Is anyone afraid of the chance that cyber-school could one day supplant the public and private school system? While you shake your head and say, "Man this guy is off the deep end", please watch Commando, with Arnold Swarzzz a who and notice that every time the small-time bad guy needs to contact the BIG BOSSMAN, he has to use a payphone.
Things have changed, and recently I have been made aware of more and more students from my home town deferring their years in the public school system and instead choosing to attend cyber-school, and some of these choices have seemed unethical. For example, a prodigy basketball player named M. Mason was recently held back on purpose by his parents and placed in cyber-scool. The reason for this was to earn him another year in high-school basketball. There are rules, but they can be bent, and eventually legislation needs passed to stop the abuse that could result from this phenomenon.
I love the notion of sitting at home and learning, but we don't know the maturity level of these students , nor do we understand hidden agendas or other motivations that may prompt these choices. I am just in fear that, eventually, all education and content design could be outsourced or cheapened to eliminate all teaching within a traditional face-to-face environment. It may be 200 years before it happens, but history has shown us that things can change rapidly and technology has already proven to be stronger than man. So what do we do????
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Both Ends of the Spectrum of a Technologically Driven Western Society
Some may feel that technology is everything to them. They chat, send eMOTIONAL greeting cards, search for long-lost relatives, even engage in intimacy. The web and current technology are their means for gratification both intrinsically and extrinsically. Everything you need can be obtained through viewing a liquid crystal display in the privacy of your own abode. What more can man desire? Technology rules the world.
Conversely, some in our communities, not necessarily in our society, have a negative view of technology. They feel that it is unwarranted and can even foster evil and dissolution and ultimately, impurity. They are the Amish.
While on a sales route though Indiana, Pennsylvania last week, I drove past an Amish man sitting on a bench in front of a run-down Shop-n-Save. He seemed content. In the last few weeks I have come across many Amish and Mennonite people and have been wondering about their idealogy, as it seems in opposition to western culture in America. I called a friend and asked if it seemed appropriate to approach this man and ask some general questions. My friend recommended it. So I did. Here is what happened.
"Hi, my name's Jeremy and I was wondering if I could ask you some questions?" Mr. Williams replied, "Yes, that would be fine." I told Mr. Williams that I have been wondering about his culture and asked him, "Why do you reject our culture and our lifestyle?" He responded, "I don't think I am any better than you." I quickly apologized for the misunderstanding and explained to him that I envy him and his freedom from our ailments in this society. I told him that I wasn't trying to offend him. He understood and we moved on. I stated that I was curious about the Amish's rejection of technology and had been told on a number of occasions that the reason for the rejection of technology and a the selection of a non-maximal approach was due to an old-school-of-thought notion that technology brings impurity and dissolution. He said, "That is an old school of thought, but it is basically true".
We continued to discuss the impact of WalMart and Sheetz on this society and I told him that I was troubled by there marketing and gimmicks. He agreed and said, "There are problems facing our people too, such as cell-phones and the Internet". We talked about the challenges for both of our societies and we UNDERSTOOD each other.
The conversation lasted about 30 minutes, and as I walked away from him I felt mortified by the fact that he seemed to have everything I wanted. Nothing.
In semiotics, semoiticians study a principle called binary opposition. In a general sense, some scholars feel that words derive their weight and meaning by their opposition to other words. Think GOOD vs EVIL or LIGHT vs DARK. While there is much below the surface of this concept, it is clear that Mr. Williams and his Amish compadres(i.e., Horrible choice of usage there, LOL) are in direct opposition to our use of technology, and while semiotics seems to be reservved for analyzing symbols, signs, and language, it seemed appropriate to adapt the framework to make this point.
So now that the spectrum is recognized, how does that translate into Blogging in the professional world? Well, it just shows us that we are not alone, and that we may need to rely on the opposition for us to define the good works we conduct via technology. What are we comparing our success to when we incorporate an abundance of technology into the professional world or classroom? What do we have to measure it against. What is the opposition? Some may sarcastically answer, "A pad and pen" well, this isn't hip-hop and things aren't that simple(i.e., Can you see the humor there about hip-hop?, Sorry Run DMC). Some may cite Clark(1985) and use the common discourse that the contect design is waht matters, not the medium. Ir all seems like a slippery slope to cynicals such as I(i.e., Man this usage and Emglish is terrible, isn't it?).
My point is: Before we praise a medium for its wonderful contributions to our society, let us design assessments and meaaure the validity of these hypotheses before we all just dive into the pool that isn't yet filled.
Peace
Conversely, some in our communities, not necessarily in our society, have a negative view of technology. They feel that it is unwarranted and can even foster evil and dissolution and ultimately, impurity. They are the Amish.
While on a sales route though Indiana, Pennsylvania last week, I drove past an Amish man sitting on a bench in front of a run-down Shop-n-Save. He seemed content. In the last few weeks I have come across many Amish and Mennonite people and have been wondering about their idealogy, as it seems in opposition to western culture in America. I called a friend and asked if it seemed appropriate to approach this man and ask some general questions. My friend recommended it. So I did. Here is what happened.
"Hi, my name's Jeremy and I was wondering if I could ask you some questions?" Mr. Williams replied, "Yes, that would be fine." I told Mr. Williams that I have been wondering about his culture and asked him, "Why do you reject our culture and our lifestyle?" He responded, "I don't think I am any better than you." I quickly apologized for the misunderstanding and explained to him that I envy him and his freedom from our ailments in this society. I told him that I wasn't trying to offend him. He understood and we moved on. I stated that I was curious about the Amish's rejection of technology and had been told on a number of occasions that the reason for the rejection of technology and a the selection of a non-maximal approach was due to an old-school-of-thought notion that technology brings impurity and dissolution. He said, "That is an old school of thought, but it is basically true".
We continued to discuss the impact of WalMart and Sheetz on this society and I told him that I was troubled by there marketing and gimmicks. He agreed and said, "There are problems facing our people too, such as cell-phones and the Internet". We talked about the challenges for both of our societies and we UNDERSTOOD each other.
The conversation lasted about 30 minutes, and as I walked away from him I felt mortified by the fact that he seemed to have everything I wanted. Nothing.
In semiotics, semoiticians study a principle called binary opposition. In a general sense, some scholars feel that words derive their weight and meaning by their opposition to other words. Think GOOD vs EVIL or LIGHT vs DARK. While there is much below the surface of this concept, it is clear that Mr. Williams and his Amish compadres(i.e., Horrible choice of usage there, LOL) are in direct opposition to our use of technology, and while semiotics seems to be reservved for analyzing symbols, signs, and language, it seemed appropriate to adapt the framework to make this point.
So now that the spectrum is recognized, how does that translate into Blogging in the professional world? Well, it just shows us that we are not alone, and that we may need to rely on the opposition for us to define the good works we conduct via technology. What are we comparing our success to when we incorporate an abundance of technology into the professional world or classroom? What do we have to measure it against. What is the opposition? Some may sarcastically answer, "A pad and pen" well, this isn't hip-hop and things aren't that simple(i.e., Can you see the humor there about hip-hop?, Sorry Run DMC). Some may cite Clark(1985) and use the common discourse that the contect design is waht matters, not the medium. Ir all seems like a slippery slope to cynicals such as I(i.e., Man this usage and Emglish is terrible, isn't it?).
My point is: Before we praise a medium for its wonderful contributions to our society, let us design assessments and meaaure the validity of these hypotheses before we all just dive into the pool that isn't yet filled.
Peace
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Current Opinions on Blogs in the Professional World
It seems, from reading other student's posts, that many of us are comfortable with the notion of including blog format technology in the general structure of our professional culture. What does the world think?
In Antonis Hontzeas’ “Considerations”, a Web Press feature article that received strong reviews, the author states that it is more effective to encourage students in the classroom to use an electronic medium instead of requiring a hand-written format. He seems to believe that the general population considered here(i.e., Younger students) have been brought up in this technologically driven society and therefore require more excitement, so to speak, and ultimately more technology. While I agree with some of the author's opinions, there were no citations of scholarly research or any mention of a representative sample.
The aforementioned author actually sheds light to one of the biggest problems with using such a free-for-all medium in the classroom, and it wasn't mentioned anywhere in his posts. The author makes bold statements, just as a student can, without any backing research or any mention of a proposed study. He basically just makes points and uses word-art discourse to try to persuade. His position, while probably in the majority opinion, needs more scholarly research and backing. This is only one blog in cyberspace. How many more users are being persuaded on a daily basis by bloggers who research nothing and cite no relevant sources. He may have some backing research up his sleeve but he didn't consider others need for evidence when he posted the blog.
(i.e., Please excuse the format of the citation. I am not sure how to cite a blog. See, yet another problem for researchers. Dose anyone know how to cite a blog?).
Hontzeas, A. (2007). Word Press Website. "Considerations" Blog Posting.
http://considerations.wordpress.com/2007/06/01/why-is-blogging-so-succesful/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
