Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Superstars!!*****
I have to say deep in my heart this section of the book made me happy. I have often flipped the TV to a channel like VH1 and caught part of "The Fabulous Life" which idolizes the lavish lives that celebrities/sports stars lead. Typically I make it through about ten minutes of the show before becoming completely enraged. I always wonder, what have these people done to deserve the kind of attention that us mere mortals lavish upon them and the huge amount of money that they make for doing.... oh wait what do they do exactly to deserve such obsene amounts of money? So, to see scholars that are doing research for the common good and being paid accordingly makes me feel a little better about the world. It's nice to know that somewhere someone realizes that these scholars are doing way more to better society than say Paris Hilton or Shaquille O'Neal.
On the other hand it is a bit concerning to hear about the greed and tasteless self-promotion of some of the "superstars". It seems when egos come into the picture even academic superstars begin to act with the same amount of sense and decorum as Paris Hilton.
I like the idea that some scholars are being paid appropriately for the contributions they have made to their field. However, Nelson and Watt point out the salaries of superstars often lead to resentment from colleagues, particularly when the person dubbed a "superstar" has not really reached that level of scholarship. Should scholars be paid more and accordingly for thier contributions? Absolutely! Should it be at the expense of their colleagues? NO. As Nelson and Watt state, "For higher education only stands to lose if we cannot begin to see ourselves as communities with responsibilities for one another's welfare." I think we should remember that academe is not the corporate world and salries should not reflect that.
A final point that I wanted to address is a very small point that Nelson and Watt make. Superstardom is only obtainable to those faculty members who publish and produce large amounts of useful research. No one will ever become an academic superstar because of their fabulous teaching skills. That is a bit discouraging but of course will most likely always be the case. Last time I checked great teaching skills weren't exactly bringing in the money for a university. Doesn't that show there is something wrong with the picture. What aren't exceptional teaching skills valued more???
I have to say deep in my heart this section of the book made me happy. I have often flipped the TV to a channel like VH1 and caught part of "The Fabulous Life" which idolizes the lavish lives that celebrities/sports stars lead. Typically I make it through about ten minutes of the show before becoming completely enraged. I always wonder, what have these people done to deserve the kind of attention that us mere mortals lavish upon them and the huge amount of money that they make for doing.... oh wait what do they do exactly to deserve such obsene amounts of money? So, to see scholars that are doing research for the common good and being paid accordingly makes me feel a little better about the world. It's nice to know that somewhere someone realizes that these scholars are doing way more to better society than say Paris Hilton or Shaquille O'Neal.
On the other hand it is a bit concerning to hear about the greed and tasteless self-promotion of some of the "superstars". It seems when egos come into the picture even academic superstars begin to act with the same amount of sense and decorum as Paris Hilton.
I like the idea that some scholars are being paid appropriately for the contributions they have made to their field. However, Nelson and Watt point out the salaries of superstars often lead to resentment from colleagues, particularly when the person dubbed a "superstar" has not really reached that level of scholarship. Should scholars be paid more and accordingly for thier contributions? Absolutely! Should it be at the expense of their colleagues? NO. As Nelson and Watt state, "For higher education only stands to lose if we cannot begin to see ourselves as communities with responsibilities for one another's welfare." I think we should remember that academe is not the corporate world and salries should not reflect that.
A final point that I wanted to address is a very small point that Nelson and Watt make. Superstardom is only obtainable to those faculty members who publish and produce large amounts of useful research. No one will ever become an academic superstar because of their fabulous teaching skills. That is a bit discouraging but of course will most likely always be the case. Last time I checked great teaching skills weren't exactly bringing in the money for a university. Doesn't that show there is something wrong with the picture. What aren't exceptional teaching skills valued more???
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Anna DeVeare Smith
The Rodney King Riots is a topic that I know very little about. I was only 14 when the riots occurred and wasn’t actually living in the United States at the time. With that said hopefully that will enable me to view Anna DeVeare Smith’s, “Twilight Los Angeles” without any preconceived notions about the event.
By watching the short clips on the PBS website it is very obvious that DeVeare Smith is an extremely talented actress who wants to present the varied reactions of the people most closely affected by this event that shook up a community and also a country. I very much look forward to viewing the video!
The Rodney King Riots is a topic that I know very little about. I was only 14 when the riots occurred and wasn’t actually living in the United States at the time. With that said hopefully that will enable me to view Anna DeVeare Smith’s, “Twilight Los Angeles” without any preconceived notions about the event.
By watching the short clips on the PBS website it is very obvious that DeVeare Smith is an extremely talented actress who wants to present the varied reactions of the people most closely affected by this event that shook up a community and also a country. I very much look forward to viewing the video!
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Marc Prensky – Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Response
Marc Prensky raises a lot of valid points that really got me thinking about my experiences as a teacher, my experiences as a student, and also future issues I will have to address as a parent. Upon first reading his article I began to reflect on my experiences as a high school teacher in rural North Carolina. As an inexperienced first-year teacher I was happy to take any advice, strategies, tips, and helpful hints that anyone was willing to throw my way. In the district where I taught they were launching a new teaching strategy called “Focused Learning”. To many of the veteran teachers this new pedagogy seemed like more of the same junk that is thrown out every year to teachers as the new strategy of the moment. However, many of the strategies made sense to me and seem to ring true to the argument that Prensky makes, that students today are different and learn differently than students of the past, and we as educators had better modify the way we teach if we want to keep our students engaged. The “Focused Learning” model made the point that students today have the ability to “click” and get info in the blink of an eye and are also used to flipping through 100 + television channels and therefore as teachers we can’t expect students to listen and pay attention to long lectures. The model instead focused on chunking information, breaking it into pieces, and incorporating pair and group work and lots of movement around the classroom. As a new teacher I was open to these strategies and often tried to incorporate them into the classroom, and they were often successful. There was however, a lot of resistance from the more experienced teachers, and lots of the comments seemed to parallel the thoughts of Prensky’s digital immigrants. These older educators wanted to teach the way they had been taught and often blamed students for not learning. I could always sympathize with these veteran teachers because I could sense their frustration (and of course experienced it myself!) with the students, noticing they never seemed to read or even take their textbooks home and never seemed to take the time to sit down and study the material. It was frustrating because that’s the way I went through school and so did these teachers, but after reading Prensky it makes sense that we are probably never going to convince “digital natives” to take home a heavy outdated textbook and sit down and read. That must just seem preposterous and arcane to digital natives. If we are going to reach these students we are going to have to accept Prensky’s challenge and begin to think and teach in ways that will hold the native’s interest (no matter how intimidating this seems!!). I must say my most triumphant moment in the classroom was the day my classes worked in the computer lab for an entire class period creating PowerPoint presentations on ancient African civilizations. They used the internet to get their info and then presented their presentations the next day in class. So many of my students, from honors students to remedial students, told me how much they enjoyed that class and how much they learned. It was inspiring and frustrating at the same time. I saw the lights come on for so many students but knew we wouldn’t be able to organize classes in the lab often because use of the computer lab was so limited!
As a graduate student I have also experienced the digital divide. To be perfectly honest, the majority of professors that I have come into contact with seem to be trying really hard to bridge the digital divide. All professors give email addresses on their syllabi and encourage students to communicate with them in that way, and many utilize web ct. I often find that I have a much stronger “accent” than most of my professors. Does that mean Higher Ed is ahead of K-12 when it comes to conquering the digital divide? I don’t know. My final reflection had me thinking about parenting techniques. As a child I loved to read and really look back fondly on time spent reading alone or with my parents or grandparents. My parents limited my TV time (we never had cable) and my sister and I never played video games. I’m really glad I was raised in that way and plan on raising my own children with lots of books around and limited TV and computer time. I have always thought that made me a pretty responsible future parent. However, reading the Prensky article made me start to doubt this. Perhaps I am being naïve. Can I really limit TV time and is it wise to limit computer time if other children are so exposed to these types of media. Perhaps my lack of interaction with video games, TV computers etc. explains my technophobia (I’m sure it must). Maybe my parenting “ideas” would put my children at a disadvantage. Hmmmm
Marc Prensky raises a lot of valid points that really got me thinking about my experiences as a teacher, my experiences as a student, and also future issues I will have to address as a parent. Upon first reading his article I began to reflect on my experiences as a high school teacher in rural North Carolina. As an inexperienced first-year teacher I was happy to take any advice, strategies, tips, and helpful hints that anyone was willing to throw my way. In the district where I taught they were launching a new teaching strategy called “Focused Learning”. To many of the veteran teachers this new pedagogy seemed like more of the same junk that is thrown out every year to teachers as the new strategy of the moment. However, many of the strategies made sense to me and seem to ring true to the argument that Prensky makes, that students today are different and learn differently than students of the past, and we as educators had better modify the way we teach if we want to keep our students engaged. The “Focused Learning” model made the point that students today have the ability to “click” and get info in the blink of an eye and are also used to flipping through 100 + television channels and therefore as teachers we can’t expect students to listen and pay attention to long lectures. The model instead focused on chunking information, breaking it into pieces, and incorporating pair and group work and lots of movement around the classroom. As a new teacher I was open to these strategies and often tried to incorporate them into the classroom, and they were often successful. There was however, a lot of resistance from the more experienced teachers, and lots of the comments seemed to parallel the thoughts of Prensky’s digital immigrants. These older educators wanted to teach the way they had been taught and often blamed students for not learning. I could always sympathize with these veteran teachers because I could sense their frustration (and of course experienced it myself!) with the students, noticing they never seemed to read or even take their textbooks home and never seemed to take the time to sit down and study the material. It was frustrating because that’s the way I went through school and so did these teachers, but after reading Prensky it makes sense that we are probably never going to convince “digital natives” to take home a heavy outdated textbook and sit down and read. That must just seem preposterous and arcane to digital natives. If we are going to reach these students we are going to have to accept Prensky’s challenge and begin to think and teach in ways that will hold the native’s interest (no matter how intimidating this seems!!). I must say my most triumphant moment in the classroom was the day my classes worked in the computer lab for an entire class period creating PowerPoint presentations on ancient African civilizations. They used the internet to get their info and then presented their presentations the next day in class. So many of my students, from honors students to remedial students, told me how much they enjoyed that class and how much they learned. It was inspiring and frustrating at the same time. I saw the lights come on for so many students but knew we wouldn’t be able to organize classes in the lab often because use of the computer lab was so limited!
As a graduate student I have also experienced the digital divide. To be perfectly honest, the majority of professors that I have come into contact with seem to be trying really hard to bridge the digital divide. All professors give email addresses on their syllabi and encourage students to communicate with them in that way, and many utilize web ct. I often find that I have a much stronger “accent” than most of my professors. Does that mean Higher Ed is ahead of K-12 when it comes to conquering the digital divide? I don’t know. My final reflection had me thinking about parenting techniques. As a child I loved to read and really look back fondly on time spent reading alone or with my parents or grandparents. My parents limited my TV time (we never had cable) and my sister and I never played video games. I’m really glad I was raised in that way and plan on raising my own children with lots of books around and limited TV and computer time. I have always thought that made me a pretty responsible future parent. However, reading the Prensky article made me start to doubt this. Perhaps I am being naïve. Can I really limit TV time and is it wise to limit computer time if other children are so exposed to these types of media. Perhaps my lack of interaction with video games, TV computers etc. explains my technophobia (I’m sure it must). Maybe my parenting “ideas” would put my children at a disadvantage. Hmmmm
