Creating Self-Importance

I've been away, for longer than I like, from posting. I've been reading, but time to write has been limited.

I've been coaching our middle school track teams. Our boys went undefeated, with 4 school records broken, and our girls finished first in all their meets except 1 - against a great private school team in Chattanooga. Anyway, my evenings have been busy -- and fun. But I haven't had the time to blog.

I was also notified last week that I get to return to the classroom to teach 7th grade Social Studies next year. I'm looking forward to it. Middle East, Africa, Asia - History, Geography, Economics, and Culture. I've already started compiling my resources, finding websites for WebQuests and Treasure Hunts. Thanks to my Twitter/blog friends for the congratulatory notes. It really means a lot to me.

But I've been reading my feeds. Blogging, to me, is active reading. I write about what I read. Occasionally I'll have a post that derives from personal experiences, but mostly I reflect, and use the information as raw data (D. Warlick).

So here's my favorite reflection of the past week or so.

Jon Becker (much like Tim Holt last summer) posted to his blog that he feels left out of the inner circle. He then gives his evaluation of the inner circle members - Will, David, Wes, Vicki, Dean, Stephen, and Chris.

[Hey Tim, If you're reading this - there doesn't seem to be a big change from last summer in the buffet :-) -
Yes, there are a few Hispanics and there are a
few women, but for the most part, the dinner is being hosted by white
guys. And it is being hosted by middle age, middle class white guys.
Still feel like coming to dinner?]

So, what's my point? Simply this, and most already know this - I did it too. If you want to get noticed, drop some serious blogger names. As Scott says - quoting Seth -

[They] don't care about you. [They] care about themselves.

Jon, you have gotten several people who have noticed you because of your thoughts. You are figuring out how to make yourself known in the information economy. Either praise the people who have gone before you, or criticize the ones who have gone before you. [They] will notice - and respond! I didn't know about you until I read Scott's post. Dr. McLeod gives very good advice, and does it consistently.

So Jon - Here's my advice. You now have an audience. Many of the people whose names you included in your post have responded, and in doing so, they have given you an audience (that's how I found you). Now for the hard part: What will you provide to keep us coming back? You have invited yourself to the buffet. You have knocked on the door to the inner circle. You have made your presence known. You have said, as all of us have, "I am somebody. I am important in the conversation."

What will your role in the conversation be?

Blogged with the Flock Browser

The More Things Change...

I was reading David Warlick's very recent post about presenter Sara Kajder's use of Web 2.0 tools.  His point is that she doesn't discuss the tools, but what the tools allow -- "It's not about the blog, it's about writing."  Amen!

David then inserts this quote...

“Learning to read and write is not learning how texts stick together, but how people stick together…” (Brandt 1990)

Here is what struck me from this post.  I bought a book at a used bookstore (McKays in Chattanooga, also in Nashville and Knoxville) called The Art of Teaching by Gilbert Highet.  It was written in 1950.  Sure, some of the things are dated, even gender-biased according to today's standards.  But, at the root of the book is that teaching is an art that requires the instructor to...

1. know their subject, and continue to learn it.
   
2. enjoy their subject, so your passion can carry you through when you are "tired" (p. 20).
   
3. like their students.  I love these lines. "It is easy to like the young because they are young.  They have no faults, except the very ones they are asking you to eradicate: ignorance, shallowness, and inexperience" (p. 25).

I am enjoying the book, much like I enjoy re-reading Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato.  There is no sarcasm in that statement, by the way.  I fear that teachers who consider themselves on the cutting edge of education, sometimes forget why the technology (whatever that might be) is so cool. 

Blogs are nothing new really.  It is only another avenue to write.  Yes, I get that the audience, feedback, and method is different, and can have a greater effect/affect on the writer - but it is still a just a tool for writing.  Thus, writing/communication is still at the core of the blog. 

Skype is also mentioned.  Again, a tool for communication that should allow for more primary sources in research.  Wikis, a tool for communication that allow for written, visual, and audio avenues. 

Our job as an artful teacher is to use new tools in order to communicate and relate to our students so the topics of interest and expertise which we teach can enrich the lives of the students under our care.

Blogged with Flock

Digital Native or Immigrant? Neither!

I know Prensky has taken some heat recently over the coinage of Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants.

I was actually told today that I didn't "get it" because I was a digital immigrant. You must understand that the person who told me this is only 6 years young than I, and when I responded that I did not consider either term to be accurate of the digital generation gap, but that Prensky was trying to make a point that young people were born into an environment where computer/video technology was already invented and therefore they are "native" to our current culture...I saw him furrow his brow as if to ask a question. I asked, "What?" He said, "Who is Prensky?"

Yeah, I'm the digital immigrant who doesn't get it.

As I explained and provided support for Marc Prensky's concept, I realized I may not be a native, but I am also not an immigrant...I am a Digital Translator.

The system where I work is about 68% Hispanic, and in the early years of the transition from 2% (in 1995) to where we are today, I recall numerous parent meetings in which the English-speaking teachers required translators so the parents could understand us and we could understand them.

A few years later, we had to implement English as Second or Other Language (ESOL) classes (which became ESL, and now ELL-English Language Learners). Whatever PC name you want to use, it has served as my topic for this post.

Part of the coursework for an ELL endorsement includes: strategies to help students learn, understanding the culture of the students you teach, and respecting the values of different cultures.

This is why I am a Digital Translator. I, as most of the people who will read this, are not aliens to the digital world, as a matter of fact some of you have created the very world in which you are considered an immigrant (irony of ironies). You are not a native because most of my readers were born pre-WWW. However, we are the ones who bridge the gap between DIs and DNs. We translate.

David Warlick has said, on a few occasions, he does necessarily "get" everything, but that does not make it a bad thing. It's not about the technology, it's what the technology allows you to do. Immigrants will seldom move beyond email, because it does everything they want. Natives want the Social Networking tools that allow them to receive updates, information, and fun in a one-stop shopping atmosphere. Translators understand the cultures, and simply seek to get Immigrants to understand and accept the values of the Natives, and vice versa. It's not that one is better than another, it's a preference (value?) of the user; so they can accomplish the things they want to accomplish in a way that is easiest (and perhaps entertaining) for their sensibilities. Immigrants do this through the non-stop email jokes, pps's, and >>>forwards. Natives accomplish the same thing in Facebook with Status updates, Groups, Wall posts, and the unending Facebook apps that can be added to a profile.

I may not be a Native, but I am also not an Immigrant. I am a proud male incarnation of Pocahontas. I was here before the WWW arrived, and as the Natives and Immigrants seek to live together in WebWorld, I will do my best to translate, to increase tolerance, and maybe get them to Twitter each other one day. :-)

David & Gary - What a conversation

I have been reading blogs for about 5 years. On occasion I will find something that really challenges the current trends of educational thinking...like when Will said his kids may not need college. Great stuff. I have an 18-year-old son who does not need college either (but he is going), and is about to work on an advertising campaign for a major national DIY home improvement chain. This is beside the point.

During my blog reading, I infrequently find anything so earth-shattering that it really makes a difference. Do not misunderstand, I still find things interesting, perhaps innovative, even intriguing. But seldom is anything life-changing. Wikis are cool and offer collaboration and a different way to work in groups. SmartBoards are neat, but it may only provide a hook to gather the attention of the ADD classroom. [I'd be ADD in today's classes too - "powering down" once I got to school.] In the world of "pick your battles" the only thing I have chosen to fight is what I call "modern-day book burning" -- internet filtering. I still don't think many people get it, and opt for the non-thinking, less work, "we must protect our children" diatribe. [BTW - has anyone else ever noticed that when we patronize kids we say "children," as in - "think of the chiiiiillllldren."] So I fight silently, and tell kids to learn things on their own, because schools will not be able to help them much with what they truly want to know. It's a loss of the ideals upon which our country was founded, but there's not much sparkle in that debate.

TODAY though, I went back to revisit David Warlick's comments about the NYT article about "computers don't make a difference in education" post. The comments were up to 25. That means David struck a nerve. David made the comment...

Sadly, we are a generation who was taught how to be taught — not how to teach ourselves. It’s one of the many reasons why the experiences that our children have in the classroom must become much more self-directed, relevant, and rich. They/we need to learn to teach ourselves. Teachers shouldn’t need professional development. They should be saying, hey, I’m going to teach myself how to do that this weekend. It’s about life long learning. Not about a life of being taught.

Brilliant! Correct! Shameful that this is the truth. [Reminder of Ken Robinson]

Then Gary Stager enters the conversation in the comments. I'm not familiar with Mr. Stager's work, but I will look up his contribution to the world. Stager ruffles some feathers in his comments to David. [You can read them for yourself.] But one comment really struck a chord...

Many young teachers figured out that teaching is the only career that doesn’t require electricity. Perhaps we should start recruiting in Amish country.

After I chuckled, I thought about the truth of his statement. Now, while I think "the children are our future, blah, blah, blah" I believe Gary's statement needs further review. I happen to think that it will be 10-15 years (I hope) before education communities will look at today's "struggles" with a hearty ha-ha, and wonder why we had issues with filtering, blogs, wikis, student email accounts, etc. BUT Gary is making an important statement here. If our new generation of teachers are continually being denied the opportunity to use new technologies, one of two things is likely:

a) they will eventually quit trying technology, or anything different that might work (Gary's point, I think) or
b) they will move on to a different career (like they already do before they are up for their first re-certification).

If the new teacher opts to continue teaching, they will develop habits of comfort in their teaching practice. I don't care how many professional developments, mandates from the District Office, or new opportunities come along, once a teacher no longer needs to think on the fly, they will not change just because someone says they have to change. We need a dose of human psychology reality if we think otherwise. Sure, they may "try it for a while," but when they don't see reward for the new effort, the new thing will be devalued. There is a small window of time (under 5 years) to capture teachers and get them to change the way they were taught, and the the way they will teach.

I can hear it now, "But I was teaching for 12 years, and I changed..." You are the exception to the rule, which proves the rule. Be honest, you know teachers are not going to truly change their philosophy after they adopt a philosophy with which they are comfortable.

Using a computer/projector and SmartBoard or computer to TV, to do the same thing I did on a whiteboard with dry erase markers, that others did with an overhead projector, that others did with a blackboard and chalk, that others did with a slateboard, that others did with a stick in the sandbox is not advancement of pedagogy. Different does not mean progress. Sometimes it just means more money.

I can't believe the number of people who are still not aware of the New Bloom's Taxonomy and the role that Creativity can play in student learning and development. But that is another story, for another time.