Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

If we go back to my cooking analogy, the implications are that providing teachers with a recipe, or a general overview of Web 2.0 tools, is not going to lead to success in the classroom or with administration.  Teachers need to understand the basic foundations of these tools, what they can do, why they are important, and how to locate the appropriate tool for individual learning scenarios.  I believe this basic premise is true regardless of the technological or pedagogical proficiency of the instructor.

Most importantly, I want to emphasize as much as I can, that we need to not promote Web 2.0 as the future of education or learning.  In fact, it is highly likely Web 2.0 will not even exist when today’s junior high students enter college or the work force.  There are many many web-based tools that can greatly enhance learning today, but need to be used with consideration of how that application affects learning.  When I see people state learners need to use these tools because they will experience them in the work place, I just cringe. They may use them in the work place, or they may not.  If they do, employers typically want to train them on their own systems.  An employer is much more interested in an employee able to communicate proficiently, locate and critically evaluate information, and build strong internal and external customer relationships.  Employers and universities don’t care if a student knows how to use a wiki or make a youtube video.  General literacy is much more important than knowledge of specific web platforms.  Some of the skills we promote as 21st century literacies will not exist five years from now.  There are some excellent frameworks for promoting literacy and I’m excited to see them promoted more fully.

Some would argue that the tension and irritation between "why" and "how" is by design. That these shifts are creating a permissive framework in education where there are no clear answers (Turner, 2004). And that in a changing educational environment the needed changes in education should be negotiated from a why approach rather than a how approach.

It is no longer about information management and prescriptive outcomes, but rather about building capacity- in ourselves, our faculty, our staff and in our students and then being able to contextualize the collective wisdom we gain through those relationships to making the world a better place.

As Jim Nehring at the University of Massachusetts at Lowell observed, “Progressive schools are the legacy of a long and proud tradition of thoughtful school practice stretching back for centuries” — including hands-on learning, multiage classrooms, and mentor-apprentice relationships — while what we generally refer to as traditional schooling “is largely the result of outdated policy changes that have calcified into conventions.”

Progressive educators are concerned with helping children become not only good learners but also good people

Learning isn’t something that happens to individual children — separate selves at separate desks. Children learn with and from one another in a caring community, and that’s true of moral as well as academic learning. Interdependence counts at least as much as independence

According to the Educause report 7 Things You should Know About Facebook, “Facebook’s structure encour­ages users to view relationships in a broad context of learning, even as affiliations change—from high school to college to gradu­ate school to the workplace. By opening itself to virtually anyone, Facebook has become a model for how communities—of learn­ers, of workers, of any group with a common interest—can come together, define standards for interaction, and collaboratively cre­ate an environment that suits the needs of the members.”