CHAPTER 7: WHY USE WEB 2.0 TOOLS WITH ELLs?

                Langer de Ramirez, in chapter seven, discusses that for the ELL student and their needs, technology is a crucial component to help overcome not only their language barriers but the time barriers that are automatically in place because they are attempting to learn a new language at the same time that they are learning new content. She points out that there are many web based tools that students already relate to so they can be used to help connect and motivate these students in the classroom. She gives excellent examples of how the TESOL standards are met by using web tools. Finally, anytime you pair children with technology, you have to consider the safety issues. I think that the author makes a very good point in that schools definitely need to consider safety and make appropriate barriers to protect students, but that completely eradicating use of the web is not the best, most appropriate barrier.

I really liked the ideas that were discussed for use of technology with helping English language learners. I think that giving them a “safe” environment to practice using the new language is critical. Since they are going to a non-English speaking home every night, they need other avenues of reinforcement and well as encouragement. The thought that they can listen to podcasts, view instructional videos as well as practice their language acquisition is fantastic. I would think that many things you do on a computer these days allows you to choose a language, so this would give them the opportunity to read something in English, interpret and then if necessary change languages and refer to what is familiar to check for correct understanding/meaning.

CHAPTER 5: UNDERSTANDING YOUTH AND DIGITAL MEDIA

                This chapter basically challenges teachers and other adults to re-evaluate the way they consider young people and how they learn/interact with technology. The author discusses the many ways that the youth of today are actually still very much like the youth of yesterday, they just happen to communicate their angst by way of different forms of technology. Something of interest that the author discusses is the effort put into texting, which is a huge form of communication amongst young people. She proposes that even though many text and instant messages composed by the younger generation appear sloppy and almost without any thought, are actually very controlled contributions so as not to seem vulnerable to their peers. Later in the chapter, some examples of how the media sources students use most can be used to engage them in learning.

                I have to be honest; it is difficult for me to see kids on cell phones constantly. I am open-minded enough to realize that yes they can be beneficial—I really did like the way the teacher used email and instant messaging as ways for her students to interact about literature. I did find this chapter interesting in that I had not thought about the way students spend their time texting and IMing today, really is similar to how my younger sister used to spend two hours or more at a time on the phone talking about really nothing. I guess my struggle is that, yes they are communicating and that’s great but are they forgetting how to speak to others and hold meaningful conversations? A lot of the verbal cues are lost when you cannot hear how someone says something. Emoticons cannot replace true emotion. I suppose, as I observe others out in the world on their phones, I am always curious about whether we are losing touch with one another even though we are more connected than we have ever been. (An example of this—I eat out a lot and enjoy watching people. I can’t count the times I have been in a restaurant and observed a couple sitting at a table where they are both on their cell phones texting others. I assume they are texting others, it would be really sad if they were sitting across from one another and texting each other instead of talking. So what I see, is that people are present, but they are not there with you, they are not engaged.)

Chapter 4 Summary Reflection

CHAPTER 4: EMERGING ROLES WITHIN THE KNOWLEDGE COMMUNITY

                Chapter four addresses the changes in roles that come with a growing, “knowledge is everywhere” environment as well as some of the potential new roles that are emerging in our digital world. One of the biggest changes that is discussed and seems to be a theme throughout our readings is that of the student(s) as teacher(s). In our fast-paced, tablet toting world, young people are absorbing and utilizing so many skills for accessing and manipulating information and data that they are often better “schooled” at teaching the teacher about these things. With the increases in digital access, we all basically have the potential to “teach” someone about something. This is discussed as collegiality in the book and for lack of a better description is basically a huge opportunity for global networking of resources and ideas. This interconnectedness also affords teachers the opportunity to provide students with anonymous reviewers of their work. Teachers from different classes, even different countries can collaborate on projects and allow their students to review and give feedback on each other’s work. Another benefit of the digital age that is touched on in chapter four is the fact that parents can be so easily included and updated about what their child is learning. With connectedness, parents can visit teacher and/or student blogs, websites, podcasts to stay up to date on their child’s activities. Finally, one of the big roles that was discussed was that of the student(s) being responsible learners. And by responsible, it means more than just coming to class and turning in assignments. The students discussed in the chapter were posed with real problems in their communities that they took ownership of and to which they contributed a solution. They actively applied their previous knowledge, gained any necessary knowledge that was not already there as well as obtained and managed needed resources.

The part I enjoyed most about chapter four was the idea that given a real-life problem, students can and will work towards a solution, particularly when they feel they have a stake in the outcome. I know that every teacher has been asked by a student, “how am I going to ever use this in real life?” Proposing real life problems that engage students will let them figure out for themselves, how they will use “this” stuff that they learn in real life. I also really liked the idea of anonymous reviewers as a way to provide assessment. I think, often because we have drilled into students that their role is to be the passive learner and to be quiet in class, many students never speak up because they are afraid that we expect them to be perfect and to always have the right answer. I know that many of them are affected by peer pressure when it comes to speaking up in class and giving their honest opinions about things. This anonymous review would be ideal for students to give and receive honest feedback. I think it would probably help them to see things more outside of themselves also because they get to interact in a non-threatening setting.

Chapter 2 Summary Reflection

CHAPTER 2: NO MORE COOKIE-CUTTER HIGH SCHOOLS

                In chapter two, Kelly, McCain and Jukes discuss that the traditional high school should be no more. They propose that schools need to be designed/developed so that they are customized to the needs of the student to include tailored teaching and learning, more choices of attendance locations and times as well as more choices about what and how they learn. Some of the proposed ideas for these new schools were very interesting. The thought of “renting” spaces for schools and the possibility of changes of location from year to year is very foreign when you look at the traditional school. The authors pointed out that “the most important issue facing schools today is the reluctance of  those in control of education to let go of what they are used to, whatever their role in the system.” (I think that this applies not only to teachers and administrators but also to the community, legislators, etc.)

As I read this chapter, I thought of one of our area high schools that has been in the news recently. Douglass High School in Oklahoma City has been on the news because a huge number of their students were expected to not be able to graduate. Since the break of the news story, the school has been undergoing remediation processes in an effort to bring students up to where they need to be. This idea that the authors have of customizing high schools made me wonder if that would be something that could have prevented this situation at Douglass. When greater than fifty percent of a senior class is not ready to pass end of instruction qualifications, something is drastically wrong. If you look at closely you see that the youth in our high schools are facing situations such as needing to work to help support their families or having aspirations of college but being stuck in classes that won’t adequately prepare them for college because the classroom/school is designed to meet the lower to middle population. Realizing that there are situations like these and many others makes me think that maybe Kelly, McCain and Jukes might have a really good idea. We do want to meet students where they are and lift them up. I always play Devil’s Advocate, though. So, my question is, “Isn’t this similar to what alternative education programs are developed for?” If that is the case, are we proposing that all schools be “alternative ed.”? How does funding work for this? Should there be smaller neighborhood schools rather than these large schools that graduate over 1000 seniors a year? If one community is developed differently from another, how do you know that the students leaving one and going somewhere else will not have problems because things are too customized? These are just some thoughts

Chapter 1 Summary Reflection

CHAPTER 1--PARTNERING: A PEDAGOGY FOR THE NEW EDUCATIONAL LANDSCAPE

                In chapter one, Marc Prensky emphasizes, that to better prepare students for our constantly changing and ever-advancing technological world, we as teachers need to move away from direct instruction and lend our classrooms more to a partnering environment. In this partnering environment, he suggests that we put students in the role of “conceptualizer/writer/star/director/crew” of their own learning “play” and that we, as the teachers, assume more of the role of “producer”, making sure that everything comes together for a quality final product—giving advice and guidance where needed but remaining in the background. He recognizes and points out that this idea of partnering is not a new concept because we have all been exposed to it in learning theories such as “student-centered learning”, “inquiry-based learning”, etc. He further emphasizes that digital technology allows for greater success in partnering because it customizes and individualizes the learning process for each student. Prensky establishes that to be successful in partnering, as with any endeavor, it is key that each person know their roles and the expectations of those roles. Examples of students’ roles in partnering are that they are the “researcher”, “technology user/expert”, “thinker and sense maker”, “self-teacher” and “world changer”. Examples of the teachers’ roles in partnering are “coach and guide”, goal setter and questioner”, “learning designer”, “context and rigor provider” and “quality assurer”. Also pointed out was that teachers have to be willing to relinquish control of the “normal, row by row, regimented” classroom and accept the new, bustling, thriving learning environment. With this kind of environment, the author notes that the students and teacher are not the only partners. He includes administrators and parents as part of the necessary partnership.

                I really like the concept of partnering. I guess it just leads to several questions for me though. At what point do you begin partnering? Obviously, there are things such as reading and writing and basic math in which students require some direct instruction. So is this just something you start to slowly incorporate into a regular classroom as the students age or do you specifically define a grade level at which it begins. This leads to another question—if students learn in this way, they will be learning at different levels, some faster and some slower—would they even need grade levels anymore? What about the schools who have very limited technology and resources—do you partner up to the extent that you are able? What if you try this and can only accomplish so much because of limitations—what does this do to the students? Do their rockets get stuck before hitting the atmosphere? I totally get the concept and can see how it could be fabulous—I just struggle with the logistics of it.