This is the same question that been asked for many years. Back in the 1980s, the Department of Education released a study called "A Nation at Risk" which made recommendations for education. Many of those recommendations were put into the Bush "No Child Left Behind" act. Basically, it was a call to return to the good old days of teaching the basics and all that. Let's get our test scores up!
What's notable about the the Department of Education's "A Nation At Risk" report isn't so much the conclusions. We've seen those conclusions over and over again each election cycle. No, the notable thing was another report that didn't get much publicity. This was done by the Department of Labor (I believe) which asked HR professionals and corporate CEOs what they wanted out of the education system. The answers were the opposite of the "A Nation at Risk" report. Business wanted individuals who knew how to learn, not individuals who already had learned. They wanted individuals who could solve problems, not individuals who had been taught the answers. They wanted thinking skills, not memory skills.
So, basically it comes down to what we want our schools to be doing. Do we want them to teach skills (such as thinking and problem solving) that will prepare students for the needs of the workforce, or do we want schools to be teaching students to do well on tests?
A friend received that letter in his snail mail box last September. He curtailed as much usage as he could, but when asking Comcast how much was too much, they couldn't tell him. When he asked what the acceptable limit was, they couldn't tell him. All they could tell him was that he was using too much bandwidth and was being unfair to his neighbors.
Rich arrived home yesterday to find that his Comcast service had been turned off. I guess his definition of too much was not the same definition as Comcast had. When he called last night, they could tell him only that he had used too much bandwidth, but they had no idea how much that was. They told him he would have to wait 12 months before he could join them again.
As mentioned elsewhere, there is a lot of discussion on the net about Comcast's AUP (there was even a thread here on/.). Their definition of too much is too much. They have not quantified it; they only obfuscate the issue by talking about "the top one percent of our users..." There will always be a top one percent of their users! Well, until they have no users left, there will always be a top one percent of their users to cancel!
Sorry if this is long winded... But my masters thesis touched on this, as well as further research I have been doing over the last year.
I feel you should look into Professor (at Harvard) Howard Gardner's theories on Multiple Intelligences. It has everything to do with various learning styles your students will be exhibiting. Some of your students will be solely auditory in their learning. Some will be solely visual. Some will be tactile. Some will be mathmatical/technical. Some will be musical learners. Most, though, will be combinations of these learning styles, more abilities in some intelligences, less in others. The point I am making is that every one of your students will learn in different ways.
And then there are thinking skills. Some students (and it's been theorized that most teachers) are linear thinkers. Others tend to think at multiple levels. Perhaps the best analogy would be that some people think like books, where you go from the beginning to the end in one straight line. Some people think like the World Wide Web where the route you take from the beginning to the end is not always a straight line. These latter learners often tend to be the ones who do less well in school.
So, what does all this have to do with computers in the classroom? Well, for one thing, the computer is a device that can handle the needs of all these multiple intelligences and learning styles. Your job will be to figure out how to tap into these learning styles to help the students utilize their native intelligences, and compensate for the intelligences that are somewhat weak (imagine not having auditory or visual skills in most classrooms today!).
So what do you do with the computers? Musical learners would do will writing music and lyrics (as for studying, it's been shown that musical learners study bettter if there is music in the background... mp3s!). Tactile learners will do well in just about any computer lessons you choose (after they learn to type), but just let them get up and walk a bit when they need to! Auditory learners can use mics to speak out loud what they read. They can use the built in text readers to read back what they write.
Video production is a great group project (social intelligence is another of Howard Gardner's intelligences). The linear thinkers can provide great scripts while the mult-level thinkers will be great at setting up shooting schedules and editing (editing in video producation is done with non-linear editing software).
Most important, though, is reflection on the learning process. You are absolutely right that blogs (or forums as others have suggested) are a great tool.
Finally, typing training is a must. Studies have been done, dating back as far as the invention of the typewriter, and they have all shown that typing skills increase spelling skills. In every case, when a teacher takes a single spelling lesson out of the curriculum each week, and substitues a typing lesson instead, the average class spelling scores go up, as compared to a class that had more spelling lessons but no typing lessons. I suspect that this has to do with the tactile learners who are finally getting their lessons in a way that complements their learning style, but that's just a pet theory of mine.
These are just a few suggestions that come to mind off the top of my head. But do a Google search for Howard Gardner and multiple intelligences.
Actually, most teacher and schools *I* can think of (and as a former school district administrator, I have worked with many) wish their students would be more critical. Unfortunately, though, unfunded mandates such as the "No Child Left Behind" act in the US require just the opposite. We are now required to judge our teachers and schools on how they perform on tests that have been developed by central authorities, working under the mandates of politicians. These "high stakes" tests do anything but demand critical thinking skills.
As one teacher I know put it, "I became an English teacher because I love Shakespeare. Most of my students used to love Shakespeare. Now that we have the standardized tests, the only thing we do in English Literature is study Act 2, Scene 3 of Romeo and Juliet which is the scene the standardized test will cover. My students know the scene backwards and forwards. We have studied the word counts. We have studied the characters and their motivations. We act it out, day in and day out. We eat and sleep Act 2, Scene 3. My students hate Shakespeare. I hate Shakespeare. But, we pass the test and score better than just about any school, all because we are judged by the government on this one test. But what it comes down to is, mandates ensure that I no longer have students who love Shakespeare."
Mandates from "on high" often stifle creative thinking, usually because they narrowly define knowledge deemed important by the politicians who control the process. Politicians don't want critical thinking among the populace.
So, what you're saying is that the government (or software censorship companies) should determine what's OK for me to see in the libraries? Which bits and pieces are to be blocked? Should the 13 year old girl be blocked when she looks for information on how to stop her uncle from sexually abusing her? Should I be blocked when I go to learn what Senator Smith said about Abortion on the floor of the senate? Should the gay teen be kept from learning how to deal with the bashers harassing him at school?
Even if we eventually have software smart enough to disallow only "pornographic" information, who's to decide what is pornographic? John Ashcroft who has spent thousands of taxpayers' dollars to cover up the nude sculptures in the Justice Department? There goes all information about ancient greek art, Michaelangelo sculptures and paintings, National Geographic Online, and so many other "pornography." Who's the arbitor of what is pornographic and what is not?
So, once the government or censorship software companies can come up with a definition of pornography that we can all agree on, I'll hold off on supporting CIPA. But, just as soon as we all agree on what pornography is exactly, I'll vigorously agree with you.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the same question that been asked for many years. Back in the 1980s, the Department of Education released a study called "A Nation at Risk" which made recommendations for education. Many of those recommendations were put into the Bush "No Child Left Behind" act. Basically, it was a call to return to the good old days of teaching the basics and all that. Let's get our test scores up!
What's notable about the the Department of Education's "A Nation At Risk" report isn't so much the conclusions. We've seen those conclusions over and over again each election cycle. No, the notable thing was another report that didn't get much publicity. This was done by the Department of Labor (I believe) which asked HR professionals and corporate CEOs what they wanted out of the education system. The answers were the opposite of the "A Nation at Risk" report. Business wanted individuals who knew how to learn, not individuals who already had learned. They wanted individuals who could solve problems, not individuals who had been taught the answers. They wanted thinking skills, not memory skills.
So, basically it comes down to what we want our schools to be doing. Do we want them to teach skills (such as thinking and problem solving) that will prepare students for the needs of the workforce, or do we want schools to be teaching students to do well on tests?
A friend received that letter in his snail mail box last September. He curtailed as much usage as he could, but when asking Comcast how much was too much, they couldn't tell him. When he asked what the acceptable limit was, they couldn't tell him. All they could tell him was that he was using too much bandwidth and was being unfair to his neighbors.
/.). Their definition of too much is too much. They have not quantified it; they only obfuscate the issue by talking about "the top one percent of our users..." There will always be a top one percent of their users! Well, until they have no users left, there will always be a top one percent of their users to cancel!
Rich arrived home yesterday to find that his Comcast service had been turned off. I guess his definition of too much was not the same definition as Comcast had. When he called last night, they could tell him only that he had used too much bandwidth, but they had no idea how much that was. They told him he would have to wait 12 months before he could join them again.
As mentioned elsewhere, there is a lot of discussion on the net about Comcast's AUP (there was even a thread here on
Sorry if this is long winded... But my masters thesis touched on this, as well as further research I have been doing over the last year.
I feel you should look into Professor (at Harvard) Howard Gardner's theories on Multiple Intelligences. It has everything to do with various learning styles your students will be exhibiting. Some of your students will be solely auditory in their learning. Some will be solely visual. Some will be tactile. Some will be mathmatical/technical. Some will be musical learners. Most, though, will be combinations of these learning styles, more abilities in some intelligences, less in others. The point I am making is that every one of your students will learn in different ways.
And then there are thinking skills. Some students (and it's been theorized that most teachers) are linear thinkers. Others tend to think at multiple levels. Perhaps the best analogy would be that some people think like books, where you go from the beginning to the end in one straight line. Some people think like the World Wide Web where the route you take from the beginning to the end is not always a straight line. These latter learners often tend to be the ones who do less well in school.
So, what does all this have to do with computers in the classroom? Well, for one thing, the computer is a device that can handle the needs of all these multiple intelligences and learning styles. Your job will be to figure out how to tap into these learning styles to help the students utilize their native intelligences, and compensate for the intelligences that are somewhat weak (imagine not having auditory or visual skills in most classrooms today!).
So what do you do with the computers? Musical learners would do will writing music and lyrics (as for studying, it's been shown that musical learners study bettter if there is music in the background... mp3s!). Tactile learners will do well in just about any computer lessons you choose (after they learn to type), but just let them get up and walk a bit when they need to! Auditory learners can use mics to speak out loud what they read. They can use the built in text readers to read back what they write.
Video production is a great group project (social intelligence is another of Howard Gardner's intelligences). The linear thinkers can provide great scripts while the mult-level thinkers will be great at setting up shooting schedules and editing (editing in video producation is done with non-linear editing software).
Most important, though, is reflection on the learning process. You are absolutely right that blogs (or forums as others have suggested) are a great tool.
Finally, typing training is a must. Studies have been done, dating back as far as the invention of the typewriter, and they have all shown that typing skills increase spelling skills. In every case, when a teacher takes a single spelling lesson out of the curriculum each week, and substitues a typing lesson instead, the average class spelling scores go up, as compared to a class that had more spelling lessons but no typing lessons. I suspect that this has to do with the tactile learners who are finally getting their lessons in a way that complements their learning style, but that's just a pet theory of mine.
These are just a few suggestions that come to mind off the top of my head. But do a Google search for Howard Gardner and multiple intelligences.
Actually, most teacher and schools *I* can think of (and as a former school district administrator, I have worked with many) wish their students would be more critical. Unfortunately, though, unfunded mandates such as the "No Child Left Behind" act in the US require just the opposite. We are now required to judge our teachers and schools on how they perform on tests that have been developed by central authorities, working under the mandates of politicians. These "high stakes" tests do anything but demand critical thinking skills.
As one teacher I know put it, "I became an English teacher because I love Shakespeare. Most of my students used to love Shakespeare. Now that we have the standardized tests, the only thing we do in English Literature is study Act 2, Scene 3 of Romeo and Juliet which is the scene the standardized test will cover. My students know the scene backwards and forwards. We have studied the word counts. We have studied the characters and their motivations. We act it out, day in and day out. We eat and sleep Act 2, Scene 3. My students hate Shakespeare. I hate Shakespeare. But, we pass the test and score better than just about any school, all because we are judged by the government on this one test. But what it comes down to is, mandates ensure that I no longer have students who love Shakespeare."
Mandates from "on high" often stifle creative thinking, usually because they narrowly define knowledge deemed important by the politicians who control the process. Politicians don't want critical thinking among the populace.
So, what you're saying is that the government (or software censorship companies) should determine what's OK for me to see in the libraries? Which bits and pieces are to be blocked? Should the 13 year old girl be blocked when she looks for information on how to stop her uncle from sexually abusing her? Should I be blocked when I go to learn what Senator Smith said about Abortion on the floor of the senate? Should the gay teen be kept from learning how to deal with the bashers harassing him at school?
Even if we eventually have software smart enough to disallow only "pornographic" information, who's to decide what is pornographic? John Ashcroft who has spent thousands of taxpayers' dollars to cover up the nude sculptures in the Justice Department? There goes all information about ancient greek art, Michaelangelo sculptures and paintings, National Geographic Online, and so many other "pornography." Who's the arbitor of what is pornographic and what is not?
So, once the government or censorship software companies can come up with a definition of pornography that we can all agree on, I'll hold off on supporting CIPA. But, just as soon as we all agree on what pornography is exactly, I'll vigorously agree with you.