I found this cool webpage about how to vet web resources--ways to determine the legitamacy of information you're getting on the internet. Lots' of interesting stuff to think about. Also links at the end I haven't even explored...
Vetting Web resources
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
thanks to Ranger Rick
So, here's the level of literature in my house... I was reading Ranger Rick and found this comic strip that is totally appropriate to my last blog and my thoughts about our last speaker.
random thoughts on civic engagement--games vs. reality...who wins?
I thought the talk by Joseph Kahne was rather interesting. I walked into the talk with my own cynicism about educational games, their effect on kids, and the companies who make them—having worked at LeapFrog for a couple years.
I kept trying to understand why we would want to use games to increase civic engagement—when it seems to me like we need to get kids into the world, in touch with actual people and things to help them understand that actual life is not a game. That there are real consequences to actions—like a person actually dies if you shoot them and they don’t come back. That people actually starve, that toxins make people sick and sometimes kill them.
Dr. Kahne talked about harnessing the engaging quality of games to educate and civically engage people. I listened as people talked about what games use to engage kids—the challenge, strategy, the problem-solving. But I think there are other keys to engaging kids or adults—one of those is allowing people to do things that are not allowed in the world—like killing and hurting people. Another is the creation of worlds where creative and bizarre things exist—which is fun and seems pretty neutral. Another engaging factor is that in many games a person can be powerful, strong , tall, thin, magical, i.e. be other than themselves (how does this affect self-esteem? I am only good when I’m all brawn or magical…). There’s also that split second action—and immediate feedback—which behaviorists would applaud, but I wonder—how does this affect kids in the long run? Sometimes we need to do things and get feedback later, sometimes we need to do things and never get outside recognition, but we do them because they’re the “right” thing to do—like nursing a cranky dying parent. I guess I’m saying that I have mixed feelings about harnessing games and their “engaging” qualities, since I’m not convinced that all those qualities are good for kids’ social, moral, and intellectual development.
On the other hand, games also allow kids to feel brave, important ,and that their contribution is valued and needed. I don’t believe that there are enough activities in school or outside of school where kids feel that way. I think that the high number of kids volunteering speak to this reality. In sports, unless you’re good enough to be on the team and really contribute, you’re not important. Volunteers are very important to keeping nonprofits going; they provide services and work that would otherwise not get done. I remember how much my daughter and her brownie troop got out of cleaning up the bay shore on bay cleanup day. I guess I’d rather kids actually contribute to their world to feel like a person who does that sort of thing—and I believe if given the opportunity and support for those kinds of values they will.
That said, I was excited by the examples of games that put kids in situations that were not possible in the real world. For example, Real Lives that puts kids into the world of different kinds of people all over the world or the Bee game that involved people from all over the world to solve a problem. I suppose if kids are going to play computer and internet games, they might as well have decent values and incorporate learning. Although I don’t believe that the game developers really care about this—they care about the bottom line, which seems to include “engaging” kids with violence and addictive high octane adrenaline boosting action. I think utilizing games to take people into situations and places that would not be possible, but could really enlighten, educate , and engage them in civically constructive ways is cool. I could see working for a museum designing second life exhibits to bring kids anywhere into learning—thinking back to the cool stuff we learned about SL just the week before…
OK, enough already! Even though my mind is still racing around with thoughts of games where kids take care of their computer kitties, but don’t do the same for their real ones…
I kept trying to understand why we would want to use games to increase civic engagement—when it seems to me like we need to get kids into the world, in touch with actual people and things to help them understand that actual life is not a game. That there are real consequences to actions—like a person actually dies if you shoot them and they don’t come back. That people actually starve, that toxins make people sick and sometimes kill them.
Dr. Kahne talked about harnessing the engaging quality of games to educate and civically engage people. I listened as people talked about what games use to engage kids—the challenge, strategy, the problem-solving. But I think there are other keys to engaging kids or adults—one of those is allowing people to do things that are not allowed in the world—like killing and hurting people. Another is the creation of worlds where creative and bizarre things exist—which is fun and seems pretty neutral. Another engaging factor is that in many games a person can be powerful, strong , tall, thin, magical, i.e. be other than themselves (how does this affect self-esteem? I am only good when I’m all brawn or magical…). There’s also that split second action—and immediate feedback—which behaviorists would applaud, but I wonder—how does this affect kids in the long run? Sometimes we need to do things and get feedback later, sometimes we need to do things and never get outside recognition, but we do them because they’re the “right” thing to do—like nursing a cranky dying parent. I guess I’m saying that I have mixed feelings about harnessing games and their “engaging” qualities, since I’m not convinced that all those qualities are good for kids’ social, moral, and intellectual development.
On the other hand, games also allow kids to feel brave, important ,and that their contribution is valued and needed. I don’t believe that there are enough activities in school or outside of school where kids feel that way. I think that the high number of kids volunteering speak to this reality. In sports, unless you’re good enough to be on the team and really contribute, you’re not important. Volunteers are very important to keeping nonprofits going; they provide services and work that would otherwise not get done. I remember how much my daughter and her brownie troop got out of cleaning up the bay shore on bay cleanup day. I guess I’d rather kids actually contribute to their world to feel like a person who does that sort of thing—and I believe if given the opportunity and support for those kinds of values they will.
That said, I was excited by the examples of games that put kids in situations that were not possible in the real world. For example, Real Lives that puts kids into the world of different kinds of people all over the world or the Bee game that involved people from all over the world to solve a problem. I suppose if kids are going to play computer and internet games, they might as well have decent values and incorporate learning. Although I don’t believe that the game developers really care about this—they care about the bottom line, which seems to include “engaging” kids with violence and addictive high octane adrenaline boosting action. I think utilizing games to take people into situations and places that would not be possible, but could really enlighten, educate , and engage them in civically constructive ways is cool. I could see working for a museum designing second life exhibits to bring kids anywhere into learning—thinking back to the cool stuff we learned about SL just the week before…
OK, enough already! Even though my mind is still racing around with thoughts of games where kids take care of their computer kitties, but don’t do the same for their real ones…
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Podcast about Dr. Ellen Wagner's talk
Here it is. I had a hard time with Audacity. It just wasn't very intuitive for me. And I re-recorded my voice because the classroom recording was too rushed and too much and I felt too wierd about it all. It doesn't seem like much time to say much of anything... Oh well. I gave it a go. I do like the music I found.
So, here's a link to it, since I can't seem to upload it to Blogger...
My 1st Podcast (Ever!)
btw, I uploaded the podcast to my server space so I could link to it here..
So, here's a link to it, since I can't seem to upload it to Blogger...
My 1st Podcast (Ever!)
btw, I uploaded the podcast to my server space so I could link to it here..
Monday, March 16, 2009
internet savvy and the degradation of curiosity
I found class frustrating because we had to cut off, what I thought was, a very interesting discussion on internet literacy. People talked about the issues of the net generation not being net savvy and not using the internet for anything other than social networking. I've been thinking about this. I think that we're talking about 2 issues. One huge issue is the lack of "internet savvy" people have--which has to do with critical thinking, being able to assess the integrity or believability of information, understanding how to research and expand one's understanding of the world.
The other issue, I think, has to do with the fact that education in this country is about achievement--about A's and B's and making the most money, getting the most privilege and power. I felt like my classmates were bemoaning the lack of curiosity their students have, which leads them to ignore the incredible educational potential of the internet. When learning is a job or a chore, why would anyone do it if they don't have to? A friend of mine told me a story about her brother asked her to stop sending his kids books as presents, because it was liking giving them homework as gifts!
And, frankly for me--the construct of learning=grades, got totally in the way of my education. I've had to learn that grades really only get in the way of my learning. When I was in high school, my learning was about getting good grades and that attitude followed me to college. When I hit college at 18 and couldn't achieve A's or what I thought education was about, I walked away. It took me years to come back to college and to education and do it for myself--because it was important to me, not for the grades. I had to fight years of programming that made me afraid of education and not getting good grades or doing everything perfectly (as if that is possible!).
I understand there is a need for assessment in education--a need to determine if students are understanding what they're supposed to understand and contributing to their education. But assessment has turned into grading and judging the success of a student, not the education. And education has turned into preparing for those assessments. A co-worker of mine has a son who's in 5th grade and has totally lost any love of learning he ever had and she's worried. All she sees ahead of him is middle school and further alienation from learning, compartmentalization, and testing.
I can't figure out how to reinvigorate curiosity and the love of learning--except to go back to kindergarten and state standards and testing and re-think how it's all working. I do however believe that we need to create curriculums of internet literacy appropriate for different ages. Let's produce it on the internet. Maybe can even get them utilizing the internet in exciting, fun, and expanding ways--to teach this subject...
The other issue, I think, has to do with the fact that education in this country is about achievement--about A's and B's and making the most money, getting the most privilege and power. I felt like my classmates were bemoaning the lack of curiosity their students have, which leads them to ignore the incredible educational potential of the internet. When learning is a job or a chore, why would anyone do it if they don't have to? A friend of mine told me a story about her brother asked her to stop sending his kids books as presents, because it was liking giving them homework as gifts!
And, frankly for me--the construct of learning=grades, got totally in the way of my education. I've had to learn that grades really only get in the way of my learning. When I was in high school, my learning was about getting good grades and that attitude followed me to college. When I hit college at 18 and couldn't achieve A's or what I thought education was about, I walked away. It took me years to come back to college and to education and do it for myself--because it was important to me, not for the grades. I had to fight years of programming that made me afraid of education and not getting good grades or doing everything perfectly (as if that is possible!).
I understand there is a need for assessment in education--a need to determine if students are understanding what they're supposed to understand and contributing to their education. But assessment has turned into grading and judging the success of a student, not the education. And education has turned into preparing for those assessments. A co-worker of mine has a son who's in 5th grade and has totally lost any love of learning he ever had and she's worried. All she sees ahead of him is middle school and further alienation from learning, compartmentalization, and testing.
I can't figure out how to reinvigorate curiosity and the love of learning--except to go back to kindergarten and state standards and testing and re-think how it's all working. I do however believe that we need to create curriculums of internet literacy appropriate for different ages. Let's produce it on the internet. Maybe can even get them utilizing the internet in exciting, fun, and expanding ways--to teach this subject...
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Some wierd kind of podcast script from Dr. Ellen Wagner's talk
How do we? A Poem...(well kinda)
How do we prepare learners for jobs and technologies that don’t yet exist?
How do we prepare a workforce for a world where they will need to solve problems we don’t even know about?
How do we prepare ourselves to edit/modify/delete much of what we have learned about our own professional practices?
How do we truly capture and extend learning experience so that is it meaningful in the context of our digital lives?
How do we move beyond the fascination with the latest and greatest and focus on sustainable innovation?
How do we find the best way to develop educational products, if taking a product to market and making it commercially viable is not necessarily that.
How do we make the rubber hit the road? Take the possibilities and make them real?
How do we pay people to do stuff if we make everything open i.e. free? How can businesses depend on free applications? How do we ensure that free stuff always works?
How do we start focusing on the experience of learning as well as the structure?
And what the heck are flex and air anyway?
And finally as Kim asked, “So what? “
What did I learn? What are my main takeaways? What keeps me up at night?
There are lots of questions, big ones with no answers or answers yet to be found, there are lots of challenges. There are vast areas of unknown and need and potential—where we can contribute… How exciting is that?
What keeps me up at night is the day to day… work that I haven’t done, how to do the next homework assignment, whether I’m raising my kid OK, if she’ll be OK tomorrow and the next day and the next. How do I work in instructional design in a way that challenges and fulfills me (and lets me make a living). How do I do instructional design in a way that really benefits learners and the world?
My main takeaway… I am a learning activist! Say it…I am a LEARNING ACTIVIST!
How do we prepare learners for jobs and technologies that don’t yet exist?
How do we prepare a workforce for a world where they will need to solve problems we don’t even know about?
How do we prepare ourselves to edit/modify/delete much of what we have learned about our own professional practices?
How do we truly capture and extend learning experience so that is it meaningful in the context of our digital lives?
How do we move beyond the fascination with the latest and greatest and focus on sustainable innovation?
How do we find the best way to develop educational products, if taking a product to market and making it commercially viable is not necessarily that.
How do we make the rubber hit the road? Take the possibilities and make them real?
How do we pay people to do stuff if we make everything open i.e. free? How can businesses depend on free applications? How do we ensure that free stuff always works?
How do we start focusing on the experience of learning as well as the structure?
And what the heck are flex and air anyway?
And finally as Kim asked, “So what? “
What did I learn? What are my main takeaways? What keeps me up at night?
There are lots of questions, big ones with no answers or answers yet to be found, there are lots of challenges. There are vast areas of unknown and need and potential—where we can contribute… How exciting is that?
What keeps me up at night is the day to day… work that I haven’t done, how to do the next homework assignment, whether I’m raising my kid OK, if she’ll be OK tomorrow and the next day and the next. How do I work in instructional design in a way that challenges and fulfills me (and lets me make a living). How do I do instructional design in a way that really benefits learners and the world?
My main takeaway… I am a learning activist! Say it…I am a LEARNING ACTIVIST!
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
small text, small screens, and listening to lectures...
I've been going through the great multimedia presentations that people made from Dr. Curt Bonk's talk. I have to say the VoiceThread drives me crazy because I can't read the comments very easily. This experience made me reflect on the whole issue of making the curriculum, tools, and applications accessible to old folks. The text was so small I could barely read it whether I had my glasses on or off.
And I'm coming to realize that the reason I don't get hype about mlearning is that I don't like listening to lectures or being read to. I keep thinking of mlearning as this little screen that can't hold much information. But I guess you can watch movies (really little ones--oops there's that vision thing again) and listen to lectures/talks.
And I'm coming to realize that the reason I don't get hype about mlearning is that I don't like listening to lectures or being read to. I keep thinking of mlearning as this little screen that can't hold much information. But I guess you can watch movies (really little ones--oops there's that vision thing again) and listen to lectures/talks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)