Comments on: He so gets it!

By: cawp

cawp — Thu, 22 May 2008 22:32:25 +0000

Sorry Cathy,
I am CAWP. Bill Gaskins

By: cawp

cawp — Thu, 22 May 2008 22:31:33 +0000

Cathy,
I like the term “sit and get’ method of teaching. I will add that to my vocabulary. Parents in the GCSD school district, especially the one on the Waccammaww neck are concerned about 90 minute periods. They think that it is shame that kids have to sit and get for that long of a period of time. Is that a shame or not? I still know a few in our profession who prefer the sit and get method. I think we are far removed from drastic change because parents need to be reeducated about school and how how kids learn.

Any thoughts…

By: Cathy Nelson

Cathy Nelson — Sun, 18 May 2008 14:48:45 +0000

Frank–while NCLB has a stronghold on US education, media literacy will always be on the backburner. It’s a shame, I know.

By: Frank Baker

Frank Baker — Sun, 18 May 2008 01:25:03 +0000

And why, dear educators, do think that “media literacy” education is not taught in our schools? And what can or should be done to reverse this trend? What can WE all do to insure students leave school more “media literate” than when they entered?

By: Cathy Nelson

Cathy Nelson — Sat, 17 May 2008 12:41:16 +0000

Heather I agree that is the problem when anything other than agreement takes place in any text based forum, be it twitter, blogs, newspaper articles, letters to the editor, and even our list, the lack of voice inflection or facial reactions can alter our interpretations, and leave many hot headed and ready to flame. Isn’t it funny that when i first began using email, one of the first reminders about etiquette in using email was not to flame folks b/c you may have misinterpreted the intent with the written words.

Yesterday I had a knee-jerk angry- like reaction to one of the posts as well, but I was so busy all day that I could only skim, and make a promise to myself that I needed to go back and read more thoroughly after work.

Frustrating more was that I was trying help P who is unable to post for some reason. SHe knew I would help. I needed her voice in the mix b/c just like T, she is form the other side of the desk too, the IT desk. So I knew she had a unique perspective, one who gets where we are coming from, but sees it through the IT lense so to speak.

Whne I finally had time I began with the Prensky article, reading it over one more time. Then I started with the first response and read through to the last. After doing this, I realized T was jusr stirrng the conversation, and not really questioning it. I thought he really added value.

The most damaging thing done–in hindsight of course–was to blog it b/c there was no way to capture the essence of the whole conversation. IN reflection I reaize that the snippets don’t really represent the total person, and could also be misinterpretted.

Luckily the people whose thoughts i respoded too can go back and reread the entire conversation. Sadly the readers of this blog only have the breadcrumbs to read, which could lead to a lot of misnterpretations.

Oh well. But I think the bottom line is this is not about technology as much as it is about engagement.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts yesterday on the list and today in my blog. I’ll go back and edit H to say Heather, and give you a ping!

By: Heather Loy

Heather Loy — Sat, 17 May 2008 03:52:50 +0000

H speaking (um, typing). You’re always welcome to use any of my comments. I was perturbed with the direction of the “debate” on the listserv. The one problem I have with communicating through text is that you can’t see or hear the person you are “talking” to in order to judge how serious they really are in what they are saying or if they are just trying to stir the pot. Its easy to make snap judgments or misread tones and turn innocent comments into something out of proportion. That’s why I usually stay out of these kinds of “discussions.” I’ll admit that when all the negativity and “evil” labeling started I stopped reading the responses until I saw your follow up.