Semester Reflection

My mind has been opened to the possibilities of educational technologies.  First and foremost, I have faith in the minds of Millennials.  They will be the ones to solve many of the world's problems.  On the other hand, previous generations, specifically Baby Boomers, are in the way.  They know the least about this world and they are the ones running shit.  I have to use terse language because it best describes my frustration with education and the society writ large.  Life is easier in 2015 than it has ever been.  Technology seems to be outpacing the ability of thinkers to come up with bigger broader issues.  I attribute a lot of that to intellectual regurgitation and still teaching concepts that have long since been automated.  Our children are being taught to irrelevance.  Based on observation rounds of young learners, I see their mastery of contemporary society.  The utility of handheld devices and their ability to come up with solutions to the simple questions that they have.  I am inferring and projecting that one of those young learners will have a large broad question on something important such as the global economy or the cure for cancer and will use education technology, which is prior knowledge, to create new advances in society.  A wealth of knowledge is at the fingertips of young students and their intellectual curiousities will continue to spur innovation.

As a leader in education, I am also acutely aware of the inability of leaders to adequately implement educational technology in the classroom.  I wonder if these are inherent errors in a top down bureaucratic approach or that leaders simply don't understand the world they live in (as I presume their students to be able to).  

Pappert's ideas are near and dear to my philosophy on leading a higher education institution.  Constructionism is key to reform.  Leaders must be assess how their learner's think and be able to channel and develop that into higher analytical thinking.  

This course has allowed me to question and envision what the class of the future will look like.  Frankly, I have questioned the relevance of the modern day school.  My children will have a different formative education going forward.  Mastery of the technology is more important than the regimentation of outdated thinking.  

 

Assessment of Educational Technology in the Class

To evaluate the effectiveness of technology in the class, I would use a Likert Scale survey to ask students.  Essentially, it is up to them to determine its effectiveness.  A Likert Scale for instructors as well combined with average scores of the class to triangulate data would be a way to assess educational technologies.

Very rarely are students assessed on the quality of educational technology.  In my higher ed experience, it is faculty that for committees to determine which educational technology is used in the classroom.  The flaw in this is that most have less experience with educational technology than the students which create a very underused device and basic functions.  In LAUSD, Ipads were issued to students only to be confiscated because students had figured out how to bypass control measures and use it outside of the intended purpose of the school administration.

Moore's Law suggests that educational technologies should be rapidly deployed and not have long drawn out committees to implement this.  By the time devices are rolled out, technology has advanced and students have mastered more advanced software.

Handheld Devices in the Classroom

As a Technical Support Specialist, Browserlock and faculty concerned about "cheating" fail to comprehend the world in which we live.  The old thinking of memorizing answers or being able to recall answers based on reading and cramming in lots of data is an outdated method.

A Doctor doesn't in go into surgery remembering every iota of their medical books.  A lawyer is not required to know every law on the books.  A rocket scientist doesn't attempt jet propulsion based on remembering every theory and law from years of study.  Every profession has the answer to the tests!  There is no "stump the chump" in any profession.  The answers are available for immediate use.  What separates the average from the greats is the ability to not only find answers but apply it in ways that are new or unprecedented.

Why should a kid memorize the multiplication table?  We have phones that can calculate that and it is much more reliable than memory.  Why must a student be forced to memorize when a certain battle took place in history or remember such minutiae when it is recorded history?  This basic level of assessment speaks to issues with the instrument, not the student!

With information at a student's fingertips, the next level of learning should be for students to analyze and synthesize the information.  Baseline teaching and assessment is the expectation of knowing that Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 whereas the synthesis and analysis can apply that voyage to World Systems Theory and disproving of the Malthusan Trap.  This will create a world where there isn't really a "right answer" but, rather shows metacognition while also creating new insights on very old (probably incorrect) subjects.

Handheld devices also empower a student to learn on their own terms outside of a rigid outdated system.  What is the folly in that?  Students, as living breathing organisms, will naturally have questions about the environment about them and be able to find answers in the palm of their hand.

Educators should embrace all technologies in the classroom if they spur questions and ideas in the classroom.    

Achieving Hard Fun

Achieving hard fun is not impossible.  Hard fun is usually manifested in the current K-12 structure under sports and fine arts.  These are competencies that aren't easy to master at the beginning but get easier through discipline and constant practice.  In the right context, it can occur in computer sciences.  With familiarity, skills develop and allow for hard fun.  As a Technical Support Specialist, I find IT to be hard fun.  I have no formal training in hardware or software.  The hard fun works by applying skills from other disciplines to troubleshoot and analyze problems.

Standardized testing inhibits hard fun.  The focus is on mastering established norms instead of seeking new or unknown knowledge.  Students are literally being asked to know or memorize things that have already been created or done.  The incentive or possibilities for hard fun are systemically not there.

Virtuosos and Masters in practice achieve this status based on dedication and discipline to craft.  Most professional athletes have dedicated their formative years to homing their craft.  They were not always able to dunk, dribble between their legs or lift 300lbs.  It took years of development.  With computer technology, I would argue that hard fun is actually easier.  Whatever the mind can envision, it is possible to add something new to the field.  There are lifetime computer scientists as well as young gamers that contribute by way of hard fun.

Finally completed  my Arduino project!!!  I'm going to need a little more familiarization with the programming to be effective at this, but I would like to continue doing this with my children.  They will be able to conquer it.  I have no doubt.  For my son, Izach, we will do a project for his birthday.

  

It was very hard to keep the wires/thread from crossing.  I tried tape but that just tangled  the thread.  In the future, I will add it into clothes and other little pet projects.  Ok, now that this is complete, I can continue to complete my other school assignments...

The Blessing and Curse of Video Games

I remember reading Ender's Game in a Freshman Lit class while a student at Franklin College and I hated it!  I did not understand the relevance and the premise seemed quite silly.  Ender, the protagonist, is picked at a young age to play video games and master levels.  It turns out that he was fighting a cyber war unbeknownst to him.

As an Artillery Officer, I saw many parallels in the premise of that book.  Firstly, the ability of young people to suspend reality or to see answers to real problems in a video game.  I managed 42 Forward Observers (FOs).  Their job in a combat scenario was to call in grid coordinates for indirect fire support (artillery, air support, mortars).  To hone their skills, I would meet in a room called the GUARDFIST which was a video game on a big screen.  

My FOs would use the game to learn the art of Field Artillery.  By playing a virtual reality of real life combat situations, my FOs were able to calibrate their eye and learn tricks that otherwise would be replicated in an actual life or death environment.  One can argue that the GUARDFIST saved lived by enabling training in a safe environment but it also used video games, as in Ender to eventually or potentially lead to killing.  The lines are blurred.  My FOs were Artillerymen and saw the lethality of war as a profession...a job.  The personalization in something that could be hectic or result in loss of life is turned into technical skills performed in a profession.  

Video games enable the ability for higher thinking.  Real life situations can become intellectual exercise.  As I have stated in other blogs, a video game enables specific situations to be reviewed and attempted to the point of changing how one actually reacts.  Strategy is refined for moments that were previously so inconsequential that most would never prepare for it.  It is observed mostly in sports.  In the form of onside kicks, two point conversions, or even allowing an opposing team to score to get the ball back.  These strategies are experienced in video games.  This can also apply to other strategy games.