Techie-Trekkies

Isn't it absolutely astounding how we, the young generation of tomorrow, are engulfed in the finite details of the modern technological age?  Where is the line drawn between gorging ourselves on the tools at our disposal and retaining our privacy?

Every new generation of technology makes older ones more accessible.  Example: the latest model of iPhone may be ghastly expensive, making one that is 1 generation older now affordable.

Everything is becoming digitized; which is probably a good thing.  But, is it entirely a good thing to not retain a hard copy of data?  What happens to businesses?  When will the internet, remote-servers, networks, hard-drives, etc. become so reliable that we switch entirely over to electronic record-safekeeping?

Key word: safekeeping.  How private are remote servers, or "cloud-computing" practices?  For me, this is one of the most intriguing tech topics that is emerging (alternately, if you're in the tech world, this is old news).  Do we trust that a third party will keep our secrets secret?  How can they?

Technology runs every aspect of our lives.  In fact, we have become so symbiotic with tech that we have no control over how it impacts our lives.  Think about the medical field (automation and tools) and engineering feats (drawings, structural calculations); there's no way we're ever going back to the days of guess-and-check and multiple assistants, blueprints and algebraic scrawls.

That's all been left in the dust.  Where do we stand now?

Literacy Week 3: Writing Woes and Wonders

Let’s employ some of Lamott’s teachings.  I am going to “throw” my thoughts onto this page as they arise.  I have never viewed writing the way that she is describing.  However, I am forced to admit that if I had been taught the tips and tribulations that she expresses about writing, I would probably have enjoyed the process significantly more.

The way I was taught to write was a very systematic process.  We were told to use the four-square method for developing stories, brainstorm webs to generate ideas, and include X number of sources in our reports.  We were graded on the entire process, our rough drafts always under critique.  I felt compelled to follow the rubrics precisely.  As a result, I failed to create reflective, thought-provoking pieces of writing.  I could not journal; since it did not involve a complex order of operations from start to finish.  I could not write the way my favorite authors wrote.  I wanted so desperately to burst out of this conformist shell and say the things I wanted to say.

Writer’s Workshop has many elements of Lamott’s writing philosophies incorporated into it; of course, they are presented in drastically different ways.  For example, in the unit on writing fiction, the Writer’s Workshop method dedicates the opening lessons to guided reflection on one’s own life and the little moments that we have experienced.  The emphasis is on how fiction is derived from our own experiences, and is not an entirely conjured-up story that we’ve pulled from thin air.  In this way, writers learn to use inspiration from all around them and make their characters, settings, dialogues, etc. as realistic, believable, and relatable as possible. 

I think this is a superb method, and aligns well with Lamott’s concept of looking through the 1-inch frame.  Writers should focus on the things right in front of them and paint (with words) the images that they see.  Then, they can compile all of these vivid snippets into a sequence and elaborate their story from there.  I enjoy Lamott’s analogy of the development of a story to the development of a Polaroid.  As authors, we unfold our stories from a single thought.  Gradually, we reveal more to the reader, taking them along on this journey of discovery with us.  There is no need to write everything into the introduction, as many students are wont to do.  We should develop our story piece by piece, with the anticipation and excitement of wanting to know what happens next.

A struggle that I am having with the Writer’s Workshop curriculum is the theory that no one except the author has the right to write on their own paper.  On one hand, this method develops a sense of ownership; making changes is at the author’s discretion, they do not have to abide by other people’s suggestions/edits/revisions.  However, a huge part of the writing process is being able to obtain critique from readers and put yourself in your reader’s shoes.  Given, you should never have to make a change to your writing that you vehemently do not believe in; however, you should value and take time to consider what others have to say.  The fact that Writer’s Workshop conducts peer reviews using wads of Post-it Notes turns valuable insight into discardable (recyclable?), haphazard comments.

Literacy Week 2: Viscose Vernacular

Being a complete beginner in the area of literacy teaching, I found this week’s reading incredibly informational.  Astoundingly, it’s not that I wasn’t aware of the concepts behind phonics teaching, but rather, the text provided explanations for the literacy teaching methods that I received in my own schooling. 

One of the most intriguing tidbits of literacy learning is how much is natural to us.  Fox says that literacy skills such as rhyming actually develop naturally in children.  However, she also says that the consciousness of rhyme is not as helpful in developing literacy as other phonemic skills.  If a development is “natural” because it originates from spoken words, then phonics education does indeed seem to be the best means to an end (literacy) because it translates spoken word into written.  Phonics assigns characters to sounds that we already know from speech.  Does the high exposure to rhyming words in children’s books aid in our phonemic development or detract us from developing other phonics skills?  I am very curious to conduct the Emergent Literacy Profile and see how the child’s skills link to the theories in this text.

Phonics education also begs the question as to the linear nature of literacy learning.  Fox notes that many states complete formal phonics education in 2^nd grade.  This means that those 3^rd-graders and up who don’t know phonics will not have the opportunity to formally learn the concepts.  She says that phonics is a tool for building reading fluency, which then leads to a stronger vocabulary and better comprehension.  For those who did not formally learn phonics, what is the impact (if any) of learning phonics, developing vocabulary, and practicing reading/writing out of order? 

(On a side note, I wonder if the linear nature of literacy education lends an explanation for the reason younger children learn new languages with ease.)

It is also interesting to review student’s work and figure out where they correspond with and diverge from the theories on literacy education.  How do teachers of older students figure out how to fill in the gaps in their students’ knowledge so that they can all become better readers, writers, and communicators? 

When I was in grade school, I never thought of phonics as a tool for building comprehension.  I always thought its sole purpose was to help us sound-out words for spelling.  Now that I am revisiting the concepts behind the use of phonics to develop word identification skills, I see how phonics lays a foundation for an entire chain of events leading to literacy.

Online Learning :-D

The Gate's Foundation is spending millions to conduct research surrounding online learning:

The Seattle Times: Gates Foundation launches $20M effort to improve online college instruction

Have you ever taken an online course?  What did you think about the experience?  How did you learn?

I'm curious because I've only taken a couple of online courses; one was simply OK, but the other was a fantastic learning experience!  What elements do you think separate tedious online courses from engaging ones?


Keep in mind that there is a "new" movement of K-12 online schooling that provides free, public education to students who want/register for it.  I know a few people who are in this program, and they think it resolves many of the issues (mostly social) that standard public schools have.

Literacy Week 1: Reviving Read-Aloud

I am puzzled with the unending dilemma of the effectiveness of curricula when taught by teachers who feel they are not trained to teach that curricula.  On one hand, teachers are required/encouraged to attend training sessions to learn how to effectively teach the given curriculum.  However, this training, which lasts 1 or 2 days, is never enough.  Not only do these training sessions usually only give a very broad overview of the curriculum materials and “how to use” the teacher’s guide, they often bore with information that teachers could readily find and learn themselves.  The trainings are not personal, since many teachers (from the whole district) receive training at the same time.  Most critically, though, many training sessions fail to give teachers a comprehensive understanding behind the theories of the method.  What happens when teachers leave the training session without the confidence to execute the curriculum effectively?  They end up trying the curriculum for the first time, in the classroom, and working the kinks out as they go.  This cannot be good for our students.

From the article we read for class, read aloud sounds like a wonderfully effective way for students to engage with their learning.  The read-aloud environment promotes inquiry and discussion of various topics.  It also is simply entertaining, drawing the students into the subject(s) being taught, and provides a different medium for students to learn.  Most uniquely, read aloud gives the teacher a chance to enhance the curriculum so that his/her students feel that their schooling is important and relevant in their lives.  Read-aloud is a tool that makes learning more meaningful.

So, how do we classify the various Language Arts curricula that include read-aloud texts?  Do these fall under the less-flexible category of “supplied curriculum”, or can they be modified such that students feel that they are invested in their learning?  For example, many writing curricula provide texts for teachers to read aloud as examples of elements of writing.  However, although these are good examples of the writing skills that we want students to learn, the texts are not chosen by the students (based on student-interest), the students may or may not be encouraged to interact with the text (inquiring before, during, and after the read-aloud), and the “modeling” approach to teaching writing may constrain many students (their voice, fluency, and creativity are stifled).  Thus, many of the foreseeable benefits to read-aloud disappear when the process becomes dictated by a given curriculum.  How can we modify these types of curricula so that read-aloud materials are transformed into effective tools that students become engaged in?  How can we make use of the curricula given to us and still ensure that students feel they have a personal investment in the texts and their learning?

I (heart) sing-along!

One of the great advantages of being literate:

Testing...1...2...3...!

This is a trial post to make sure all of my settings are sublime.