As I have read several of the posted blogs, Crystal and Mary-Lynn's wonderings about what technology is stripping away from our humanity resonated with me.
McLuhan suggests that "When everyone is involved with everybody, how is one to establish identity? I have been thinking about this statement and the implications for my work. I receive, on average, over 30 emails a day. If I don't respond and keep on top of it, the email pile grows exponentially everyday like dirty laundry. People are expecting immediate turn around time on queries. It makes one look incompetent if you answer some one's email five days from the time they send it.
I feel like I am becoming more and more chained to my computer. Rather than someone coming to my office to talk to me in my new school, or me venturing out of my office to talk "in real" with someone, we are both using the technology, and isolating ourselves from human contact in the process.
So how then, do I establish my identity with teachers when so much of the communication is no longer face to face and coming through the medium of email. How is my identity as an educator communicated? How much of my "humanness" is relayed through this technology? I may be involved with everyone and everyone is involved with me, but what are the implications for really "knowing" each other? And how will "identity" be re-imaged and redefined by the use of present and future technology?
All I can say is that I have to force myself to break the chain, leave the chair, and walk up to someone and talk "in real". I am actually frightened of who I will become as a principal in the next 15 years as the technology becomes more prevalent and pervasive.
McLuhan also challenged that "nothing is inevitable so long as we are willing to pay attention". To me, paying attention is the act of questioning and reflecting. Let's continue to consider the impact of certain technologies possibly aiding in a decent down into the maelstrom. I am looking forward to talking to all of you about these thoughts and others "in real".
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Buffy, the DVD and my definition
Good Morning fellow bloggers,
I wanted to put some of my thinking out there about Buffy. When she talked about the "it" in every child that shines through him or her, she questioned how that fits with standards, outcomes, targeted goals in school systems. I wonder how this language of learning we use in curriculum allows for every child to have a good appearance in the world and honour their "it".
Buffy challenged us to consider multiple perspectives and the many ways of knowing. Yet who really gets to decide around matters of education? Does the day to day life in schools with children truly reflect and respect difference?
When watching "Growing Up Canadian" I was struck by how "young" our education system really is in Canada. I heard Tim Tyson speak this week and he talked about how our school system is largely based on the industrial model, creating workers for an industrial job market, and that overall, schools have not changed. Looking at the video, it is smug of us to say how far we have come. When considering certain practices in education, are we all that radically different as a system then we were 50 years ago?
One critism: In this retrospective, the consideration of residential schools in the video was grossly understated, in my opinion. When we look at the history of school in Canada, residential schools are viewed as one of Canada's most shamed actions. It relates directly to the question about what we will be sorry for in the next 50 years. How can we see where we are going if we are not looking honestly at the past? I understand that this video had a "feel good-walk down memory lane" sense to it. I think that is why I enjoyed it so much. But I think this video provides a platform for critical questioning of past, present and future.
So I going to throw this out there and suggest that we might be apologizing for a few things.
How about not giving greater importance to our social responsibilities to our fellow man?
Not emphasising the climate crisis?
How about not helping children to be open to and embrace difference?
Perpetutating and valuing our insatiable appetites as comsumers?
Technology's influence and the way the world will change?
...I could go on.
Yikes! What is in my coffee this morning?
My definition of curriculum is somehow rooted in the above questions. What is an educated person for the future? What do we need to know about as human beings to contribute and grow as a society?
That's all for today.
Lorelei
I wanted to put some of my thinking out there about Buffy. When she talked about the "it" in every child that shines through him or her, she questioned how that fits with standards, outcomes, targeted goals in school systems. I wonder how this language of learning we use in curriculum allows for every child to have a good appearance in the world and honour their "it".
Buffy challenged us to consider multiple perspectives and the many ways of knowing. Yet who really gets to decide around matters of education? Does the day to day life in schools with children truly reflect and respect difference?
When watching "Growing Up Canadian" I was struck by how "young" our education system really is in Canada. I heard Tim Tyson speak this week and he talked about how our school system is largely based on the industrial model, creating workers for an industrial job market, and that overall, schools have not changed. Looking at the video, it is smug of us to say how far we have come. When considering certain practices in education, are we all that radically different as a system then we were 50 years ago?
One critism: In this retrospective, the consideration of residential schools in the video was grossly understated, in my opinion. When we look at the history of school in Canada, residential schools are viewed as one of Canada's most shamed actions. It relates directly to the question about what we will be sorry for in the next 50 years. How can we see where we are going if we are not looking honestly at the past? I understand that this video had a "feel good-walk down memory lane" sense to it. I think that is why I enjoyed it so much. But I think this video provides a platform for critical questioning of past, present and future.
So I going to throw this out there and suggest that we might be apologizing for a few things.
How about not giving greater importance to our social responsibilities to our fellow man?
Not emphasising the climate crisis?
How about not helping children to be open to and embrace difference?
Perpetutating and valuing our insatiable appetites as comsumers?
Technology's influence and the way the world will change?
...I could go on.
Yikes! What is in my coffee this morning?
My definition of curriculum is somehow rooted in the above questions. What is an educated person for the future? What do we need to know about as human beings to contribute and grow as a society?
That's all for today.
Lorelei
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Welcome to my blog!
Hi Everyone,
In light of Tim Tyson's presentation yesterday, I am feeling pretty darn proud of myself for jumping in to this new technology. What's next? A page on Facebook?
See you all tomorrow!
Lorelei
In light of Tim Tyson's presentation yesterday, I am feeling pretty darn proud of myself for jumping in to this new technology. What's next? A page on Facebook?
See you all tomorrow!
Lorelei
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
