Week 5

"Let me give you an example. Here is one of today’s examination questions: How long will it take a 5 Kg mass to fall to the ground if dropped from a height of 20 metres? (Do not use computers, calculators or any other aids. Do not talk) This could easily be changed to: Use the Internet to find out how long it will  take a 5 Kg mass to fall to the ground if dropped from a height of 20 metres. Discuss the answer with your colleagues and report the results of the discussion. Justify why you think the answer is right."
This is a quote from an interview in Steve Wheelers' blog. To me, the pros and cons are as follows: The first question is testing memorization of a formula and the application of the formula. It helps to ensure that the student does the math carefully, and enables the student to apply the concept to other similar math problems. The second question does not require the learning of the formula, but does require the student to think critically and understand the rationale behind the rule. The discussion with other students can also help to clarify the concept. If this gives the student a greater feel for the "truth" behind the theory of gravitational pull etc., I think, despite being a bit of a tech skeptic, that the second question will lead to a more important learning experience.

Lisa Nielson (http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.co.il/2013/03/3-ways-to-connect-with-parents-via-cell.html#more) has a nice idea for keeping parents updated. The basic idea is to do a weekly podcast style update for the parents to hear what has been going on in the classroom, or for upcoming events. As a parent, this sounds like a good idea. No more finding out about the book report the day before it is due, not that MY kids would ever do such a thing :). She recommends the "phonecasting" service called iPadio. This enables you to record a podcast through calling a phone #, then the service makes it available to you online. You could then post it or email it to parents. I watched a how-to video on their site (http://blog.ipadio.com/11/introduction-to-ipadio/) and it does seem pretty easy to use.

I got to the following chart from the 2 cents worth blog (http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/). This was very striking to me. This is an example of using technology (a computer generated graphic) to present information in a clear and understandable way. The way it enables the student/reader to compare and contrast the wars, and to see the overall cost of the wars, in terms of both life and money, is more effective that a frontal lecture replete with statistics on the subject

The Wars the US fought infographic

Something funny for Pesach

This gets hysterical about a minute in.

So, Steve Wheeler has a post http://steve-wheeler.blogspot.co.il/2013/03/whos-afraid-of-big-bad-mooc.html#!/2013/03/whos-afraid-of-big-bad-mooc.html on the subject of MOOC's, Massive Open Online Courses. These are courses given on a university level, generally not accredited, and free. The post touches upon the questions of how brick and mortar colleges are going to change in order to deal with this "threat". Now, you might question whether this is really a threat, because if the "whole point" of going to college is to get a degree, and these courses are unaccredited, then what is the threat; nobody would "go to" one of these "universities" instead of a "real" college? Wheeler argues (based on Thomas Friedman) that having the diploma will become less important in the future, and the focus will be more on "what you know" and not "where did you learn it". Either way, the main point he raises at the end is that schools will have to give courses in a way that there is real value added over the on line version. This got me thinking about our course: In what ways would it be better (or worse) if it were done "live"? Just for one thought, I think a classroom atmosphere would be great to generate discussion on the practical uses of the technology. We are getting a good amount of that through the activity forums (which, by the way, are written on much more often than forums at other online courses I have taken), but a live give in take would be an improvement. Please comment on other ways you feel going "live" would impact this course!

In another post http://steve-wheeler.blogspot.co.il/#!/2013/03/gold-mines.html, he mentions something called the 100 Word Challenge. This is a place for students to post short (guess how many words) on a given theme each month. "Winners" are selected and showcased. The idea is to give the students  a creative outlet, with public recognition, and to get them to be producers of language, not just consumers.While our students will not be able to write on the level required for that site (it is for students whose English is L1, and probably L-only) perhaps teachers from several schools here could start something similar for our EFL students. Even if all of us get together and set up a site for our current and future students, that would be enough to get it going.

The new posts on Lisa Nielsen's blog are not so techy, so I read through an old one (a guest post) http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/5-reasons-to-allow-students-to-use-cell.html on why we should allow smart phones into class. There is good food for thought here, especially regarding the point that in other areas of life they will be able to problem solve with cell phones, so why not in school? Remarkably, however, the author does not address the primary drawback in allowing the phones in class, which is that the students will be distracted and not be doing what they need to be doing. Just from my experience here at Herzog, it is very clear that students that have smart phones open are engaged on a lower level (no preaching here, I include myself in this assessment). So, is there a middle ground? By the way, if you want an in depth read on the "Internet as an extension of our minds"see http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/superman/2013/03/cognitive_enhancement_how_the_internet_is_expanding_our_minds.html

Through Bob Spankle's bit by bit blog (an old post) I came across this site http://www.thinkb4u.com/. This is a great site with interactive tutorials on issues connected to being online. There are sections for teachers, advising how to teach students about proper and improper online behavior, sections for students, and sections for parents. Definitely worth a browse!

Text analyazer possibilities

One of the tools that I was very impressed with was the text profiler. It was presented in the course as a way to make sure that the text we present to our students is on their level, and that is a great use. The thing that struck me was the potential for using it the other way around. Firstly, in completing assignments for the college (especially long papers) we could run our texts through the analyzer to check if we are using a sophisticated enough vocabulary, and then to modify, by changing more general, basic words to more specific, academic words as needed. Secondly (and I used this idea for my activity), it could be a way of helping our students to enhance their vocabulary, by showing them a simple text, and seeing if they could "smarten it up" using a thesaurus. I am not talking about acting as a sesquipedalian for its own sake (look up that word and its etymology for fun!), but rather for the purpose of elevating our writing/speech so that the sophistication of our vocabulary can match the sophistication of our thoughts.

Bullying

A bit off topic, but this book http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/books/review/sticks-and-stones-emily-bazelons-book-on-bullying.html?ref=books&pagewanted=all (and subject) are very in the news. I would be interested in hearing from those in the group with teaching experience about how prevelant the problem is here, what are signs to look out for, and what can we do to help.

Steve Wheeler has a nice post (http://steve-wheeler.blogspot.co.il/#!/2013/03/skills-or-literacies.html) about navigating one's way in the digital world. His main point here is that in any new context/culture people find themselves, the only way to really get the hang of it is through immersion. He gives the example of when he, used to driving on the left side of the road, first had to drive in the U.S. At first he was hesitant and made errors, but, through driving, came to reach a comfort level. The same is true of technologies. The only way a person can be at home in a technology is through the trial and error of usage. He gives the example of learning that TYPING IN ALL CAPS is the online equivalent of shouting. A benefit of the course we are taking is that it will allow us to get to use new technologies in a safe zone so that we can achieve a comfort level with them before trying them out on the outside world of our students (who are apt to laugh at our attempts if we are not practiced enough).

Not much going on at Lisa Nielson's blog. There is a guest post (http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.co.il/2013/03/children-of-core-american-students-at.html) by Kris Nielson (her husband?) advertising his new book on education in America. His basic take is (or seems to be, from the post) that the emphasis on standardized testing on a state and federal level hampers the ability of teachers to bring out the best in their students in an individuated way. This seems to me to be kind of axiomatic. If we are going to push for a common standard, that will automatically mean a lessening of focus on the individual. The purpose of standardized testing is to ensure that the students are progressing in their learning. It may be that for the excellent teachers, these tests are a hindrance, but my feeling is that for the rank and file, having clearly defined goals in their teaching can help to get them to accomplish more than if goals were more open ended.

Bob Sprankle has not updated in a while, perhaps I will have to look for a different choice for my third blog to follow.