It is interesting to see major tech companies probe about for online opportunities. Apple appears to believe it has openings by first emphasizing privacy and now vetted information. TechCrunch reports to Apple has purchased Texture. If you are unfamiliar with Texture, this company offers for a monthly fee access to a wide variety of magazines. The content comes in a very attractive format suitable to reading on a tablet.
I just came across a Forbes opinion piece making this claim. Please read the original for yourself, but my brief summary would rely on the “we are making kids too soft” theory. We encourage trust in perceived authoritative sources and this does not serve us well in the “real world.”
Here is the counter argument (based on work done in learner understanding of science knowledge). We all built explanations (models, theories) to help us deal with life (real world) experiences. These theories help us get by. However, research shows that these personal theories are often flawed and incomplete. Personally formulated theories are very difficult to modify even when the flaws are confronted through formal education. We seem to have the capacity to store competing models of phenomena we encounter in the world and the context in which we formed such models ends up being used to call to mind one theory or the other when we must deal similar experiences. The problem here is that the school context is intended to prepare learners for the real world, but the potentially more accurate knowledge remains “inert” when in a real world concept is prompted by the real world context. These findings are the basis of a form of education based on what is described as “conceptual change theory” – basically flawed models must be activated and then experienced as inadequate for improved understanding.
The Forbes article makes some sense, but consider the problems educators would have if educators tried to activate and take on fake news stories. Parents who accept the fake news would object.
I think it is important for the education community to set priorities for the goals to be accomplished. Time and resources are limited at all levels and not every societal ill or need can be addressed. My concern is that educators chase the news and chase the new shiny thing rather than carefully considering the expectations for education in society. Coding makes a great example for me. I wrote code for a living and I think having some individuals capable of coding is important. However, the “coding for all” thing makes no sense to me.
I am presently willing to argue that media literacy is a more important goal. As a life skill, having the capacity to question information AND perhaps more important to recognize personal biases in the information you or I see out when making decisions. What good is science when politicians are willing to promote the denial of scientific conclusions that are inconsistent with a political agenda and educators are limited in the openness with which they can address politically charged issues?
Anyway, personal frustrations aside, here is a recommendation for a recent (free) publication on media literacy educators might want to review.
The promises, challenges, and futures of media literacy (provided by Data and Society, 2018)
My wife and I have attended technology conferences for years mostly paying for our own way. We made this commitment because of our professional interests.
Cindy called my attention to the ISTE registration fees for 2018. I estimate that with the cost of transportation and housing, the cost for this conference would be far over $1000. This would be without extra fees for extended preconference training sessions. I was unaware of what the fees were so I did a search. Try it yourself. My search also came up with multiple “donors choose” pleas related to this cost. I have not taken the time to create a cost comparison of various conference options. This is not the point I am trying to make.
I have no idea of how these organizations spend their money. Big conferences obviously cost a lot of money – the venue, the speakers, full-time staff. Big conferences also bring in a lot of money.
I think schools do need to spend money on professional development and technology has to be part of this. I think it is appropriate, however, to consider the cost-effectiveness of different approaches. The density of a four-day experience produces the same problems as the concerns about school-based one-day efforts with paid presenters to a much larger degree.
The cost creates another problem. With high costs come decisions that must be made about who can go and who cannot become more difficult.
There must be ways to make learning experiences for educators more cost-effective.
I admit I have never actually touched a Merge Cube. However, Cindy suggests educators buy them now (at Walmart). The trip to Walmart is on the agenda for today. We are in Kauai so this is more of a commitment than it might seem.
I am starting a “count down deal” on Layering for Learning starting on Mar 3. The Kindle book will initially be available for $1. Going lower would be counterproductive as authors are charged a fee for “serving” the book to the reader. The promotion is intended to interest those who teach college “technology for teachers” courses or perhaps professional development. Of course, the deal is available to anyone.
The issue I have dealt with in moving from a big commercial publishing company to selling a book on Amazon is the marketing provided by the big companies. Big textbook companies have representatives that visit individual campuses and visit individual professors. They give away free copies to professors and explain the benefits of the books. Professors seldom venture off on their own (in my experience) to locate a suitable textbook. I guess we are lazy in that way. One of the challenges in my efforts to compete with my previous self is how to deal with this issue. I would like to get beyond selling books to interested individuals to mass adoptions. This is not about greed (perhaps a little bit), but this is about who the book was written for. A book for the early adopter would ideally take a different approach from a book for preservice or in-service teachers best served by a different writing style.
Anyway – this is my attempt to compete with the door to door book reps.
You must be logged in to post a comment.