Speaking these words can be a way to commiserate with colleagues, or they can become “in jokes” among friends. These exchanges can be OK when we are face-to-face with others, as we have body language and voice inflections to help us understand the meaning and context behind the statements. Online is a different situation, however.
Suddenly my Twitter stream was a teacher’s lounge.
if we have an online presence, we must be responsible in what we say or write. This seems simple, doesn’t it? Nevertheless, we forget that we are not in the company of friends when we say or write the things we do. Almost anyone can read our words, and they might misunderstand our intent.
What if, instead, in ten years those teens-now-adults used those tweets and their lingering presence in search results as a teachable moment?
Let’s promote the idea that those embarrassing tweets, or anyone’s embarrassing digital dirt, can be used to validate identity change and growth.
we are equally celebrating the cultural norm that expects perfection, normalization, and unchanging behavior. What if more people wore past identities more proudly? We could erode the norm of identity consistency, a norm no one lives up to anyways, and embrace change and growth for its own sake
it will encourage an understanding of identity as more fluid. This re-understanding might be more tolerant of the non-normal and accepting of change and difference.
hat a person isn’t just what one is but a non-linear process of becoming rife with starts and stops and wrong turns may grow to be increasingly obvious.
No kidding. Common core swings the pendulum far in the other direction with document-based evidence, informational/expository texts, and sapping the love of the printed word right out of learning.
Conclusions that computers can score as well as humans are the result of humans being trained to score like the computers (for example, being told not to make judgments on the accuracy of information).
Computer scoring systems can be "gamed" because they are poor at working with human language, further weakening the validity of their assessments and separating students not on the basis of writing ability but on whether they know and can use machine-tricking strategies.
The digital camera is often an overlooked device for use in the classroom by students. It's an easy way to meaningfully use technology. Combined with web 2.0 tools, it opens up so many possibilities.
"When you're on a site like Facebook, you get lots of posts about what people are doing. That sets up social comparison — you maybe feel your life is not as full and rich as those people you see on Facebook," he says.
"It suggests that when you are engaging in social interactions a lot, you're more aware of what others are doing and, consequently, you might be more sensitized about what's happening on Facebook and comparing that to your own life,"
The prescription for Facebook despair is less Facebook. Researchers found that face-to-face or phone interaction — those outmoded, analog ways of communication — had the opposite effect. Direct interactions with other human beings led people to feel better.
The people who don’t benefit from spelling tests are those who are poor at spelling. They struggled with spelling before the test, and they still struggle after the test. Testing is not teaching.
Are all children learning to love words from their very first years at school?
Are they being fascinated by stories about where words come from and what those stories tell us about the spelling of those words?
re they being excited by breaking the code, figuring how words are making their meanings and thrilled to find that what they’ve learned about one word helps them solve another word?
"One theme we all emphasized is that, before we can make comparisons between virtual worlds and real worlds, we need to understand lots more about the real world...."