Work is hectic; however, with TCC being an online conference, I was able to attend some sessions this year. It was challenging trying to listen in on sessions and do work at the same time, but I managed to come away with some good information. I attended Curtis Bonk’s keynote session this afternoon and thought it made a big difference having his video turned on. Even though he was essentially a talking head, I felt like I was more engaged compared to other sessions I attended. I wish I could have attended some of the sessions in Second Life and compared that to both Curtis Bonk’s and other sessions. I believe I would have been most engaged in the Second Life sessions; however, when I consider some of the sessions I have attended at face-to-face conferences, it all comes down to the quality of the content and the ability of the presenter to connect with the audience. I think presenters are at a disadvantage when we can’t see them because it’s difficult to connect when we are simply looking at a PowerPoint presentation. Perhaps that’s just me.

dean

The world according to Google…

Read an article last week about Google and I began to think, “Wow,” so much of what we do on the web is guided by what Google tells us–or doesn’t tell us. How much of what we do and see is driven by what we find doing a Google search? That’s scary! In education we talk so much about digital literacy and how important it is for us to teach it to our students, but every day, I do Google searches and don’t think much about what’s being presented to me. I filter out sites that I don’t think are good or appropriate, and I often refine my searches, but I’m sure there are sites that don’t even show up because of Google’s algorithms. When you think about it, they have an a lot of say in what you see and don’t see. It concerns me that they are branching out their services more and more each day and it scares me to think how dependent we’ve become. What would life on the Internet be without Google. I think it would be quite strange these days. I wouldn’t have Gmail, wouldn’t have Google Docs, wouldn’t be able to search with Google, and who knows what else. Who knows what else? Well, I better do a search (a Google search) to see all the other things that Google does that I would be missing out on.

dean

According to School Computing, emerging technology is defined as a media that is coming into view, coming into existence, or coming to commonality. It is an innovative technology that is reshaping the nature of education. (http://schoolcomputing.wikia.com/wiki/Emerging_Technologies) Reflecting back on my first post, this definition seems to be consistent with my thought of an emerging technology–something that’s coming. It’s not quite there yet, not adopted, and not common. How does that fit with a technology that’s been around for a while and is only now being adopted and coming into commonality? Would we consider that to be an emerging technology or not? Are cellphones considered an emerging technology? It’s definitely in view; however, one could argue that it hasn’t been adopted in education. In fact, many schools ban the use of cellphones during the school day. I think we need to consider cellphones and smartphones in education. Most kids have them today, and we need to figure out how to better leverage this powerful tool for instructional purposes. Once we do, can we say that this is an emerging technology or is it just a cellphone or smartphone?

Just got done viewing all the introductions for our class and I was blown away at each person’s creativity. Although some of the same tools were used to do the introductions, each had their own unique way of presenting the information about their classmates. It’s amazing to think how many different delivery options are available on the Web. We are currently addressing social media in our school and I’m of the mindset that we should have the goal of getting our students to a place where we don’t need to filter content or sites. When we talk about tools and blocking certain ones like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, I think we’re missing the point. We need to refocus. The real tool is the Web. Sites and apps like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are merely ways of using “The Tool.” I think it’s too narrow minded to think in terms of individual Web 2.0 apps. We need to think of the Web as a whole and present it to our students that way. Yes, it might be something that will take some time to get to. We may need to start out more restrictive, but we should never lose site of our goal– to give students access to “The Tool” so they can learn to apply the appropriate apps, sites, etc. and if one doesn’t work, they should know that there are many others that can fulfill the same need. I think our introductions prove that there are so many options to do an introduction.

When I think of my own children, I want to know that they will behave responsibly, that they will be able to leverage the Web for school and later for work, and the only way I can do that is to give them access to “The Tool.” Will they need my guidance and mentoring? Absolutely! Will they make mistakes and need to be corrected. I expect so. Will that stop me from teaching them. No!

dean