Monday, March 25, 2013
Blog Post #10
In another post, Spencer posts a conversation between a teacher (presumably himself) and a principal. The contents of the conversation was about a principal scolding the teacher for having a class play a game instead of teaching from worksheet packets and memorization tests. That alone screamed old world thoughts and simplistic teaching. I hope as a professor, I constantly strive to show that learning can be fun and interesting. It doesn't have to be boring. People will argue and tell me that children have to be serious and understand the main point and/or smaller details of any subject, but I'll always fight back saying "Why does that have to be boring?" It's not enough that we trudge in, plop work on their desks, and grunt at them like cavemen telling them to work. 'Engaging' seems to be a key word in teaching, and I think that was the idea behind his post.
"Don't teach your kids this stuff, please?"
This poem sarcastically battled the nay-sayers of new technology in the realm of teaching. It didn't seem to necessarily constrict to teachers, but could have been interpreted to include people with children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and godchildren. The point: if everyone was to open up to the idea of online and technologically enhanced or based learning, good can come from it. It addresses that (sure) there are bad things that the internet includes, but the internet isn't made of only porn and distractions. It's mostly a great source for new information in a variety of flavors. For instance, if I don't understand a topic in calculus, I can look up videos, read several posts on the best way to look at a problem, and develop an individualized way of attacking that certain topic if I ever see it again. Without technology, I rely on books, my teachers, and peers to help me through tough subjects. Unfortunately, if I don't understand the first or second time a teacher presents the subject(questions included), my peers can barely explain the topic themselves, and I don't understand what the book is saying(or it doesn't cover a specific example that is giving me trouble), I'm out of luck and I miss out on test points, and future subjects may become more than difficult for me.
Understandably, the author ends on a "let's see who's horse is bigger in the future" note. Summary: just because bad things can happen with new technology, don't let it deter you from the out weighing potential it possesses.