This morning as I listened to Mike and Mike in the Morning on ESPN Radio (my usual morning pastime on my long drive into work), I heard caller after caller and email after email slamming Michael Vick's apology as forced and insincere. To me, Vick seemed contrite, and not sorry he was caught, but truly sorry for the results his actions had on young people. Even if his apology was insincere, at least he took responsibility, which is more than I can say for the Tennessee Titans' Adam "PacMan" Jones. His actions, which reportedly resulted in the permanent paralysis of a nightclub bouncer, drew relatively little reaction from the mainstream media and a steady but small (in comparison to the Michael Vick coverage) interest from sports media. I realize dogfighting is a heinous offense, and I am not trying to minimize it, but I wonder why the hue and cry over Vick is more intense than the outrage at Jones, especially after his statements in subsequent interviews. Jones showed no remorse; rather, he made excuses repeatedly and tried to say his actions were not even wrong.
I applaud Vick for at least admitting his immaturity and attempting to take responsibility. I was never a Vick fan, and I am not necessarily one now, but I do think his reaction at least reduces the distaste I had for him somewhat. That being said, if he never played football again, it wouldn't bother me.
I do believe he will play again, but I won't be rooting for him, just as I never did before. However, I don't understand why people have been so critical of Vick while not criticizing Jones with the same intensity.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Welcome and a few thoughts
Welcome to my blog! I finally have a place to air my observations, musings, and questions about a variety of topics. I will probably discuss several passions of mine which include serving God, using technology, and watching baseball. I hope those of you who only share my passion for technology and not the other two will indulge me addressing the other two. Occasionally, I will discuss life in general and my views regarding current events. In all ways, I hope my blogs are stimulating, uplifting, and edifying to those who read them. I would encourage those who disagree with me to be civilized--respectful disagreement and discussion is at the forefront of the information age and how we all stretch to reach our fullest potential. To those reading this, thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts. I hope you are entertained and informed by them and that the reading experience is as beneficial for you as the writing experience is for me.
With that being said, after I attended the Prince William County Schools Technology and Content Literacy Conference today, I was again stimulated and challenged in my role as an Instructional Technology Resource Teacher. Last school year was my first in that position and frankly I thought my role was to help teachers integrate technology. Today I realized this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Today's students are inundated with information from a variety of sources and most will interact with technology from the time they get up until the time they go to bed. The information superhighway is as fast-moving as ever, yet the traffic of users is so vast, the demands on the teachers of today are numerous and endless at the same time. Keynote speaker David Warlick rightly pointed out that we have no choice but to meet the needs of the digital native by engaging them where they are at. His main point was that we are not to be technology integrators, but LITERACY integrators.
By his definition, teaching literacy includes teaching students how to find, use, evaluate, and create information for themselves and in a larger sense engage them in a never-ending discussion. In this way, we are sure to create productive learners who can keep up in a fast-paced world of technology. We do this mainly by giving students a problem to solve. This problem can either be a "real-like" problem or a real-life problem. (In other words, the problem or task can be simulated or genuine). Warlick's presentation was to me the clearest and most vivid mandate for shifting the way we teach and the way we view WHAT we teach I have encountered in quite sometime.
I also attended another of his sessions related to RSS and Web 2.0. In it, I realized the World Wide Web is a living, growing, dynamic organism that most of us are just beginning to scratch the surface of. Again, we as educators are often limited by factors we cannot control. For example in Prince William County, blogging and wiki websites are not allowed by the filtering system in use. So the very thing Warlick advocated for cannot be utilized in our instructional design. This must change if we are to effectively engage the future members of our workforce. Another factor beyond our control is the tendency of government and administration to look at test scores as the ultimate measure of our productivity as students. I believe if we would give the businesses what they want (candidates who can effectively communicate and are technologically literate) our success can be measured adequately and no stones could be thrown at our educational system. In our quest to leave no child behind, we are leaving our children behind by not ensuring equity of access to technology for all students, providing sufficient time for students to interact with the information they derive from technology, and not allowing the tentacles of our students' reaches to move beyond the framework of our standards of learning.
In closing, I will say I believe four things must change if we are to adequately serve our students. First, we must move away from a quick and dirty mindset which requires a perfunctory covering of standards (which in turn requires the government to not force teachers to teach to the test or have the state standards be the end all, be all). Second, we must embrace all technologies necessary, without fear of lawsuit. (If blogs or wikis are adequately monitored and controlled, their educational implications are enormous and the safety and sanctity of discussion will be assured). Third, our government and local school boards should put their money where their mouths are and fund technology, ensuring equitable access for all students. The schools with students who come from homes with a lack of technology resources should not be left to fend for the crumbs, while schools whose families have more resources enjoy the seven-course dinner with dessert. It is disgraceful that there are schools in our district with 52 interactive white boards alongside schools with 2, 1, or even zero. Whether that money comes from the district itself, from private business donation or grants, or from any other source is immaterial. We as a culture must put a premium on education. In a country where a man can make in excess of $25 million a year for hitting, fielding, and throwing a baseball, it is inconceivable to me there is not money available to fund technology adequately as a national priority. Finally, the way schools are evaluated and results are quantified must change so students and teachers are accurately judged for the fine work most perform and the ways learners are engaged.
I am hopeful my next blog entry will be shorter, but I appreciate the soapbox. I would relish the opportunity to hear from dissenters and the choir alike and hope you enjoy reading this blog.
With that being said, after I attended the Prince William County Schools Technology and Content Literacy Conference today, I was again stimulated and challenged in my role as an Instructional Technology Resource Teacher. Last school year was my first in that position and frankly I thought my role was to help teachers integrate technology. Today I realized this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Today's students are inundated with information from a variety of sources and most will interact with technology from the time they get up until the time they go to bed. The information superhighway is as fast-moving as ever, yet the traffic of users is so vast, the demands on the teachers of today are numerous and endless at the same time. Keynote speaker David Warlick rightly pointed out that we have no choice but to meet the needs of the digital native by engaging them where they are at. His main point was that we are not to be technology integrators, but LITERACY integrators.
By his definition, teaching literacy includes teaching students how to find, use, evaluate, and create information for themselves and in a larger sense engage them in a never-ending discussion. In this way, we are sure to create productive learners who can keep up in a fast-paced world of technology. We do this mainly by giving students a problem to solve. This problem can either be a "real-like" problem or a real-life problem. (In other words, the problem or task can be simulated or genuine). Warlick's presentation was to me the clearest and most vivid mandate for shifting the way we teach and the way we view WHAT we teach I have encountered in quite sometime.
I also attended another of his sessions related to RSS and Web 2.0. In it, I realized the World Wide Web is a living, growing, dynamic organism that most of us are just beginning to scratch the surface of. Again, we as educators are often limited by factors we cannot control. For example in Prince William County, blogging and wiki websites are not allowed by the filtering system in use. So the very thing Warlick advocated for cannot be utilized in our instructional design. This must change if we are to effectively engage the future members of our workforce. Another factor beyond our control is the tendency of government and administration to look at test scores as the ultimate measure of our productivity as students. I believe if we would give the businesses what they want (candidates who can effectively communicate and are technologically literate) our success can be measured adequately and no stones could be thrown at our educational system. In our quest to leave no child behind, we are leaving our children behind by not ensuring equity of access to technology for all students, providing sufficient time for students to interact with the information they derive from technology, and not allowing the tentacles of our students' reaches to move beyond the framework of our standards of learning.
In closing, I will say I believe four things must change if we are to adequately serve our students. First, we must move away from a quick and dirty mindset which requires a perfunctory covering of standards (which in turn requires the government to not force teachers to teach to the test or have the state standards be the end all, be all). Second, we must embrace all technologies necessary, without fear of lawsuit. (If blogs or wikis are adequately monitored and controlled, their educational implications are enormous and the safety and sanctity of discussion will be assured). Third, our government and local school boards should put their money where their mouths are and fund technology, ensuring equitable access for all students. The schools with students who come from homes with a lack of technology resources should not be left to fend for the crumbs, while schools whose families have more resources enjoy the seven-course dinner with dessert. It is disgraceful that there are schools in our district with 52 interactive white boards alongside schools with 2, 1, or even zero. Whether that money comes from the district itself, from private business donation or grants, or from any other source is immaterial. We as a culture must put a premium on education. In a country where a man can make in excess of $25 million a year for hitting, fielding, and throwing a baseball, it is inconceivable to me there is not money available to fund technology adequately as a national priority. Finally, the way schools are evaluated and results are quantified must change so students and teachers are accurately judged for the fine work most perform and the ways learners are engaged.
I am hopeful my next blog entry will be shorter, but I appreciate the soapbox. I would relish the opportunity to hear from dissenters and the choir alike and hope you enjoy reading this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)