institutions. That went nowhere. Too much money involved (and other things like football). As we move toward free information everywhere, colleges and universities will, most likely, have to reinvent themselves. K-12? Maybe if we could separate babysitting from learning.
ReplyDelete