Thursday, July 7, 2011
Week 5 Reflections
I think that my definition of educational technology has remained pretty solid through this course. The difference is going to be the implementation of that definition. My definition of educational technology leaves open the possibility of utilizing any technology for the purpose of enhancing education. Before this semester, I really would have limited the tools that I would have plugged into that definition to a much greater extent. I think that O'Reilly's approach to Web 2.0 is one that will cause a lingering apprehension to diving head first into any such tools, but I think that rather than ignoring such tools completely, I will be looking to follow more of a Novemberian approach, which I think realistically is comparable to how I approach educational technology to begin with: judiciously offering our student a means of developing a compass for the use of technology in their lives. I also really think that my definition of educational technology is supported by several of November's points, especially when it comes to the definition of educational technology and his commentary on the "$2000 pencil". I have developed a sense of need to expand my thinking about what can fit within the definition of educational technology, which has been an "ah ha" process, and I have also felt very validated by November and some other authors which have provided some "ah ha" moments.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Week 4 Reflections
Q1: I am definetly more comfortable composing digitally. The real reason is not due to a lack of ability with pen and paper, but the editing tools available when composing digitially and the fact that I can type much faster than I can write (due to a highly overly developed sense of neatness - I can type neatly as fast as I can. If I write as fast as I can, it is not as neat as I like it to be.)
Q2: I cannot remember anything. Just 5 years ago, I could remember literally hundreds of IP addresses and which servers/hosts they belonged to, I could remember the same number of command lines and procedures, I knew the phone numbers of all of my colleagues, associates, and vendors and I could do it without thinking. Now, I rely on my iPhone for all of my contacts, notes, etc. Part of that is due to becoming more and more reliant on the technology and part of it, let's just face it, is age. I always use to say that the day that I need a PDA to keep up with everything is the day that I have too much to do. Well, you know the rest of the story. One thing that I definetly hate about being reliant upon the technology for these pieces of information is that I am a lot less efficient than I used to be. When I could maintain all of that information in my head, I could recall it and utilize it much faster than I can now that I have to look it up.
Q3: See Q2!
Q4: I use the Internet for everything and I don't go anywhere without my iPhone.
Q5: I can actually engage in 5 or 6 activites at once and have to on a regular basis.
Q6: I do play video games and the better the graphics are, the more I love 'em!
I am a hybrid between Gen X and Net Gen. I am very independent and skeptical, but I am also detemined and hopeful. I love my freedom to do things the way that I want them done and I don't need to work in groups to be happy (I'm happier working alone) and I desire a real balance between work and life. I love my parents - they are the smartest people on Earth and have been since I was about 24 years old. I hate red tape; I want to get things done. This also feeds into the fact that I hate anything slow! (Except a slow smoked brisket!)
Oblinger and Oblinger present a lot of critical issues for educators in their first chapter. There is a lot to digest, but I think that there are several highlight points. The first deals with the way that students approach technology. Based on research it is evident that the Net Gen students do not look at the technology so much as what they are able to do with the technology and if the technology does not meet expectations, then it is not deemed to be "technology". They are looking for interaction and validation. I wonder then, if students would define the "technologies" that they are presented with in primary school as technology or not. From experience I believe that there are a lot of programs and things that we engage in as educators in the name of employing educational technology which would in fact not even meet the students' definition of technology let alone that of those educators who are in the know about what makes up educational technology. The generational, or as the authors very specifically point out, experiential, gap between classroom educators and the Net Gen student means that we have a lot of work to do to develop these experiences in our staff to bring them up to where our students are, enabling them to empathize with where the students are learning from and thus meet them there, and/or develop other mechanisms for leading them in their educational paths. I think this is going to drive a shift from the traditionally valued "seasoned" veteran teacher to younger, more experientially equal teachers who can engage the students more natively. I wonder how many of the seasoned educators can make a transition in experience and approach quickly enough to adapt the educational environment to meet these students before we loose them.
The second point that I think is paramount to how and why we use technology in education has to do with the issue brought up dealing with multiple media literacy. Certainly our job as educators is to meet the students where they are, but I cannot help but wonder how the prefence for graphics over written word will impact students once they leave for the work place. I think we need to know if adaption to offering more visual queues and a decreased focus on written instruction and work will benefit students once they leave us. Are the various industries making the same transition or will the students find themselves unable to function in a work force still bound to traditional methods and procedures. I cannot help but think of the more and more common occurance of the fast food cashier who cannot return/calculate correct change for a customer because they have only to push buttons on a register that shows pictures of the products and performs the calculations for them. We have already moved to a heavy reliance upon calculators in primary schools for standardized tests; how damaging is this transition to meeting our students "where they are" on their future success. I don't recall having been allowed to utilize a calculator on the computations portion of the GRE....I am not saying that we should not adapt to our students or that we should not attempt to meet them where they are. I think, however, that it is imperative that we understand the long term consequences of adpting to them, rather than having them develop to some traditional approaches to learning.
The last comment that I will make is really more of a question: How? Now that we know about how important social interaction and immediate gratification is to our students, how do we develop the skills and how do we alter the educational environment to meet them? Professional development has to be critically reviewed. The way that we approach PD has to mature and take on the qualities of quality professional development. The changes in perspective and behaviour that must be taken on by the traditional teacher to meet these new expectations cannot occur in a sit down meeting once a month, with a mandate given to go and make it happen. I think that the real change to traditional "professional development" that is going to need to take place, and will be the change that will turn most educators on their heads, is going to be the fact that we will need to transition from the veteran teachers leading the way and mentoring the "young 'uns" to the "young 'uns" mentoring the veterans. There will need to be lots of pride swallowed for the traditional educational organization to make the changes needed to shift to this student centric learning model.
Q2: I cannot remember anything. Just 5 years ago, I could remember literally hundreds of IP addresses and which servers/hosts they belonged to, I could remember the same number of command lines and procedures, I knew the phone numbers of all of my colleagues, associates, and vendors and I could do it without thinking. Now, I rely on my iPhone for all of my contacts, notes, etc. Part of that is due to becoming more and more reliant on the technology and part of it, let's just face it, is age. I always use to say that the day that I need a PDA to keep up with everything is the day that I have too much to do. Well, you know the rest of the story. One thing that I definetly hate about being reliant upon the technology for these pieces of information is that I am a lot less efficient than I used to be. When I could maintain all of that information in my head, I could recall it and utilize it much faster than I can now that I have to look it up.
Q3: See Q2!
Q4: I use the Internet for everything and I don't go anywhere without my iPhone.
Q5: I can actually engage in 5 or 6 activites at once and have to on a regular basis.
Q6: I do play video games and the better the graphics are, the more I love 'em!
I am a hybrid between Gen X and Net Gen. I am very independent and skeptical, but I am also detemined and hopeful. I love my freedom to do things the way that I want them done and I don't need to work in groups to be happy (I'm happier working alone) and I desire a real balance between work and life. I love my parents - they are the smartest people on Earth and have been since I was about 24 years old. I hate red tape; I want to get things done. This also feeds into the fact that I hate anything slow! (Except a slow smoked brisket!)
Oblinger and Oblinger present a lot of critical issues for educators in their first chapter. There is a lot to digest, but I think that there are several highlight points. The first deals with the way that students approach technology. Based on research it is evident that the Net Gen students do not look at the technology so much as what they are able to do with the technology and if the technology does not meet expectations, then it is not deemed to be "technology". They are looking for interaction and validation. I wonder then, if students would define the "technologies" that they are presented with in primary school as technology or not. From experience I believe that there are a lot of programs and things that we engage in as educators in the name of employing educational technology which would in fact not even meet the students' definition of technology let alone that of those educators who are in the know about what makes up educational technology. The generational, or as the authors very specifically point out, experiential, gap between classroom educators and the Net Gen student means that we have a lot of work to do to develop these experiences in our staff to bring them up to where our students are, enabling them to empathize with where the students are learning from and thus meet them there, and/or develop other mechanisms for leading them in their educational paths. I think this is going to drive a shift from the traditionally valued "seasoned" veteran teacher to younger, more experientially equal teachers who can engage the students more natively. I wonder how many of the seasoned educators can make a transition in experience and approach quickly enough to adapt the educational environment to meet these students before we loose them.
The second point that I think is paramount to how and why we use technology in education has to do with the issue brought up dealing with multiple media literacy. Certainly our job as educators is to meet the students where they are, but I cannot help but wonder how the prefence for graphics over written word will impact students once they leave for the work place. I think we need to know if adaption to offering more visual queues and a decreased focus on written instruction and work will benefit students once they leave us. Are the various industries making the same transition or will the students find themselves unable to function in a work force still bound to traditional methods and procedures. I cannot help but think of the more and more common occurance of the fast food cashier who cannot return/calculate correct change for a customer because they have only to push buttons on a register that shows pictures of the products and performs the calculations for them. We have already moved to a heavy reliance upon calculators in primary schools for standardized tests; how damaging is this transition to meeting our students "where they are" on their future success. I don't recall having been allowed to utilize a calculator on the computations portion of the GRE....I am not saying that we should not adapt to our students or that we should not attempt to meet them where they are. I think, however, that it is imperative that we understand the long term consequences of adpting to them, rather than having them develop to some traditional approaches to learning.
The last comment that I will make is really more of a question: How? Now that we know about how important social interaction and immediate gratification is to our students, how do we develop the skills and how do we alter the educational environment to meet them? Professional development has to be critically reviewed. The way that we approach PD has to mature and take on the qualities of quality professional development. The changes in perspective and behaviour that must be taken on by the traditional teacher to meet these new expectations cannot occur in a sit down meeting once a month, with a mandate given to go and make it happen. I think that the real change to traditional "professional development" that is going to need to take place, and will be the change that will turn most educators on their heads, is going to be the fact that we will need to transition from the veteran teachers leading the way and mentoring the "young 'uns" to the "young 'uns" mentoring the veterans. There will need to be lots of pride swallowed for the traditional educational organization to make the changes needed to shift to this student centric learning model.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Week 3 Reflections
I have always regarded the use of e-portfolios as a tool in education as a great idea that really doesn't fit with where eduction is today. I have really viewed them as being a little late on the scene in terms fitting in with how teacher's assess students. I think teachers, especially elementary teachers, used portfolios much more in the past because at the lower grade levels, Kindergarten in particular, traditional grades were not given out; portfolios were used to display student progress. I am not sure how much assessment was going on. Even today, I think portfolios are still used in the very early years of formal education for this purpose. Today, standardized testing is such a focus even in the upper elementary grades, that portfolios as assessment tools don't make much since in terms of meeting goals or time allotment. HOWEVER,...that was my thinking prior to this week.
I think the philosophy of using portfolios as assessment for learning is right on target. Employing this philosophy works around many of the standing issues facing the use of portfolios in the educational environment. I've always been concerned about the use of portfolios for summative assessment due to issues with subjectivity associated with how teachers evaluate portfolios and how these tools would be standardized to fairly evaulate students across different SEC and cultural groups.
Portfolios as assessment for learning should also leverage the positive uses of portfolios: student engagement, developing student self-learning, producing authentic works, and teacher-student collaboration in the learning process. I think that the most important of the 10 research principles for AFL identified by Black & William is that AFL develops learners’ capacity for self-assessment so that they can become reflective and self-managing. As an educator, this speaks to the most important aspect of education in my opinion: develop learners who have a passion for learning. I think that a key characteristic of true learners is the ability to evaulate their own learning and to be able to modify their learning approach to be successful at any given time and in any situation. This is a powerful effect of portfolios within the AFL philosophy.
Becoming involved with creating my own portfolio will help me to work through the issues that students will experience when developing their own portfolios. I think the most difficult part of working with the e-portfolios is managing the organization and format to produce a unified collection that can be viewed from a meaningful perspective rather than as a random, disconnected grouping of information. Hopefully by working through this process, I will be able to better support and collaborate with students as they develop their own portfolios.
I think the philosophy of using portfolios as assessment for learning is right on target. Employing this philosophy works around many of the standing issues facing the use of portfolios in the educational environment. I've always been concerned about the use of portfolios for summative assessment due to issues with subjectivity associated with how teachers evaluate portfolios and how these tools would be standardized to fairly evaulate students across different SEC and cultural groups.
Portfolios as assessment for learning should also leverage the positive uses of portfolios: student engagement, developing student self-learning, producing authentic works, and teacher-student collaboration in the learning process. I think that the most important of the 10 research principles for AFL identified by Black & William is that AFL develops learners’ capacity for self-assessment so that they can become reflective and self-managing. As an educator, this speaks to the most important aspect of education in my opinion: develop learners who have a passion for learning. I think that a key characteristic of true learners is the ability to evaulate their own learning and to be able to modify their learning approach to be successful at any given time and in any situation. This is a powerful effect of portfolios within the AFL philosophy.
Becoming involved with creating my own portfolio will help me to work through the issues that students will experience when developing their own portfolios. I think the most difficult part of working with the e-portfolios is managing the organization and format to produce a unified collection that can be viewed from a meaningful perspective rather than as a random, disconnected grouping of information. Hopefully by working through this process, I will be able to better support and collaborate with students as they develop their own portfolios.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
"MAPping" the Internet
I really liked this activity. I learned several things that I did not know about identifying information about websites (and I thought I knew most of it.. :)) I especially liked the archive site that let's you go back and see the history on the sites; it is really interesting to see how some sites have changed over time. I chose the "Tree Octopus" site to MAP. I found that most of the sites that are linked to this site are educational sites focusing on the same activities and issues with the identification of good information on the Internet that our class is.
I have always been very skeptical about information on the Internet and have therefore always been very selective about how I search for information. A lot of what I search for on a regular basis is technical information and you really have to learn to stay away from sites which are run by individuals or some less than reputable groups. You find in the technical world that you can very typically trust vendor backed sites, including blogs established by vendor employeed personnel. As a matter of fact, employee blogs are one of the best sources of technical information for Altiris (just in case you were wondering)...
Our high school librarian is and has been very outspoken about the dangers of Wikipedia in the schools. Kids and even teachers often take the information on Wikipedia as gospel truth and it drives her crazy. She as well as the other librarians spend a great deal of time teaching the staff and students to use the library databases such as EBSCO in order to perform quality research on books and media. I think she is correct for the most part. I do think that especially for topics for which you might not have very much information, Wikipedia can be used as kind of a primer - a place to start, to begin to get an idea of the topic and a point to launch further, more academic searches from. If we don't teach our students to be critical thinkers and to really be critical of information, they will end up believing anything presented to them.
This week, I really spent a lot of time reading the article by O'Reilly on Web 2.0 and I just had to step back several times and gather my composure. After two weeks of reading and exploring, I have become more comfortable with the need to expose our students to Web 2.0 and to participation in the collective intelligence therein, although I use the latter portion of that term VERY loosely! The new approach to the web that characterizes Web 2.0 is obviously something that our students need to understand, not because I think that they need to inherently be a part of global thinking and mind melding (I have this burned in image of Jean Luc Picard as a Borg in Star Trek - assimilation!!!!) but because they are going to have to be competitive in the world which is become dominated by such technology. And I really believe that that is the bottome line to this Web 2.0 - It is a concept primarily derived by titans of technology business with a focus on attacking the perennial titan, Microsoft. You can almost hear in O'Reilly's comments how much he HATES Microsoft. And that is fine, but I think we need to understand that this is an idea driven by a man who is making money off of this idea. It's a captitalist issue more so than an educational issue, by a long shot. However, as long as it exists, we can use it to teach our students about how to manage information and how to be knowledgeable, responsible users and contributors to the world of information around them.
As far as Wikis, I think there is a lot of power in their use for the purpose of producing coopertive products. These can be used as a forum between parents and teachers, between educators for the purpose of sharing ideas, and for students as study group forums, etc. There are many implementations that could be approached with Wikis and they will all be highly functional just as a long as they are treated with the necessary respect. I really think that within the educational environment, if these kinds of tools are going to be used, they should be hosted and managed by district personnel rather than using public Internet based sites which might make management and control of content to open.
I have always been very skeptical about information on the Internet and have therefore always been very selective about how I search for information. A lot of what I search for on a regular basis is technical information and you really have to learn to stay away from sites which are run by individuals or some less than reputable groups. You find in the technical world that you can very typically trust vendor backed sites, including blogs established by vendor employeed personnel. As a matter of fact, employee blogs are one of the best sources of technical information for Altiris (just in case you were wondering)...
Our high school librarian is and has been very outspoken about the dangers of Wikipedia in the schools. Kids and even teachers often take the information on Wikipedia as gospel truth and it drives her crazy. She as well as the other librarians spend a great deal of time teaching the staff and students to use the library databases such as EBSCO in order to perform quality research on books and media. I think she is correct for the most part. I do think that especially for topics for which you might not have very much information, Wikipedia can be used as kind of a primer - a place to start, to begin to get an idea of the topic and a point to launch further, more academic searches from. If we don't teach our students to be critical thinkers and to really be critical of information, they will end up believing anything presented to them.
This week, I really spent a lot of time reading the article by O'Reilly on Web 2.0 and I just had to step back several times and gather my composure. After two weeks of reading and exploring, I have become more comfortable with the need to expose our students to Web 2.0 and to participation in the collective intelligence therein, although I use the latter portion of that term VERY loosely! The new approach to the web that characterizes Web 2.0 is obviously something that our students need to understand, not because I think that they need to inherently be a part of global thinking and mind melding (I have this burned in image of Jean Luc Picard as a Borg in Star Trek - assimilation!!!!) but because they are going to have to be competitive in the world which is become dominated by such technology. And I really believe that that is the bottome line to this Web 2.0 - It is a concept primarily derived by titans of technology business with a focus on attacking the perennial titan, Microsoft. You can almost hear in O'Reilly's comments how much he HATES Microsoft. And that is fine, but I think we need to understand that this is an idea driven by a man who is making money off of this idea. It's a captitalist issue more so than an educational issue, by a long shot. However, as long as it exists, we can use it to teach our students about how to manage information and how to be knowledgeable, responsible users and contributors to the world of information around them.
As far as Wikis, I think there is a lot of power in their use for the purpose of producing coopertive products. These can be used as a forum between parents and teachers, between educators for the purpose of sharing ideas, and for students as study group forums, etc. There are many implementations that could be approached with Wikis and they will all be highly functional just as a long as they are treated with the necessary respect. I really think that within the educational environment, if these kinds of tools are going to be used, they should be hosted and managed by district personnel rather than using public Internet based sites which might make management and control of content to open.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Educational Technology
My definition of educational technology is probably fairly standard with just a hint of a sense of being jaded and a dash of pragmatism. I have witnessed far too many implementations of software programs and gaming consoles in the name of education. Increasingly, educators are bombarded with grant opportunities which promise very low cost purchases of said technologies and they jump head-long into the purchase of the product without ever evaluating the worth, application, or sustainability of the proposed technology. More often than not, the end result is the antithesis of educational technology: a digital babysitter.
Educational technology is not defined by “what” as much as it is defined by “how” and “why”. Educational technology is the use of technology, selected for a specific purpose, and integrated into the process of education for the purpose of enhancing, extending, and clarifying the teaching process that already exists. Correctly implemented, it requires identification of desired outcomes and goals, integration with only those staff, students, and/or community members who will benefit directly from the interface with the technology, and on-going evaluation of the process to validate that the technology is a benefit to the process. This definition may initially seem to be very rigid, however I believe that it actually leaves open the “what”, allowing educators to be free to implement any technology which can plug into the definition, including those gaming consoles and myriad of software programs, but now it can be so many other devices, tools, and implements which are functional in the process. I very much enjoyed and agreed with November’s comment on the “$2000 pencil”. In fact I had to walk away from the article, fiendishly chuckling to myself over the truth and irony of the statement. In that scenario, the word processing program and computer were not being used as educational technology. They do represent technology, no doubt, and technology exists to assist us with performing work and computers and software do that on a daily basis; but let’s not call an apple a computer.
Friday, June 10, 2011
To Blog or Not to Blog
First off, I do not believe that Richardson would approve of the use of this blog in this manner – I believe he would refer to it as contrived! J I do not think that the potential of blogs has been realized in education, for the same reasons as Richardson states. There are inherent boundaries that as educators we must provide for our students both for their safety and the safety of others. The recent occurrences of cyber-bullying related deaths is proof enough that there are students that meet Richardson’s grouping of people who should not be blogging. Aside from safety concerns, many educators lack an understanding of how to integrate such a technology as true educational technology – it would in fact become what Richardson decries as contrived and would hold little or no real value to the teacher or student. Quality educational professional development is needed to assist educators in learning to use these types of technology as integral components to their teaching and communication methods.
Should blogging be used in education? Yes, I think that it holds value for teaching students how to communicate and share ideas, and it certainly offers those capabilities against a larger population of peers. Students are members of society and should learn not only how to communicate, but how to do so responsibly.
Should blogging be used in education? Yes, I think that it holds value for teaching students how to communicate and share ideas, and it certainly offers those capabilities against a larger population of peers. Students are members of society and should learn not only how to communicate, but how to do so responsibly.
Reflecting on November's "Creating a New Culture of Teaching and Learning"
Alan November’s article is so poignant on all points, that I could easily speak to them all. I will however stand upon my soapbox regarding his point on truth and the Internet. The salient point on this topic relates to the responsibility that we have as educators to not simply present our students with any and all information or any form of technology and expect that they have the natural where withal to use it wisely or judiciously. As teachers we have a responsibility to present information and educational tools to our students along with direction for their application. We must help our students develop a moral compass or maybe more so, a moral direction finder. If all we offer our students is information, then they are left on their own to develop their own perspectives or to run into those who would offer them a most dysfunctional or harmful one. Our students will one day have to make up their own minds about what information is right, wrong, or indifferent. While they are under our care, we have the responsibility to help them develop the personal standards to make the right decisions later on.
Importance of Creating a Philosophy Statement
Having placed my Philosophy of Education down in writing will afford me the opportunity to reflect upon it and analyze future assignments and thoughts through that lens. I think that it is important to know what you believe and what motivations guide your actions and thoughts. As an educator, it is important to have this personal philosophy written down as it makes it more concrete. It is sometimes easier to bend the rules, if no one else knows what they are.
Philosophy of Education and Technology
Education is the process of passing on not only information and skills, but more importantly a passion for learning. All people of all ages and life circumstances are students. All people must constantly take in information and apply it. In some cases these people are instructed through texts or technical literature, by means of interaction with other individuals in their social environment, or in the case of schools, by interaction with professional instructors. In any case, a process of information transfer exists; skills and information pass from one to another.
There exists a significant difference between an instructor and a great teacher: passion. A great teacher has a passion for learning and a passion for people. I want to be a great teacher. I have a passion for the instructional areas in which I teach and train and I have a passion for people. I desire to see others succeed and to develop the same passion for learning that I have. To this end, relationships are of paramount importance. I must learn who my students are: what they care about, what they worry about, what they are passionate about, and what motivates them. I believe that any capability that I have to be a great teacher comes as a gift from God and it is from God that my passion and concern for people comes. As my calling to teach comes from God, I am also bound to teach from a specific perspective: that which I teach must be the truth and must be presented in a manner which presents boundaries to the learners. I must instruct in a manner which develops for the learners the same boundaries of moral and ethical correctness that I adhere to. Thus, when students fully become learners, they should have developed not only my passion for learning in general but also a compass for seeking out valuable and appropriate information and for its use whether that is to pass on or use in their own lives.
Because the process of education is to develop learners, thus passing on the passion of the teacher to others, the teacher role is critical to the process. However, as time passes the role of the learner becomes more important. As young students, people will ultimately decide whether to take on the mantle of learner. As students become learners, they also become responsible for their role in the education process. A learner must actively and conscientiously engage in the process of education. He or she must develop the ability to critically examine the information which they are presented with and responsibly apply and pass on that information which is viable and discard and even decry that which is contrary to their beliefs. This burden that is placed on the learner means that the teacher must teach from a realistic perspective. Certainly creativity is a goal that all teachers should have for their student-learners, but that creativity on the part of the learner must be tempered by grounded and reliable structure. To set learners free to believe that any creative or free thought has value and meaning is to leave students afloat and vulnerable to any direction that life or experience may influence them. It is the learners who must maintain his/her course for it will fall to them to become the teachers of the next generation.
If the main components in education are the teacher, the learner, and the information/skills being initially transmitted, then educational technology is the medium through which those components mesh. Just as it is important that the teacher disseminate valuable information, it is just as important that educational technology be highly scrutinized before being used in the education process. Educational technology is a tool for enhancing the process of education and just as an artist must use the correct implements for producing a masterpiece, lest he damage the raw materials with which he is working, so must educational technology be selected with care. Educational technology must not mask the teacher or the learning from the learner. Technology must be implemented so as to add clarity to communications, information, and skills but must not become a goal it and of itself. As a teacher, my goal is to use technology to provide real, genuine experiences for my students so that the concepts and information being taught take on concrete meaning and value for them. The limitation is that I never want to use technology to replace human interaction. Learners must have modeled for them the value of interpersonal relationships so that they develop an understanding of the importance of such interactions in learning and life so that they may practice and eventual model the same.
So we have examples of students and instruction mediums and of a process of taking in information and using it. This is not education. In education, instructors become teachers; those who have a passion for learning and for people. Information and skills become valuable commodities as they must be filtered and value judged so as to present only that which is true, factual and socially appropriate and relevant. Students become learners; those who have developed a passion for learning and who apply learning as responsible members of society. The purpose of education is to bring together teacher-learners together with students for the purpose of developing student-learners in an environment which espouses socially and morally acceptable application of information and skills.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)