He so gets it!
May 16th, 2008 by Cathy Nelson
My final response started like this:(T said)….considering what is blasting into their ears from their ipods, and what they see on television, and the content of some of the most popular video games, i’d recommend putting them in quiet rooms to read and discuss good books!
Perhaps instead of opening the door to all their toys and tools with no restriction, we develop policies that embrace them and teach students about using them responsibly, sensibly, and with limits. Why not teach them to be analytical about the tools they are so mesmerized by, and help them make well thought out, educated, wise choices about the said tools? Gosh, this just may sound a bit like, um, media literacy?
(T said)…teenagers have been bored in school since there have been teenagers in school, and while i support most of prensky’s principles and his recommended practices, i become wary, dubious and skeptical when consultants, educational game designers, and microsoft vp’s suggest that we aren’t doing enough to make education fun and entertaining…
I do believe Prensky said as much, that boredom has been long withstanding in many classrooms throughout the 20th and now 21st century. No surprise. But some are missing the point here. This is not about grabbing their attention with their preferred tools as much as it is about “engaging” students. Very few students who are engaged become bored, cause discipline problems, and best of all, they WANT to learn. Kids are bored because school is focusing on concepts covered on the test, and making it more of a priority than making sure their kids are engaged.
(Heather Loy said) They aren’t used to the “sit and get” methods and/or WON’T get them simply because they will tune us out as we are boring.
Bingo! I myself as a veteran “student” having many years of experience in the classroom learning can vouch for the fact that it is so difficult to have a “sit and get” style class today. And in this day and age of 90 minute blocks, OMG, I pity our students who must endure 90 minutes of this. I’ve been through k-12, college, and 2 post college degrees, and I can promise you the ONLY ones that bring back memories I care to remember are the ones where I did not “sit and get” the whole time. As an adult who LOVES attending conferences, I find that I cannot even stand to sit in one hour sessions that are the sit and get variety. For that reason, I have begun carrying my laptop everywhere, and pray I’ll have wireless, so I can self-stimulate if it gets too boring. I’ve developed the attitude—Engage me or enrage me. There is no in between.
(L said)…LOL “T”…I’ll give you the Microsoft research point…kinda like Renaissance Learning research finding conclusive evidence that AR works.
I think all corporations can find research to support their theories and/or products. It is why we have all bought into such programs as Renaissance Learning, CCC, SuccessMaker, Read 180, and so many more sure fire cure-alls to what ills education.
(P said)…I am currently serving on an EOC Tech Think Committee and I guess the individuals on that group must be as uninformed as well since we all concur on the use of technology in the classroom to engage students.
So glad to hear a state department of education contact saying this!! Also pleased as punch there is representation that understands our roles in the library.
Thank you ALL for this healthy debate. Some may feel it is not part of the library media program, but I beg to differ. We are poised to be a catalyst for true technology integration and modeling engagement in our libraries. We should be doing just that. No educators, especially those in the library, are off the hook. Engage them or enrage them.
Image Attribution:
Image: ‘Wii’
www.flickr.com/photos/48104302@N00/310446979
Image: ‘My name is Hans, and I am a Machead.’
www.flickr.com/photos/91499027@N00/6576953
Image: ‘resting’
www.flickr.com/photos/75016602@N00/199276257
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.
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!
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?
Frank–while NCLB has a stronghold on US education, media literacy will always be on the backburner. It’s a shame, I know.
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…
Sorry Cathy,
I am CAWP. Bill Gaskins