My father, in paradoxical effort to amuse/annoy my mother, used to stick his finger in her ear and ask, "Am I boring you?" Chances were that, yes, he was, but not necessarily because of the offending finger intrusion. He was and remains a very predictable man, routined in more ways than I can even describe, and I'm sure he thought his little prank a way to both acknowledge and combat such a routined existence. And dang it if I haven't become very much like him. Don't you hate when you become like your parents - aaargh! Anyway, imagine my delight when in response to my earlier post, my sister expressed surprise that I wrote about Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) instead of the likelier topic for an English teacher, choosing reliable sources. At first I was happy to have surprised her, but then I worried that "surprise" might have been code for "What a boring post!"
So here I am to defend a potentially boring topic. Let me start by acknowledging the importance of choosing reliable sources, and I can see using GoView as a way of leading students through a discussion of choosing and critically examining sources for reliability, quality, etc. Really, I think that is a neat idea and am anxious to try it. You see, despite my resistance to Second Life, I am in full favor of using technology for both content and delivery.
The problem is, though, that if for some reason kids have restricted access to technology because they have violated some part of the dreaded and possibly boring AUP - and they do, as we are reminded by SBISD students own sabotage of Wikipedia - then by the logical consequence of the AUP they are limited from full participation in the educational process.
If we really believe that technology is a fundamental part of the modern educational process, then learners must be allowed access to it. Punishing a student for misusing technology by removing his/her license to use it is as flawed as punishing for misbehavior in math class by taking away his textbook! Another blogger who wrote that technology is a privilege, not a right, but really, after all that we have learned over the last two summers, can we really fall back on that too-easy response to student misconduct?
It seems that if we are going to teach students to "act with respect to technology," that we have to begin with a basic belief that technology is fundamental to modern education, that it is a means of accessing content and a means of delivery, that everyone must have access to it, and that there are certain standards - behavioral, ethical, etc - that support said access. Maybe to reduce this idea to the AUP is too pat. Maybe what we're really facing is another type of character education. Or maybe it is part of the character education that is already ongoing in so many of our schools. Here's how we behave at home, at school, in the community, in cyberspace...
Well, there you go: my explanation. Am I boring you?
4 comments:
I never find you to be boring. I loved these comparision of banned computer use to taking away the textbook. I agree that technolgy is a fundamental of education not a priveledge. Yes, I think this might be an avenue for more character education. Being who I am, I'm tempted to say what you do online at home and school can be 2 different things! What is acceptable in one place is not acceptable in another. I notice a sign at the post office store that said please hang up your cell phone when you are being served. Again, do we really need to be told or reminded of etiquette and
good manners. Obviously, we do. There are so many things in education that I think we really shouldn't have to teach. Kids should know these things from home. Someone should have already taught them. But, no they have not. So just like Digital Conduct we will have to go ahead and teach what seems obvious and hope some of them will believe it matters.
Here is the link:
http://www.conservation-us.org/
I think it is really interesting.
I love the new you. It is just a little Betty Rubblesk!
I felt a sigh of relief rush over me as I read. "Use your voice" and "taking risks" are what is needed. I was insanely anxious when I was writing my first essay, because I had already read some of my friends essays and I was starting to believe that I would have to write what I thought would be a boring essay which would seem unique and invigorating to someone else. From what I gathered on the essays I read my VOICE is what needs to be heard. Got it.
What I Thought was interesting was that the Colleges like Brown and Harvard didn’t feel that editing services were worth the time and money. This strikes me because I currently have a tutor editing my paper. So does this mean my time with my tutor was wasted? In my opinion the tutor did the important job of asking the dreaded questions that always spiral me in to “Readers Block,” questions such as, “Who Cares,” and” Why is this important.” In “The College Essay: An expert Advice” there was a quote about writing your own personal voice that I found interesting; “They can say whatever is important to them and in doing so, give us a more human sense of who they are.” This showed me that the essay is designed to be more like a casual sit-down conversation, rather then an essay paper. I also learned that being a genuine senior in High School is more approprate then sounding like an English Teacher. (Sry Mrs. K!) I will adjust my paper accordingly in an effort to connect with the deans on a personal level rather than trying to impress them with words I either don’t know or never use.
Post a Comment