A Wired World

This week I have been reflecting about Facebook due to my little sister Olivia, age 15, finally joining, my friend Pia, age 26, deciding she doesn't want to be a part of it anymore, and my fiancé receiving some hate mail from an alias created by my ex-boyfriend.  With all this Facebook commotion in just one week I started mulling over whether or not I appreciated this way of digitally connecting to friends or not.  Is it possible to be too digitally connected and become so frustrated that you would rather stick to a phone conversation or meeting in person?  Well that happened to Pia and I am feeling the same frustrations.  Facebook has been a fun way of sharing ideas, following events, and viewing pictures but it has also infiltrated individuals’ privacy in a way that might be causing a digital aversion.

My thoughts segued into some of my thoughts on our readings concerning the degree of wireless connection that students have on university campus.  I thought it was quite a ridiculous stretch to have UNC-Chapel Hill freshman all receive a free Apple iPod.  This investment seems like more of a marketing plan rather than supplying the student with a technology tool that would contribute to their learning experience.  This is especially evident when students are quoted themselves saying, "I'm not using it for academics, no one really is," and "if it was up to me, I'd use (the money) for other purposes."  This is an ideal example of spending tuition money in a manner that employ's new technology that "looks and sounds good" but isn't a future investment or an educational investment for that manner.

This reflection leads me to settle on the concept of moderation.  Concerning Facebook I see a loss on emotional connectedness in exchange for immediacy and convenience.  Too much emphasis on being connected can deflect from the main purpose of educating young adults. Sure, let’s invest in technology, but let’s invest in technology that has proven to enhance the learning of students.  Students can become prepared for a wired world without technology luxuries like the iPod.

Paradigm Shift: reflection

In Tim O'Reilly's discussion of the Open Source Paradigm Shift (2004) he describes the change in rules of the computer industry since 1981 thanks to IBM whom themselves failed to understand the consequences of the change; "playing by the old rules while the new rules are reshaping the industry around them."  Can this reality be directly related to education today?  Is education rigidly playing by the old rules while new rules are reshaping countless industries around them?  Who is reshaping the benefits by sticking to the old rules?  Special interest groups?  Definitely not the children, the core agenda of it's existence.  As software commoditization has been driven by standards so have the expectations of student achievement.  But while these technology advances are constantly changing with time and improvements, educational change is not keeping up by a long shot.  In fact it is far behind with it's roots still following the rules set in place by the industrial revolution. 

As Mr. O'Reilly states that software itself is no longer the primary locus of value in the computer industry and that new business models are required.  Open source technology, like internet technology has allowed for people to connect around interests, rather than through geographical location or affiliation.  Values have migrated with change as things that were once kept for private advantage are now shared freely. Collaboration has proven to be central to the success yet education is still so rigidly structured with grade levels defining children, academic achievement based on certain styles of learning and test taking.  Why is education so stifled and unchanging?  Well most certainly it's all the politics involved, the huge clash of values due to the mixing pot of cultures and religions in such a large and new country of immigrants. 

Public education was implemented for "public" benefit.  But in a country with its students' demographic, cultural, and social needs so diverse how can one structure of teaching and learning be so justifiably generalizable?  Will public education have to keep getting worse before a paradigm shift can occur?

Tech Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fnh9q_cQcUE

Human learning and multimedia development & my growth goal from ed400

As part of my personal growth goals I would like to become more knowledgeable about what kinds of technologies are most effective for constructivist learning environments and what kinds of challenges teachers have when trying to execute this model of teaching.  I have very limited experience with the multimedia learning experience outside of higher ed. presentations.  I can image a teacher feeling my same uncertainty with this model of teaching and learning with limited training and experience.  It would be a very difficult and daunting expectation to execute without it's being mastered first in order to be affective in the classroom.  I hope to gain this knowledge by the end of the course and possibly purse it further as my PDD topic concerns learning with technology in the classroom.

Mayer Reading

While reading the Mayer article I found myself comparing the multi-media means of learning directly to the way in which I have learned to communicate with my boss.  She is 76 years young and has demanded from me that I communicate in a manner that gets straight to the point, with prior research made, and examples to supplement.  In a way her elderly years have reverted her to the young students needs found within the cognitive theory of multimedia learning.  I can never write her an email exceeding three sentences without her demanding clarification and a hard copy of what I am referring to.  The good thing is that she always wants to understand so we will enter websites together or print out hard copies in order for her to gain a "whole picture" of what I am trying to convey and then we can proceed.  Corresponding written and verbal words with pictures and examples allows her to make the clearest connection of understanding.  Applying this article to education in the classroom I would say if the technology is available then why wouldn't teachers use it in a way that appeals to this multi way of reaching students in order to increase the learning engagement of different learning styles amongst individual students in the classroom.  The key then is proper teaching training so that the multimedia methods of technology are properly implemented and used to create a coherent learning supplement or enhancement if you will, rather than a substitute for teacher engagement. 

Distance coaching

The sports article in the New York Times forwarded to us by Dr. Faverty was very interesting to me because I had not realized the positive effects that technology could have in athletics when it comes to rehabilitation.  Also, I am especially interested to see how far this idea of "distance coaching" can work without the crucial "real life" contact between athletes.  I can see the benefits to this sports technology as far as technique practice but will a dependence on this method cause athletes to falter when they are put in the full impact, non-simulated situation?

Getting a student started with some "energy"

In the article by Larmer & Mergendoller I definitely see the benefits of using technology to enhance the opportunities of helping students to feel the “energy” created by stimulating their interest and excitement towards project learning.  The “need to know” aspect is where this “energy” can be harvested.  I compare it to my own experiences of watching a breathtaking special on the Discovery channel about the depletion of the rain forest and the way in which the camera and statistics made me passionate about what I as an individual could do to be more green.  My little sister became passionate about the bizarre depletion of bees after having a guest speaker come into her class.  Big picture?  Get me excited about doing something and I will excel at the assignment, project, campaign…whatever it is, if it strikes a chord inside of me then it will become a learning experience and not something I just need to get done.  This last statement correlates with the author’s second criterion of a project serving an “educational purpose”.  To this point I ask myself, how can this component really happen in a way that creates a lasting impact without them feeling some “energy” about it?  The student is going to move through the project by checking off all its requirements rather than having it serve as a vessel to get excited about learning if some “energy” isn’t there.