Thanks, everybody. I'll be here all week. Try the veal.
Seriously though, in Monday, September 19th's, we discussed copyright and fair use laws. While I did know a little about copyright laws, I had no real handle on what "fair use" was. After the class discussed fair use laws for a lengthy period of time, I feel as though I have my own, working definition on fair use laws: "Laws for idiots." While this may sound harsh, the class discussion focused mainly on what and what is not fair use - and most of what is not fair use seems pretty reasonable. For example, I used an example in class of a Ninth Circuit court's decision to uphold a ruling that didn't allow a publishing company to publish a book that "parodied" the beloved children's book The Cat in the Hat, but poked fun of the O.J. Simpson double homicide murder trial. While this may seem incredibly silly - especially considering there is very little correlation between Dr. Seuss and O.J. Simpson - it also appears harmless; this is, in fact, not the case. Apparently, the fair use laws define a "parody" as allowable only if the parody is poking fun at the original work or author. As stated above, there is no real connection between Suess and Simpson. This is distinctly what I'm referring to when I saw fair use laws are "laws for idiots;" who would want to use The Cat in the Hat to make fun of O.J. Simpson? Even if one did feel that it made sense (which, obviously, to me it does not), what defense could you even use for your case? For that matter, what case could you make that your book should legally be published? Clearly, a book that has nothing to do with the author or original work, but uses the author's/work's iconic make-up (in this case, the widely known writing style of Dr. Seuss) can't be justified to be printed for a profit. I'm not saying that someone couldn't take a popular song or poem and reconstruct to make fun of a friend, but to openly sell it for profit seems pretty brainless.
All that aside, we did begin to discuss Microsoft Excel in regards to creating our grade books. I feel pretty at home with Excel; I was actually taught fundamental concepts of Excel when I was in 8th grade math. From there, I went to a technical high school for Computer Information Technology, which, in addition to computer networking and programming, did involve learning a fair amount of the Microsoft Office suite. I'm actually kind of excited to do this project.
Oh! One final note: the class went on bit of a tangent about educating. This was incredible; anytime I can listen to a teacher discuss teaching and how they approach it, I'm appreciative.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Monday, September 19, 2011
Recap of Monday, September 12th's Class
Okay, so to briefly recap what happened in class, we discussed the different skills required to function properly in the 21st century classroom, in addition to watching a couple of videos on YouTube and Google pertaining to the characteristics of the modern student; fundamentally, we explored the modern student as both a student and a person.
In terms of the 21st century skill sets, I personally believe that the most important is developing interpersonal communication. Sure, we live in a technology dominated world, and, of course, that means it is essential to have technology-related skills for scholastic purposes, such as effectively researching information for a project using the Internet, using word processing programs, etc. I don't think there's any way to logically deny this; however, I think the younger, future generations can easily become absorbed by this. As I pointed out in class, for example, I found that my 18-year old brother and his friends don't engage in conflict the way that me and friends do. When I'm angry at a friend, I would typically do it face-to-face with him or her, because I am probably feeling very strongly about whatever the issue is, and the best way to get that across is by demonstrating it to him or her with inflection and emotion in my voice. This doesn't seem to hold true with my brother's generation; they seem to prefer text message arguments - or email arguments, if it's bad enough. Of course, I would agree that there are a number of ways to display emotion (in this case, anger) through the written word, but can you ever truly replace the tone of someone's voice? Or, better yet, there gestures, actions, and body language? And this is just one example of interpersonal skills that seems to get lost; there are, of course, a slew of other situations where text messages or email don't seem to bring with them the same force of a live, personal conversation. Many years ago, it was believed that the "village" (the neighborhood in which someone lived) would raise the "village" children. This does not seem to hold true anymore; people believe in keeping personal and family matters confined to their household. I don't necessarily believe this to be such a bad thing, but I do believe that this modern mentality, in conjunction with the exponential growth of social technology and social media (Facebook, Myspace, etc.) that American culture is losing focus on people interacting with people. As such, I believe there needs to be a great deal of focus on maintaining such skills through the classroom.
The "student of today" also needs a great deal of focus from educators. According to statistics in the videos, many students appear to be overworked, under-appreciated, unsure of his or herself, and being trained/educated for jobs that either don't exist or they eventually don't want. If we want to have a conversation about the skills required in the 21st century, then we need to discuss the people that are going to be taught - i.e. the students. "Overhauling" the education system in this country may be too much; rather, there needs to be a refocusing. By that, I think we need to focus the attention on the student instead of anything else. Think about this: at one time (I'm not sure if this is still true or not), the No Child Left Behind Act said that the schools that performed the best on the standardized tests - standards, mind you, that are set by our governments, both state and federal - would receive more federal funding than schools that did not. Pardon the language, but how ass-backwards is that? So, the schools who have the most need don't get it? My point here is that our culture, with all its high points, is ready and able to reduce everything to a "numbers game." That may work with some things, but let's not forget - education deals with educating people, and last time I checked, no two people are exactly the same; the current system may work for some, but it most certainly won't work for all. In order to better prepare the "student of today," let's refocus the system on them. Obviously, we won't be able to make an education system that will be flawless, but we can make one that works - well, better.
In terms of the 21st century skill sets, I personally believe that the most important is developing interpersonal communication. Sure, we live in a technology dominated world, and, of course, that means it is essential to have technology-related skills for scholastic purposes, such as effectively researching information for a project using the Internet, using word processing programs, etc. I don't think there's any way to logically deny this; however, I think the younger, future generations can easily become absorbed by this. As I pointed out in class, for example, I found that my 18-year old brother and his friends don't engage in conflict the way that me and friends do. When I'm angry at a friend, I would typically do it face-to-face with him or her, because I am probably feeling very strongly about whatever the issue is, and the best way to get that across is by demonstrating it to him or her with inflection and emotion in my voice. This doesn't seem to hold true with my brother's generation; they seem to prefer text message arguments - or email arguments, if it's bad enough. Of course, I would agree that there are a number of ways to display emotion (in this case, anger) through the written word, but can you ever truly replace the tone of someone's voice? Or, better yet, there gestures, actions, and body language? And this is just one example of interpersonal skills that seems to get lost; there are, of course, a slew of other situations where text messages or email don't seem to bring with them the same force of a live, personal conversation. Many years ago, it was believed that the "village" (the neighborhood in which someone lived) would raise the "village" children. This does not seem to hold true anymore; people believe in keeping personal and family matters confined to their household. I don't necessarily believe this to be such a bad thing, but I do believe that this modern mentality, in conjunction with the exponential growth of social technology and social media (Facebook, Myspace, etc.) that American culture is losing focus on people interacting with people. As such, I believe there needs to be a great deal of focus on maintaining such skills through the classroom.
The "student of today" also needs a great deal of focus from educators. According to statistics in the videos, many students appear to be overworked, under-appreciated, unsure of his or herself, and being trained/educated for jobs that either don't exist or they eventually don't want. If we want to have a conversation about the skills required in the 21st century, then we need to discuss the people that are going to be taught - i.e. the students. "Overhauling" the education system in this country may be too much; rather, there needs to be a refocusing. By that, I think we need to focus the attention on the student instead of anything else. Think about this: at one time (I'm not sure if this is still true or not), the No Child Left Behind Act said that the schools that performed the best on the standardized tests - standards, mind you, that are set by our governments, both state and federal - would receive more federal funding than schools that did not. Pardon the language, but how ass-backwards is that? So, the schools who have the most need don't get it? My point here is that our culture, with all its high points, is ready and able to reduce everything to a "numbers game." That may work with some things, but let's not forget - education deals with educating people, and last time I checked, no two people are exactly the same; the current system may work for some, but it most certainly won't work for all. In order to better prepare the "student of today," let's refocus the system on them. Obviously, we won't be able to make an education system that will be flawless, but we can make one that works - well, better.
Monday, September 5, 2011
Response to "Characteristics of the 21st Century Classroom"
Well, clearly, there are many differences between the 20th century classroom and the 21st century classroom. Chiefly, the 21st century classroom, in order to be effective, involves a torrent of ever-evolving methods of teaching. This includes, for example, the implementation of modern technology and collaborative projects among the students; both of these examples provide a so-called "student-centered" classroom. This 21st century pedagogy is a stark contrast to the 20th century classroom, which stressed the teacher-centered classroom. Additionally, the 21st century and the student-centered classroom is focused on the students' own, innate desire to learn. By using different techniques, such as hands-on learning activities (for instance, science labs) and the cooperation of teachers to use interdisciplinary methods of instruction (for instance, English teachers issuing book reports on novels historical settings and other social studies-themed material), teachers can call upon each individual students natural passion to learn, so that each student may learn how he or she is most comfortable. Again, these new methods of instruction differ from the 20th century teaching methods, in that the teaching methods of last century promoted one teacher lecturing and (possibly) pressing one specific teaching method. Furthermore, the usage of these new methods in the classroom allow students to grip information with different cognitive faculties, allowing for a more comfortable learning experience for each student; it stands to reason that a student who is more comfortable with the material presented to him or her will learn the material better and have a better understanding of it. Through the usage of these new, innovative teaching methods, one can see just how obsolete the methods of last century are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)