From the Beloit College Mindset List:
Born when Ross Perot was warning about a giant sucking sound and Bill Clinton was apologizing for pain in his marriage, members of this fall’s entering college class of 2014 have emerged as a post-email generation for whom the digital world is routine and technology is just too slow. …
The class of 2014 has never found Korean-made cars unusual on the Interstate and five hundred cable channels, of which they will watch a handful, have always been the norm. Since “digital” has always been in the cultural DNA, they’ve never written in cursive and with cell phones to tell them the time, there is no need for a wrist watch. Dirty Harry (who’s that?) is to them a great Hollywood director. The America they have inherited is one of soaring American trade and budget deficits; Russia has presumably never aimed nukes at the United States and China has always posed an economic threat. …
Most students entering college for the first time this fall—the Class of 2014—were born in 1992.
Read the complete list.
Share on Facebook
In the late Sixties and early Seventies, universities across the United States established programs like “African Studies” and “Women’s Literature.” At the time, many scholars expected them to be short-lived. They thought that these areas of study would become redundant as they were incorporated into mainstream study over time. One could speculate on why that didn’t occur — one side claiming attitude and prejudice, the other side pointing to a department’s determination to maintain its funding — but the fact remains that the expected seamless integration hasn’t happened.
The same can be said about technology integration in the classroom. As a profession we’ve been working with computers for at least 20 years. While some educators have accomplished amazing things in that time, the expected “seamlessness” hasn’t happened. We might point to lack of equipment, lack of training, or lack of interest — probably all three are to blame in varying degrees — but the reason almost doesn’t matter. The result does.
When I launched Web English Teacher in 2000, I thought classroom technology would become so mainstream that it would be silly to relegate it to its own page. When I found, for example, a wiki project on Henry IV, I posted it on the Henry IV page. I didn’t see a need for a separate page of wiki projects.
In the past few weeks I’ve reassessed that position, and I’m launching technology pages. I expect that these pages will include two sections: one part will feature nuts-and-bolts explanations of how a technology tool works. The other part will include models of the tool in action.
I’m also happy to announce partnership with Tom Daccord and Justin Reich of EdTechTeacher, classroom veterans who now offer technology training for educators. I’ve been working with Tom in his summer workshops for the past few years, and I’m very confident with the materials that he and Justin produce, including their book, Best Ideas for Teaching with Technology. Tom and Justin have also produced several videos that I plan to link to as online professional development.
I still have hope that classroom technology will become mainstream, just as I still have hopes for African Studies and Women’s Lit. But until that occurs, this scaffolding will have to serve.
A famous credit card commercial asks, “What’s in YOUR wallet?” As I get ready for school to start, I think about the things I typically keep in my desk besides office supplies. Sometimes a little offbeat, they help me keep it together.
That’s my list. What’s in YOUR desk?
A very successful Midwest Moodle Moot took place at Goshen College earlier this week. Floyd Saner did a lot of work to make things go so well (not his first Moot!). The star this year was Martin Dougiamas, founder and lead developer of Moodle.
In the opening session Dougiamas shared some features of Moodle 2.0, currently in beta, which he hopes will be ready for the January semester. It will include portfolio and external blog support, conditional activities (finish this before going on to that), and a customizable user page. Sticky blocks will be accessible from throughout a site, not just from the home page. One tab will handle navigation; another tab will manage all the settings. The new version will look like a blog.
He assured us that any module that works on version 1.9 should also work on 2.0. “If not,” he tweeted, “it’s a bug. Test it for us!”
The Moot was a great blend of expertise, ambiance, and fun. Workshops covered a range of interests, from all levels of education to application in the corporate world. Round Table discussions on Tuesday allowed people to share ideas. The Twitter stream was lively with backchat, as well (#mootusin10).
Martin's closing session in the chapel.
The Moot also offered an opportunity for networking and relaxation. Saner introduced visitors to the local Amish community by arranging a dinner at the home of an Amish couple Tuesday evening. As we rode through fields of corn and beans and neatly tended farms, we were surprised to see an occasional solar cell on an Amish farm. The cells are there to power a generator for a computer, necessary because so much of the carpentry and woodworking — for which the Amish are highly regarded — now requires digital communications. (The computer is not allowed in the house.)
After dinner at an Amish home, Martin tried to roll out Moodle 2.0, but the code was buggy.
In the closing session Dougiamas fielded questions. He said he was glad to spend some time with end users, though he had to protest he wasn’t “Father Christmas” and couldn’t make everything happen that we wanted.
Maybe in Moodle 3.0.
The Goshen College campus was beautiful.
Tom Whitby tweeted an interesting question this morning:
“If research supports the fact that Wikipedia is more reliable than Encyclopedia Britannica, why are educators so slow to accept it as a source?”
I’ve been asking that same question at my rural high school, where I teach in a wired classroom. Kids embrace Wikipedia not only because it’s easy to access but also because they trust it. Every teacher who tells them not to use it loses credibility with them. But I’ve started to understand teachers’ reluctance.
Anyone can edit Wikipedia, so teachers believe it must not be credible. In one workshop a 20-something teacher told me that she had edited the Wikipedia entry of her very small hometown to state that her father was the mayor. (The town was too small for a mayor.) She stated smugly that her entry had never been deleted, and on that basis she didn’t allow any of her students to use Wikipedia as a source. I wanted to ask her why she deliberately published false information, but it was clear she just wanted to establish an excuse for her students not to use Wikipedia. She had made up her mind.
Another problem is the frequent comparison to the Encyclopedia Britannica. We try to wean kids off general encyclopedia usage by the end of elementary school. Why would we want them to use an online encyclopedia?
Most important, however, is that teachers don’t know the process that goes into editing Wikipedia. Most have never read the history or discussion pages to an entry and therefore don’t understand the process (and sometimes, the zeal) involved in publishing an article that has accurate information. They don’t know about locking down an article during controversy, about editorial review, about creating accounts, about citation — in short, they know one piece but not the entire process.
With all respect to grieving families, I have to say we get to see Wikipedia at its best in the 24-48 hours after the death of a famous person, especially if that person is controversial. I am currently using screen shots from the Discussion page on Charlton Heston in my workshops. (Unfortunately, I was traveling when Michael Jackson died.) For one thing, people can see that Wikipedia will lock down a page for a while if it’s deemed necessary. Even better, the Discussion page reveals the conversation that goes into crafting a person’s biography. Even getting Heston’s birth date correct becomes a matter for careful research. (Good modeling for students, by the way!) But how many people actually read the Discussion page?
Once people know the process that goes on in Wikipedia, the resource becomes more trustworthy. Until then, Tom, I’m afraid people will consider its credibility suspect.
P. S. In my classroom the policy is simple: use Wikipedia as a starting point if you wish, but corroborate everything.
On Sunday former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin tweeted refudiate and joined the ranks of those who’ve used in public what Mark Twain once called “the almost right word.”
She later changed the word to refute (she probably meant repudiate) and excused her lapse(s), saying English is “a living language” and comparing herself to Shakespeare.
Palin’s comparison to the Bard is apt, but not for the reason she intended. Shakespeare also used malapropisms; they were a stock comedic device associated with people of low social class. In Much Ado about Nothing, the character Dogberry uses them so often that another name for malapropism is Dogberryism. Examples:
Palin isn’t the first or the last to famously get her words in a tangle. Fortunately, no harm was done, and we may have had a chance to clarify the difference in meaning between two uncommon words.
This incident gives teachers one more teachable moment in vocabulary development. Diction matters, not just in essays, but also in text messages and tweets.
The New York Times reports the results of recent studies in which children in low-income families were given laptops to take home. Web access was either absent or inhibited — much as I’d like to say “blocked,” we all know what happens when kids encounter filters. Researchers were looking for an impact on learning. After all, they had given the kids a powerful tool. Would it help them at school?
The standardized tests showed no improvement in reading, writing, or math scores. It appears the students spent most of their time using the computers to try to get around the “nanny ware” and to play games.
The knee-jerk reaction might be to think, “Well, computers must not be all that important to education. We can scale back on that expensive technology and save some money.”
A better response to this research might be to use an analogy. Students were give the equivalent of a car, and researchers expected that students would use it to learn how an engine works. Instead, students figured out how to get to the the ball field and how to avoid radar traps.
If we want kids to develop skills in self-directed learning, a rudimentary understanding of filtering technology, and game theory, then simply giving them a laptop and getting out of their way will probably accomplish this. But standardized test scores don’t measure those skills.
Didn’t we establish 10 years ago that technology integration isn’t about giving kids machines but about using new tools to develop new skills, especially in reading and writing? Why are we still testing that?
It’s not about the car. It’s about the mechanic and the apprentice.
The city is dealing with the worst heat in 10 years. In that city, the university is facing budget cutbacks and is trying to be more “green.” In that red-brick building, the classroom has almost no air conditioning. It’s hot.
In that hot classroom, a group of teachers is laughing, typing, and problem-solving. They have given up a week of vacation time to develop new skills integrating technology into their teaching practice.
I love working with teachers, but I especially love the ones who willingly give up time in the summer. They’re not paid to be here; they are doing this because they want to upgrade their skills and those of their students.
On another discussion board I sometimes visit, a parent complained that “teaching used to be a noble profession.” When I look at the unselfish actions of the teachers in this hot, sweaty workshop, I can’t help thinking, “It still is.”
I wish I had written down the date 10 years ago when I launched Web English Teacher. I remember it was near the end of June, and I launched with pride and curiosity. I had built it — would they come?
Ten years and 27 million visitors later, I have my answer.
Over the years Web English Teacher has undergone some changes. At first I hand-coded every page and did all the design myself. It looked like this:
An early Web English Teacher home page
My friend Lisa, a gifted graphic designer, helped me move toward a better design. This summer I’m celebrating with a complete makeover. The layout and colors have changed, but the content is still there.
It has been a pleasure and an honor to give back something to the profession that has meant so much to me. Here’s to the next 10 years!
