Please click on Edit page and post your discussion question response here. You will be required to comment on at least 3 posts, in addition to your own to receive full credit for class participation. We are looking for quality in responses, rather than in quantity. Take care to post information to support your response. That is, don't tell us that you agree or disagree, tell us why. Please "sign your name" below your response so that we can easily discern who is responding.
DISCUSSION QUESTION 2:
Take a 3 minute break to look at this "late breaking news broadcast."
While obviously a spoof - this broadcast does make one pause to consider. While moving full steam ahead trying to integrate technology into oureducationaldaily lives, what will we (the world) do without these tools? Is this something we need to consider - possibly even plan for? InThe Long Emergency, Kunstler posits that all advancements in civilization occurred solely because of the availability of cheap energy in the form of fossil fuel - that would be everything from abundant food supplies to the Internet - and all things between. Obvioulsy, we are also shaping education to rely as much upon fossil fuel driven technologies as the rest of the world.
What does this have to do with emerging technologies in education? You tell me. Discuss the increasing reliance on technology in education and whether this is a good thing - a bad thing - or somewhere in between.
--Janice
Comments:
Tools are just that, tools. They enhance and often make easier what we do. And if educators were to avoid integrating tools, the students would be at a disadvantage and lack basic skills needed to function in an ever progressing society. There are always problems with tools: learning, affording, maintaining, etc. Emerging technologies are no different, and educators should be trying to be first to use and teach, instead of playing catch up games. If it were to all shut down, we would still be able to teach. As to the problem of education becoming increasingly reliant on fossil fuels - would that also include things like heat, air conditioning, and lights? Our society is dependent on fossile fuels. It is not a question of whether educators should worry about what will happen if and when - that's a lifestyle and responsibility that everyone must be address in all areas of what we do everyday. - Rebecca
I really don't know to much on the subject of fossil fuel and so forth, however, based on what I've read; With the limited fossil fuel we are receiving and the high cost of the source, everyone will need to think of other methods of energy. As we speak, many researchers are finding ways to now to develop other sources of energy. The most popular source would be to research on renewable energy. Renewable energy is fairly new, however, it is becoming a major importance to the future source of energy due to the problems currently with fossil fuel. If the change is made to renewable energy, then we would need to rethink on the changes that need to be made to the future emerging technologies in education and whether we are prepared for such a change.
Veronica Baca
We need to strike a balance. I think it would be a mistake to try and replace teachers with technology. While technology is increasingly viable and valuable as an educational resource, I don’t think we could emulate the student-teacher relationship with technology. On the other side, we should leverage the advantages that technology has to offer our students. The vast amount of information available along with the amazing new tools being developed seemingly daily can provide our students with greater access to wide varieties of knowledge. The main point of this is that we need to continue to educate teachers that are capable of teaching along with understanding how to integrate technology into the classroom. Teachers should be able to teach using technology or just a chalkboard.
After watching the video, I was glad that for most teachers integrating technology into their courses usually means creating a powerpoint presentation. If the internet went down along with running out of fossil fuel, teachers would be safe if they had a backup plan where they had filed a printed copy of their powerpoints. The disruption would be minimal. The video kind of reminds me of when I was working at Intel Corp. prior to Y2K. There were all sorts of stories about how we should prepare to survive after all the computers in the world crashed on Jan. 1, 2000 and the world would be plunged into darkness. Crazy times getting ready for that.
-David
Ok...I LOVE the Onion. I'm sure for the uninformed, this might seem very real. Thank God we are a bunch of un-trusting, skittish individuals that would never let something like this happen...right? We do need to move forward with caution when diving head first in the swimming pool that is the technological world. In the field of education, we need not worry so much of an impending Armageddon; what we need to watch out for is acceptance. As we technology pushed forward, it has encroached on traditional educational methods. We need to make sure, as David said, to "strike a balance" between the human aspect and technology. We will never completely replace a flesh and blood educator...but we can make them...stronger, faster, better. We have the technology to do it. Technology needs to continue being an enhancement and not a replacement.
Kerry,
Now you've made me start thinking of a virtual teacher. Perhaps in a Second Life kind of environment. However I agree with you that "we will never completely replace a flesh and blood educator" but we should be able to enhance their abilities by leveraging technology.
-David
Kuntlser nailed it, in my opinion. I could ramble on for hours about fossil fuels and the rock/hard place we've put ourselves in (and if any of us ever end up getting together for a beer, I'll probably do just that. :-)
But as regards technology and education, I agree with David: technoogy is great, but a chalkboard has to be able to suffice. Because what education is all about is learnign to think, to inquire, learning facts about the real world and being able to put them together and create something constructive from them. You don't need high-tech for that (obviously). And every time you introduce technology, you put yourself at risk. Who hasn't been to a presentatio where half the time spent was trying to get the PowerPoint file to come up (or work right... or come out of the projector properly... or...) When that happens, I just feel like telling the presenter to bag it and use chalk! Because what's important is the message, not the medium.
Even so-called "stable" technologies are astonishingly fragile. Computers go down; networks go down; software freezes up; etc. etc. etc. Everytime you rely on something you personally don't control (aka the Internet) you're opening yourself up to risk. And in terms of emerging technologies, you're talking a much greater degree of risk--unless you've got a back-up plan. (Wimba, for example, allows participants to dial-in using their telephones, which is a nice balance of emerging and relatively "old school.")
I see a big need for distance education in response to the coming fuel crisis. As supplies dry up and prices rise accordingly, more and more people will choose distance education. To be frank, in about ten years I don't think there will be much of an alternative to distance ed. (I hope I'm wrong.) In this case, we have no choice but to pursue emerging technologies, but to do it right, I think we have to have as many back up plans as possible.
Emily,
I spent a year in Afghanistan. During that period, I was able to assist in providing local schools in the Ghazni and Wardak provinces some assistance. It was amazing to see how these teachers were preparing students to go to the university with just a chalkboard and a few books. Many didn't even have buildings to teach in must less technology. I know it can be done without technology if need be.
-David
David,
Your thoughts on improving teachers knowledge and skills in using technology is great importance. As times are getting harder for energy consumption, the educational system should be prepared on the types of technology that is needed in our learning system and ways of backing up all systems if we do have a tragic incident that was predicted during Y2K.
Veronica Baca
Kerry,
I hope we, educators, don't get replaced. But I agree with you in that technology needs to be enhanced instead of replaced. Our educational system is getting anxious on improving our student's learning and teaching standards, however, they need to improve preparation methods for teachers to adjust to the new technology that will be entering education in the future. Without proper training, what's the point of investing in new techology if we can't use it.
Veronica Baca
Emily,
You make a strong point on the fact that higher prices in fuel and energy require major adjustments. Perhaps, going back to old methods of teaching using the chalkboard will be a plan, however, with everyone getting accustomed to using some type of technology for teaching, it would be hard. Your right, the educational system will need to be creative in the new technology emerging in education.
Veronica Baca
Zowie! Afghanistan! I'm impressed. It's amazing and heartening to hear eye-witness accounts of teachers succeeding with such limited resources.
You speak to one of my biggest fears: that too much reliance on technology may produce a generation of teachers who can't cope if the plug gets pulled. Previous generations, and some countries today--as Afghanistan--have had continuous infrastructure challenges that educators somehow had/have to work around. I'm not saying it's noble not to have access to technology; but when you don't, you figure out how to get the job done because you have no choice, as you've seen with your own eyes.
But with kids today spoonfed passive screen-learning from birth (90% of kids 24 months and under watch the tube, and by the time they're in school they're watching 1500 hours per year, contrasted with the 900 hours per year they spend in school) -- how the heck are they going to respond if the plug gets pulled? How are we *training* them to respond? It seems like we're raising a generation that relates to the world primarily through gadgets. They expect information in pre-digested, corporate-developed, sound-byte-delivered form--to the extent that educators, by a lot of accounts, are considering technology not necessarily because they think it will improve the education process, but because "kids want it." Are we doing students any big favors by letting them use, say Wikipedia instead of a traditionally vetted source? Do they know the difference? Do we *care* if they know the difference? Are we worried about inaccuracies, company biases, or propaganda? Or are ease of use and familiarity more important?
Basically, if we as educators rely more heavily on technology, are we crippling students? (I think this is a follow-on of the old "calculators vs. pen-and-paper" argument.)
Perhaps I'm getting off-topic... Just enjoying reading everyone's views.
Nothing is stable. The world is full of components that are in varying states of eventual catostrophic failure. It's only a matter of time. But a agree with you, a chalkboard or white board should STILL be an effective form of communication and education. I have seen it at my schools; a computer goes down and the learning screeches to a halt. We need versatile teachers. But at what point does clinging to the old methods become a waste?
I don't think teachers should ever be replaced - tools can enhance, but not replace. There is nothing that could match or take the place of an incredible teacher. I am grateful, though, that technology changes the way we can receive instruction and interact with a teacher. Is the limit of most teachers really PowerPoint? And, when I used PP to teach, I often incorporated links to the internet. And I hate to think of all the paper wasted by people printing out presentations.
I agree, technology is an enhancement, not a replacement. I have seen a lot of programs and modes of instruction that are very, very dry and not engaging, by both human and computer. It takes more than the information for successful teaching, and technology can be a great asset. But so can a lot of other things like hands on experience and field trips.
You're right, the discussion of energy and our society could go on and on. However, we are rather in the midst of it, and our reliance upon it is not going to go away easily. We may make some changes as you suggested with relying more on distance ed. But even if we are not driving, we are still using different energies to receive our education. They really are two different subjects to address - giving everyone the opportunity for the best education, and fueling our excesses.
I have to agree with your point about people trying to get presentations going. I have seen that happen a lot, and then the presentations usually don't even enhance the teaching. PowerPoint presentations can often be more distracting than helpful. A tool is no good if the user doesn't use it effectively.
It does change things when you have to teach without the tools you are used to using. I did my student teaching in Tonga. No textbooks, limited resources, etc. I was teaching ancient history - interesting to teach about the Nile and it's importance when they didn't have a good understanding of what a river is. Pictures, movies, whatever, cannot replace actual experience. One of the most fun things we did was go on an "archaeological dig." After explaining how we find out about the past, I took them to a "site" (pile of sand) where I had "artifacts" buried that they had to dig out with spoons and paintbrushes and such.
Rebecca,
Very impressive story and a great example of how you can engage your students without the use of technology. Getting our kids out from in front of TV and the computer to actually experience learning in the "real world" is a good thing.
-David
Pay at the pump, direct deposit, online payment of accounts, PDA cell phones, WI-FI, and GPS devices are all technologies that enhance our daily lives. If these technologies were to somehow “crash”, then our daily lives would at most be mildly interrupted. The earth will continue to orbit around the sun. It would not be the end of the world. But at the same time, we should continue to explore new technologies in order to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. There seems to be no end to the rising costs of gasoline and our government seems to be shuffling its feet in this election year to do anything about it. Funding should be provided by our government to study and develop new technologies that can either replace or reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.
It is for this reason that we should try to incorporate more and more technologies into the classroom. By school districts subscribing to the idea of “online high schools”, they would save a significant amount of funding allocated for transportation students would be taking online courses from the comforts of home. Parents would also save money on transporting their children to school. Teachers would also save money commuting to school. Discipline problems (tardies, hall passes, etc.) would cease to exist in an online environment. The advantages seem to heavily outweigh any disadvantages that may exist for an online high school.
I agree with some of my colleagues with the notion that teachers will never be replaced by technology. There is no substitute for a teacher. Technology, in all of it’s forms, will never be able to express compassion, caring, understanding, patience, and the many other characteristics that teachers display.
I think the "crash" people like Kuntsler are positing is a bit more severe than our GPS systems going down. Fuel gets past a certain price point (or becomes unavailable altogether) and it's more than an inconvenience. It's not just that trucks stop running, so that supplies such as food, educational supplies, medical supplies, hardware, etc. dry up. It also means, eventually, that there's no way to power factories to make new goods (or a way to transport them if you could make them). It means food production goes way down even on a local level, because commercial plantings rely heavily on fossil fuels. It means services stop, because people literally can't get to their jobs, can't get any materials to use in their jobs, can't heat or cool the place, can't fix equipment when it breaks (no new parts). Ad infinitum. It's nothing more than a pinch in American wallets right now, but people in other parts of the world are rioting and dying right now over these issues.
From an educational standpoint, I think there are two scenarios to consider. One: things get more expensive. A biggie, but not a show-stopper (statistically; I'm not downplaying suffering). In this scenario, online high schools make absolute sense, because they use our existing model of few teachers to many students (as opposed to community/neighbor mentors and the one-room schoolhouse) and slash costs. I don't believe online high schools could possibly be as effective as in-person instruction for most students, but they're superior for a few, adequate for most, and better than nothing for the rest.
Scenario two: things get impossible. It's at this point we would be back with chalk and chalkboards. Wiithout fuel to run factories and distribution networks, there would be no technology as we commonly use the term.
Spoof, yes. But not hard to image. Pbwiki had an upstream problem with one of their providers recently, causing interruptions in their services. There definitely is a correlation between cheap and usage. The cheaper the technology, the more use. It is my opinion that technology drives all educational processes.
For example, at my college, we formed a committee to discuss our non-existent email retention policy. As the head of IT, I am responsible for email retention in compliance with TAC 206. One snipet of the statute is that email must be individually accessible. Basically, this means XML format. We do this. Also, the records retention requires that emails be retained between 1 and 3 years, depending on the nature of the email. Most email after 3 years can be purged. Unfortunately, up to now, we never deleted anything. Some end users have emails for the past 15 years. End users use email systems like filing cabinets. Technology configurations are straight-forward. However, email user styles are many and vastly different. One archive method works for some but not all. It's very difficult to balance the needs of the users with the needs of legal systems and educational institutions.
So, what if the WWW is shutdown only for a few minutes? How many emails would be undeliverable? And when it comes back up, how many systems would be overloaded with the deluge of emails? I can image it.
Car manufacturing has replaced people with technology. Several other industries have replaced people with technology. Will this work in education?
~ Dawn
Comments (22)
Emily Moore said
at 10:28 pm on Jun 10, 2008
Janice,
It looks like this video is no longer available on YouTube--can we view it somewhere else?
-Emily
Veronica Baca said
at 3:39 pm on Jun 18, 2008
I really don't know to much on the subject of fossil fuel and so forth, however, based on what I've read; With the limited fossil fuel we are receiving and the high cost of the source, everyone will need to think of other methods of energy. As we speak, many researchers are finding ways to now to develop other sources of energy. The most popular source would be to research on renewable energy. Renewable energy is fairly new, however, it is becoming a major importance to the future source of energy due to the problems currently with fossil fuel. If the change is made to renewable energy, then we would need to rethink on the changes that need to be made to the future emerging technologies in education and whether we are prepared for such a change.
Veronica Baca
David Plummer said
at 4:06 pm on Jun 18, 2008
We need to strike a balance. I think it would be a mistake to try and replace teachers with technology. While technology is increasingly viable and valuable as an educational resource, I don’t think we could emulate the student-teacher relationship with technology. On the other side, we should leverage the advantages that technology has to offer our students. The vast amount of information available along with the amazing new tools being developed seemingly daily can provide our students with greater access to wide varieties of knowledge. The main point of this is that we need to continue to educate teachers that are capable of teaching along with understanding how to integrate technology into the classroom. Teachers should be able to teach using technology or just a chalkboard.
After watching the video, I was glad that for most teachers integrating technology into their courses usually means creating a powerpoint presentation. If the internet went down along with running out of fossil fuel, teachers would be safe if they had a backup plan where they had filed a printed copy of their powerpoints. The disruption would be minimal. The video kind of reminds me of when I was working at Intel Corp. prior to Y2K. There were all sorts of stories about how we should prepare to survive after all the computers in the world crashed on Jan. 1, 2000 and the world would be plunged into darkness. Crazy times getting ready for that.
-David
Kerry Bonugli said
at 11:38 pm on Jun 18, 2008
Ok...I LOVE the Onion. I'm sure for the uninformed, this might seem very real. Thank God we are a bunch of un-trusting, skittish individuals that would never let something like this happen...right? We do need to move forward with caution when diving head first in the swimming pool that is the technological world. In the field of education, we need not worry so much of an impending Armageddon; what we need to watch out for is acceptance. As we technology pushed forward, it has encroached on traditional educational methods. We need to make sure, as David said, to "strike a balance" between the human aspect and technology. We will never completely replace a flesh and blood educator...but we can make them...stronger, faster, better. We have the technology to do it. Technology needs to continue being an enhancement and not a replacement.
David Plummer said
at 12:42 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Kerry,
Now you've made me start thinking of a virtual teacher. Perhaps in a Second Life kind of environment. However I agree with you that "we will never completely replace a flesh and blood educator" but we should be able to enhance their abilities by leveraging technology.
-David
Emily Moore said
at 1:10 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Man, I love the Onion! This was terrific.
Kuntlser nailed it, in my opinion. I could ramble on for hours about fossil fuels and the rock/hard place we've put ourselves in (and if any of us ever end up getting together for a beer, I'll probably do just that. :-)
But as regards technology and education, I agree with David: technoogy is great, but a chalkboard has to be able to suffice. Because what education is all about is learnign to think, to inquire, learning facts about the real world and being able to put them together and create something constructive from them. You don't need high-tech for that (obviously). And every time you introduce technology, you put yourself at risk. Who hasn't been to a presentatio where half the time spent was trying to get the PowerPoint file to come up (or work right... or come out of the projector properly... or...) When that happens, I just feel like telling the presenter to bag it and use chalk! Because what's important is the message, not the medium.
Even so-called "stable" technologies are astonishingly fragile. Computers go down; networks go down; software freezes up; etc. etc. etc. Everytime you rely on something you personally don't control (aka the Internet) you're opening yourself up to risk. And in terms of emerging technologies, you're talking a much greater degree of risk--unless you've got a back-up plan. (Wimba, for example, allows participants to dial-in using their telephones, which is a nice balance of emerging and relatively "old school.")
I see a big need for distance education in response to the coming fuel crisis. As supplies dry up and prices rise accordingly, more and more people will choose distance education. To be frank, in about ten years I don't think there will be much of an alternative to distance ed. (I hope I'm wrong.) In this case, we have no choice but to pursue emerging technologies, but to do it right, I think we have to have as many back up plans as possible.
-Emliy
David Plummer said
at 1:27 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Emily,
I spent a year in Afghanistan. During that period, I was able to assist in providing local schools in the Ghazni and Wardak provinces some assistance. It was amazing to see how these teachers were preparing students to go to the university with just a chalkboard and a few books. Many didn't even have buildings to teach in must less technology. I know it can be done without technology if need be.
-David
Veronica Baca said
at 3:36 pm on Jun 19, 2008
David,
Your thoughts on improving teachers knowledge and skills in using technology is great importance. As times are getting harder for energy consumption, the educational system should be prepared on the types of technology that is needed in our learning system and ways of backing up all systems if we do have a tragic incident that was predicted during Y2K.
Veronica Baca
Veronica Baca said
at 3:41 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Kerry,
I hope we, educators, don't get replaced. But I agree with you in that technology needs to be enhanced instead of replaced. Our educational system is getting anxious on improving our student's learning and teaching standards, however, they need to improve preparation methods for teachers to adjust to the new technology that will be entering education in the future. Without proper training, what's the point of investing in new techology if we can't use it.
Veronica Baca
Veronica Baca said
at 3:47 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Emily,
You make a strong point on the fact that higher prices in fuel and energy require major adjustments. Perhaps, going back to old methods of teaching using the chalkboard will be a plan, however, with everyone getting accustomed to using some type of technology for teaching, it would be hard. Your right, the educational system will need to be creative in the new technology emerging in education.
Veronica Baca
Emily Moore said
at 4:25 pm on Jun 19, 2008
David,
Zowie! Afghanistan! I'm impressed. It's amazing and heartening to hear eye-witness accounts of teachers succeeding with such limited resources.
You speak to one of my biggest fears: that too much reliance on technology may produce a generation of teachers who can't cope if the plug gets pulled. Previous generations, and some countries today--as Afghanistan--have had continuous infrastructure challenges that educators somehow had/have to work around. I'm not saying it's noble not to have access to technology; but when you don't, you figure out how to get the job done because you have no choice, as you've seen with your own eyes.
But with kids today spoonfed passive screen-learning from birth (90% of kids 24 months and under watch the tube, and by the time they're in school they're watching 1500 hours per year, contrasted with the 900 hours per year they spend in school) -- how the heck are they going to respond if the plug gets pulled? How are we *training* them to respond? It seems like we're raising a generation that relates to the world primarily through gadgets. They expect information in pre-digested, corporate-developed, sound-byte-delivered form--to the extent that educators, by a lot of accounts, are considering technology not necessarily because they think it will improve the education process, but because "kids want it." Are we doing students any big favors by letting them use, say Wikipedia instead of a traditionally vetted source? Do they know the difference? Do we *care* if they know the difference? Are we worried about inaccuracies, company biases, or propaganda? Or are ease of use and familiarity more important?
Basically, if we as educators rely more heavily on technology, are we crippling students? (I think this is a follow-on of the old "calculators vs. pen-and-paper" argument.)
Perhaps I'm getting off-topic... Just enjoying reading everyone's views.
-Emily
Kerry Bonugli said
at 4:28 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Emily,
Nothing is stable. The world is full of components that are in varying states of eventual catostrophic failure. It's only a matter of time. But a agree with you, a chalkboard or white board should STILL be an effective form of communication and education. I have seen it at my schools; a computer goes down and the learning screeches to a halt. We need versatile teachers. But at what point does clinging to the old methods become a waste?
Rebecca M. said
at 7:26 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Hi David,
I don't think teachers should ever be replaced - tools can enhance, but not replace. There is nothing that could match or take the place of an incredible teacher. I am grateful, though, that technology changes the way we can receive instruction and interact with a teacher. Is the limit of most teachers really PowerPoint? And, when I used PP to teach, I often incorporated links to the internet. And I hate to think of all the paper wasted by people printing out presentations.
-Rebecca
Rebecca M. said
at 7:30 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Kerry,
I agree, technology is an enhancement, not a replacement. I have seen a lot of programs and modes of instruction that are very, very dry and not engaging, by both human and computer. It takes more than the information for successful teaching, and technology can be a great asset. But so can a lot of other things like hands on experience and field trips.
-Rebecca
Rebecca M. said
at 7:38 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Emily,
You're right, the discussion of energy and our society could go on and on. However, we are rather in the midst of it, and our reliance upon it is not going to go away easily. We may make some changes as you suggested with relying more on distance ed. But even if we are not driving, we are still using different energies to receive our education. They really are two different subjects to address - giving everyone the opportunity for the best education, and fueling our excesses.
I have to agree with your point about people trying to get presentations going. I have seen that happen a lot, and then the presentations usually don't even enhance the teaching. PowerPoint presentations can often be more distracting than helpful. A tool is no good if the user doesn't use it effectively.
-Rebecca
Rebecca M. said
at 7:42 pm on Jun 19, 2008
David,
It does change things when you have to teach without the tools you are used to using. I did my student teaching in Tonga. No textbooks, limited resources, etc. I was teaching ancient history - interesting to teach about the Nile and it's importance when they didn't have a good understanding of what a river is. Pictures, movies, whatever, cannot replace actual experience. One of the most fun things we did was go on an "archaeological dig." After explaining how we find out about the past, I took them to a "site" (pile of sand) where I had "artifacts" buried that they had to dig out with spoons and paintbrushes and such.
-Rebecca
David Plummer said
at 9:47 pm on Jun 19, 2008
Rebecca,
Very impressive story and a great example of how you can engage your students without the use of technology. Getting our kids out from in front of TV and the computer to actually experience learning in the "real world" is a good thing.
-David
Marco A. Gonzalez said
at 11:48 pm on Jun 21, 2008
Pay at the pump, direct deposit, online payment of accounts, PDA cell phones, WI-FI, and GPS devices are all technologies that enhance our daily lives. If these technologies were to somehow “crash”, then our daily lives would at most be mildly interrupted. The earth will continue to orbit around the sun. It would not be the end of the world. But at the same time, we should continue to explore new technologies in order to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. There seems to be no end to the rising costs of gasoline and our government seems to be shuffling its feet in this election year to do anything about it. Funding should be provided by our government to study and develop new technologies that can either replace or reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.
It is for this reason that we should try to incorporate more and more technologies into the classroom. By school districts subscribing to the idea of “online high schools”, they would save a significant amount of funding allocated for transportation students would be taking online courses from the comforts of home. Parents would also save money on transporting their children to school. Teachers would also save money commuting to school. Discipline problems (tardies, hall passes, etc.) would cease to exist in an online environment. The advantages seem to heavily outweigh any disadvantages that may exist for an online high school.
I agree with some of my colleagues with the notion that teachers will never be replaced by technology. There is no substitute for a teacher. Technology, in all of it’s forms, will never be able to express compassion, caring, understanding, patience, and the many other characteristics that teachers display.
Emily Moore said
at 11:25 am on Jun 24, 2008
Marco,
I think the "crash" people like Kuntsler are positing is a bit more severe than our GPS systems going down. Fuel gets past a certain price point (or becomes unavailable altogether) and it's more than an inconvenience. It's not just that trucks stop running, so that supplies such as food, educational supplies, medical supplies, hardware, etc. dry up. It also means, eventually, that there's no way to power factories to make new goods (or a way to transport them if you could make them). It means food production goes way down even on a local level, because commercial plantings rely heavily on fossil fuels. It means services stop, because people literally can't get to their jobs, can't get any materials to use in their jobs, can't heat or cool the place, can't fix equipment when it breaks (no new parts). Ad infinitum. It's nothing more than a pinch in American wallets right now, but people in other parts of the world are rioting and dying right now over these issues.
From an educational standpoint, I think there are two scenarios to consider. One: things get more expensive. A biggie, but not a show-stopper (statistically; I'm not downplaying suffering). In this scenario, online high schools make absolute sense, because they use our existing model of few teachers to many students (as opposed to community/neighbor mentors and the one-room schoolhouse) and slash costs. I don't believe online high schools could possibly be as effective as in-person instruction for most students, but they're superior for a few, adequate for most, and better than nothing for the rest.
Scenario two: things get impossible. It's at this point we would be back with chalk and chalkboards. Wiithout fuel to run factories and distribution networks, there would be no technology as we commonly use the term.
-Emily
Dawn Quinn said
at 10:28 pm on Jul 15, 2008
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QSpIsAEevvg&feature=related - Web Crash 2007
Fatal error &HH8052175648
(-6468102)
Restart World Wide Web
Data may have been lost.
Spoof, yes. But not hard to image. Pbwiki had an upstream problem with one of their providers recently, causing interruptions in their services. There definitely is a correlation between cheap and usage. The cheaper the technology, the more use. It is my opinion that technology drives all educational processes.
For example, at my college, we formed a committee to discuss our non-existent email retention policy. As the head of IT, I am responsible for email retention in compliance with TAC 206. One snipet of the statute is that email must be individually accessible. Basically, this means XML format. We do this. Also, the records retention requires that emails be retained between 1 and 3 years, depending on the nature of the email. Most email after 3 years can be purged. Unfortunately, up to now, we never deleted anything. Some end users have emails for the past 15 years. End users use email systems like filing cabinets. Technology configurations are straight-forward. However, email user styles are many and vastly different. One archive method works for some but not all. It's very difficult to balance the needs of the users with the needs of legal systems and educational institutions.
So, what if the WWW is shutdown only for a few minutes? How many emails would be undeliverable? And when it comes back up, how many systems would be overloaded with the deluge of emails? I can image it.
~ Dawn
Dawn Quinn said
at 12:22 pm on Jul 16, 2008
Car manufacturing has replaced people with technology. Several other industries have replaced people with technology. Will this work in education?
~ Dawn
Dawn Quinn said
at 12:25 pm on Jul 16, 2008
Kerry -
I would like for educational institutions to "throw" as much money towards people as they "throw" towards technology.
~ Dawn
You don't have permission to comment on this page.