Revised Educational Philosphy

The philosophy I adhere to is primarily realist with existentialist and re-constructivist sympathies and both an aversion and respect for pragmatism. Simply put, I am a bitter idealist who sees institutional and practical constraints as the brakes placed on the wheels of individual self-realization. My own education seems to come out of the idealist school. There was an emphasis on higher-level thinking, facts, ideas and the canon of knowledge concerning Western Civilization. These classics were taught to help students perform well on standardized tests that often cover such subjects. This also prepared students for university course work. The search for truth, focus on self-realization, character development and moral growth were possible because of the high stakes involved. The high level of education of the parents, the high average incomes of the households and the general trend for parents to strive to help their children with their educations meant this philosophy could be put into practice. The holistic approach was sometimes annoyingly abstract, but the point was to keep the students thinking. Students were constantly asked to piece together connections between factors after in-depth analysis of the subject matter coming from lectures, research and projects. I agree that the model is elitist, but I think the reverence for such institutions as Ivy League education, Oxbridge tuition and other prestigious forms of education shows that our societal model is inherently elitist. Though the approach is considered bookish, my high school instruction prepared me so well for university coursework that I was far ahead of my peers at A&M up until the fifth semester. What I see as ideal is existentialism, but there still exists the problem of helping children grow up to be functional adults who can adapt to the demands of society and market forces. In my teaching, I try to incorporate reflective and metacognitive thinking, but I remain focused on what affects their lives in the form of assessment and graduation. Because I believe some aspects of standardized testing can stifle creativity and infringe on the development of individual maximization of talent, I want to improve this by allowing for more student input and leadership. On the other hand, if students see school as a place to test boundaries, giving the students free rein can be a disaster. In theory I would love for my lessons to be 100% student-driven, but the problem is that by relying on their cues, I fear that I will be neglecting their testing needs. In sum I believe that financial constraints make idealism untenable for state-supported schools. Societal pressures and market-forces make instructing with the existentialist philosophy an act of defiance on the behalf of the teacher at the expense of the students’ futures. On the other side of my preferences are pragmatism and constructivism. I have taught high school and university students. Naturally-motivated students are not what I encountered every day. Though I support a general education and experimentation, students face tests that determine their future. Diversified education is a good thing, but time constraints must be considered. Personally, I think students should be in school until 8, 9, or 10 pm. The criticism that pragmatism rejects traditional values in religion, ethics, and society can easily be substantiated, but by not allowing students to question, we hinder the development of critical-thinking skills. Regardless of my preference for realism, I recognize the position constructivism currently enjoys. Though I do believe in multiple representations of reality, and see oversimplifications as horrible concepts to disseminate, the suggestion of creating “authentic tasks in meaningful contexts” is rather abstract and ill-defined. The collaborative construction of knowledge through social negotiation and not through competition runs directly against the grain of our mainstream society that prizes competition and individual perseverance. Re-constructivism to me is both essential for this country to heal its wounds and possibly the greatest threat to freedom of expression. The mark of a free country is the liberty to address the most controversial and divisive of topics with conflicting opinions given the same respect. Proponents of the opposing opinions must use logic and reason to reach a compromise of sorts or at least agree to disagree. Until this country lays out a codified list of state-sanctioned beliefs, correcting social ills can be very tricky. The attempt to eradicate discrimination and make amends for ignoring subjects deliberately to justify dubious assumptions about society can lead to equally tyrannical demands of conformity. Teachers focusing so much energy on convincing students of the need for change, and training them to be social activists, are making a very important decision for the students without anyone else’s consent. It is my understanding that parents, citizens, policy makers and politicians do not believe that teachers are in a position to determine the beliefs that students are supposed to hold. All the same, I strongly support instructing students to pay attention to world issues and read literature from around the world. This leads me to the philosophy I identify with the most, realism. Perceived logic can easily lead to incorrect conclusions and what we think exists does not always exist. In order to gain as much understanding while simultaneously taking into account limitations, realists attempt to be as objective as possible. Students are asked to deduce meaning from their observations and not to force previously conceived notions on the subject of their investigation. Students study systems, arrangements, order of processes and deduce theories about the relationships being observed. Watered-down courses waste students’ time, mislead audiences, and result in meek outcomes. School, like work, must be goal-driven. Though lectures seem to be out of vogue, I see lectures as productive because when people do not have a frame of reference for historical events, it is best to give them some background information. With students who reliably read, this can be done as homework. With students who are a bit more recalcitrant, lecture may be the only input they receive concerning the facts and figures. I try to use the teacher-centered classroom to mine as much student participation out of the students as possible. In my opinion, the best teacher walks the tight rope balancing a preconceived understanding of which directions the class should go and an ability to adapt to the personal needs and interests of the students authentically. The critics of realism state the realist approach is inhuman, mundane, rigid, scientifically cold, and inherently classist. It also purportedly fails to consider the totality of man and overemphasizes hard work and discipline. This is where my opinions come forth. I think our country needs a large dose of realism. As Americans, we face competition we have not seen since before the U.S. took its place as world hegemon. Our lifestyle, our status, our way of life depend on our ability to create the most innovative and effective system of education. We are at a turning point where either we work harder or lose more and more of our influence on the world. A great teacher cannot be defined in the way an acute triangle can. A great teacher is one who when allowed the freedom to create a wonderful learning environment without restrictions, fulfills his or her duties. This is a vague, but I believe you cannot quantify success for this profession. The various needs I had as a student, a child, an adolescent, and a young man were met at different times by individual teachers who have affected me greatly. My second-grade teacher never allowed me to lazily just coast through class. My high school English teacher helped me formulate reasonable and defensible arguments against ideas with faulty foundations. At the university level, I had a wonderful German professor who pushed me to work harder on my German even though I had never visited the country and was taking advanced composition. The wealthy will always be able to pay for SAT prep courses, private tutors, and astronomically expensive university tuition fees. It is the talent that lies in the muck of lower-class and middle-class mediocrity that needs to be nurtured and unleashed. The best teachers set the benchmark for what I need to become. The other teachers are the benchmark for what I should never become.. I want to help people the way so many good people helped me. I want to be someone who makes students feel comfortable exploring ideas instead of rehashing the same stuff. In lieu of my experience with the University of Texas, I want to be a teacher who remains loyal to his obligations by being a helpful mentor even when the district is about to start lay-offs, even when my coordinator is in a bad mood, or there are family problems at home. A professional, like a soldier does not allow these factors to influence his or her performance. Teaching and waging war are both in the interests of the entire population of a state. Thus a fitting synonym for teachers is warriors fighting ignorance and helplessness. I personally consider myself passionate, approachable, and willing to walk the extra mile for students.As a prospective social studies teacher, I want my students to learn that the black and white painting of the world they have been presented is a far cry from reality. I want my students to think for themselves, create their own opinions and most importantly be able to back up those opinions with logical arguments regardless if they resemble my own opinion. The goal is to help students stand by their assertions, yet be able to accept constructive criticism. Another goal in teaching history would be to make students recognize that their understanding of the wider world is riddled with huge holes in the hopes of prompting them to learn more and more. Many adults become complacent with ignorance. No one at the age of 17 has a firm and intricate understanding of the world. Only in the curious days of our adolescence do we care to find out more information. Upon receiving the never-ending list of responsibilities that accompany adulthood, many simply learn what they have to and call it a day. Teachers need to be able to adapt to thes ever-changing circumstances of today and avoid applying theories to entire groups with the justification that it is new and research-based. If the students want activities, give them the opportunity to enjoy their learning. If the class is not as interested and the group work is more of a experiment in cooperative learning than a genuine method of instruction, I will revert to what they know. Experimentation is great, but having been a student, I prefer not to be used as a guinea pig. It did not make me feel more respect for my teacher’s ability. It simply made me distrust the teacher’s sincerity. Working with glorified chalkboards, I find myself in a catch 22. We need to use more technology because the students do not respond the same as they used to. Bombarded by images, videos, podcasts and other blips, students need more technological interaction. The question is whether teachers have become sales representatives for Microsoft, Apple or other technology-based companies instead of distributors of knowledge. Realistically I have heard over and over again that we need to incorporate technology into the classroom. To appease these pressures, I try to be an informator instead of an automator. I want the addition to have a purpose and not simply be an exercise in teacher technological competence. Another pressing issue is to help students understand which sources are reliable and which are less than reliable. The technological addition has to help students cross the bridge to understanding. As a teacher, I need to be aware of changing trends, standards and norms. Time is always an issue in classrooms and if technology supports the biggest bang for their buck, then I use it. Facing the problem of educating our multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic and class oriented society, I base my methodology around realism. I see the situation here in the United States tipping into an abyss most of us are not ready to accept. With the world transforming exponentially at a rate no generation before us can even fathom, change is essential. The question is what kind of change. When we consider the state of our nation and our species, whatever methods have been employed in the past have created the society we live in today. Far from perfect these methods need some alteration. The problem is when teachers obsequiously follow trends in education and neglect the actual work of educating. In my own teaching, I constantly consider how I compare to the most effective of my former teachers and the most ineffective of them. The most pertinent problem I face is that there is no precedent for the incorporation of technology. With this stated, I will stand on the sidelines and let the more dare-devilish of teachers do the experimentation, yet I will accept their findings and change my practices appropriately.

Blog Reflection 6

I spent a good amount of time trying to figure out how exactly to create a podcast. I eventually went with what seemed easiest. My undergraduate degree in political science and international studies has not blessed me with the greatest of technological acumen. Those friends of mine who studied computer science on the other hand are doing quite well for themselves. Then again, some of them also have no idea where most of the 183 states on this earth are. Nor do they have an iota of understanding of what factors affect those people. Even though in today's society, my credentials seem to amount to very little, I can live with the decisions I have made in life. One of those decisions was to use Jing, the free version which allows for limited data memory and a podcast of no more than four and a half minutes. When thinking about what to do for the podcast, I thought of what I had to do in order to apply for a position in Korea teaching English. I have already taught at a high school there and decided to show a sample of what my lessons then looked like. As I have been directly told, power point presentations are no longer considered technologically acceptable in the classroom. They are outdated. I wish I had known this before I spent countless hours compiling photos, translating vocabulary words and creating some sense of continuity within my lessons. I was able to touch very lightly on the style I taught. My lessons were meant to be an hour long. My lessons were also designed to reach out for student interaction. I viewed it better to have an endless barrage of questions ready rather than to have a lecture that ran out of time leaving me in a spot where all I could do was wing something. I have had the unique opportunity of seeing what podcasts are being used to do, and unfortunately for someone who has devoted nine years of his life to teaching ESL, I saw podcasts as my fellow teachers' replacement. I worked for a Spanish company that designed a platform for primarily Spanish speakers to interact with target languages. They watched videos and listened to audio recordings and then recorded their own responses. My job was to help students with any technical problems and while being on call corrected their responses. Here is the catch. No more than 10 minutes was allowed for each assessment no matter how many mistakes the students made. Regardless of how egregious the errors were, I was instructed to pick three mistakes, explain why they were mistakes and then move on. To someone who is going to be a teacher partially due to the great respect I have for my former teachers, this was an absolute betrayal. If I wrote something with a feeling that it was wrong, but received no red marks, I took it that I had done well. This was not the case for many of my former employer's clients. The article written by Ashley Deal comes right out and says there is no substantial literature that supports whether podcasting is beneficial or not. There is a lengthy explanation about how easy it is to subscribe and how much time it saves once the initial setup has been established, but one part of the paper grabbed my attention. That was that students felt annoyed by the extra work load which then perceived as something that should have been done in the class. As I am getting certified to teach high school social studies and will probably take this and move abroad to continue with my ESL career, I see two things happening. If I were to stay in the states, then the first thing in my mind is that I remember it being difficult enough to get students to read their assigned reading. How I am going to convince my students to not only continue reading, which I hope will continue to be a part of organized education, but also to watch podcasts of more information that most teenagers find dull and at best annoying is beyond me. The report states with surprise that students studied to ascertain their responsiveness to podcasts typically viewed the podcasts from their computers instead of their remote devices. I am sorry, but while running, exercising, and especially driving, I do not want to listen to lecture notes. Driving is dangerous enough. Is it possible that one day we will accept that focusing on one task at a time may save lives? Just this morning I drove past a lady whose scooter had been hit. She was convulsing on the ground as the ambulance arrived. I know this is conjecture, but I assume the driver was probably making use of her smartphone at the moment of impact. The never-ending search for convenience is the prime suspect in why the health of the nation looks as dismally as it does. I went to college when students were often more concerned with partying and nursing hangovers than attending class. The article points out that by allowing all lectures to be watched from wherever and whenever, that it is possible that something negative is being done to the fostering of prioritization, organization, discipline and personal responsibility. I sincerely hope that podcasts do not replace textbooks, and other required readings, but as most of us know from the existence of sparknotes, many students will inevitably take the easy way out. Then, students will complain about how teachers did not create sufficient podcasts, never mind that there is some responsibility on the part of the students to, I would say, work. The article briefly mentions in passing that a considerable amount of time goes into creating the podcasts. Of course, after the initial phase, this becomes much easier, and the lessons are their to be used indefinitely. I also believe that teachers become better at what they do over time and any good teacher would feel the need to edit their lessons. So the idea of it being less time-consuming is a bit ambiguous. One positive concerning podcasts is that it allows teachers to focus more on projects and that by having the students watch lectures prior to class, which as most teachers know is like praying for rain in a desert, they can devote more time to student-centered learning. The fact that their was a 10% higher average on project grades goes without saying. They had more time to do it in class. Another positive that the article uses that raises red flags is that students believed that using podcasts was "the most realistic and practical class they had taken as undergraduates". As an undergraduate, I took almost everything my esteemed professors told me for granted. The article even states that there is no research to back up this statement. The biggest problem I see with using this technology is what is explained as product-driven development and working backwards to use technology for the sake of using technology. I have already given my opinion on this at great length and am at least happy to see proponents show some honesty in conceding this very significant fact. We still do not know what benefits using the podcasts will bring. As I have said this is how I percieve podcasts within the context of high school social studies. If we look at foreign language studies, I have a different stance. I think that this provides an unbelievably positive tool to learn languages. On the other hand I do not believe in dislocating students from the teacher. We are still social animals, and no matter how much technophiles tout Web 2.0 as just as good as human interaction, without the gaze of a concerned human being, I believe the over-reliance of technology cheapens education and its merits are slogans yelled in the prime desire simply to make money.

Web 2.0

When reading O'Reilly's article, I could only accept the honesty when he states the criticism of this term being more than a meaningless marketing buzzword. I grasp that the web has become more of an interactive platform than a simply extension of published texts. I accept the analogy of the webtop being similar to the horseless carriage. I acknowledge that Netscape has given way to Google, that DoubleClick has given way to AdSense, that Akamai has been replaced by BitTorrent, that Britannica Online is no longer as significant as Wikipedia, that blogging has become more popular than personal website, and that publishing by experts is now less important that the participation of users. I resent the wording when it comes to the blogging and the wisdom of crowds and the obfuscation of the fact that this culture of participation is rooted in the desire to have customers volunteer their time to do what had previously been done by paid employees. Most of the article discusses the business potential of the revolution in information dissemination. The perpetual beta is interesting in that it is the manner in which these hugely successful companies have decided to make their money. On the other hand, there is still the monopolistic control on technology Microsoft has, and those who cannot afford to buy an Apple computer are still forced to continue purchasing products from this company every few years. Though the article paints a pictures of communities being built around sites such as Flickr, Napster, MySpace and Facebook, I still believe that the other more traditional communities suffer as a result. These communities are first and foremost prosumers, or with the neologisms put aside, consumers. As Tim Berners-Lee states, most of this is simply jargon. Darcy DiNucci, a consultant, coined this term. In reading the wikipedia article, I was slapped in the face with the underlying nature of this movement. The Web 2.0 is instrumental in getting customers to build business for the people whom they give their money. In assessing the merits, we are asked to completely forget about the never-ending spamming and trolling we must endure. Though "we" were chosen as the Person of The Year in 2006 by Time magazine, I support John Flintoff's assertion that Web 2.0 has created an endless digital forest of mediocrity. Adrew Keen's description of digital narcissism and amateurism is rather poignant. The accumulative value of centuries of print and peer-review should not be tossed out the window in the pursuit of greater participation. Let us not forget that over the centuries, experts have been given their status after jumping through countless hoops and never-ending accreditation. The cult of the amateur, though valuable to companies trying to cash in on fads and trends, still calls to mind the nature of society displayed in the film Idiocracy. It is well-known that television stations experimented with broadcasting informational shows that flopped and became commercial failures. Mass consumerism, though being the engine car of our recent service-based economy, does not in and of itself justify tossing out the book we have written over millennia. As useful as I have found wikipedia as a launch pad for further research, the idea of trusting all members is beyond short-sighted.

Blog Reflection 5

For a brief moment, I epitomized the characterization of Aggies in not recognizing that Dihydrogen Monoxide was in fact water. Seeing that the website was listed as a .org domain, I was initially caught off guard. Even though I have nothing but suspicion when I look on the web, I was taken for a ride. Just as Professor Butz's appallingly idiotic explanation for the Holocaust, this website was under the radar because most people only perfunctorily glance at where the website comes from. The fact that it lists reputable websites such as the Department of Health and Human Services, the Center of Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute, Sandia National Laboratories, the Sierra Club and Greenpeace leads one to believe that there may be a grain of truth to the assertions until one does what the internet has impeded and that is think. This website was obviously created to make a solid point. That or the author really had very little to do with his or her time. It is a bit funny when one reads that it is loosely affiliated with the US Environment Center and it's division on creating awareness of the dangers of water. When I typed in the URL on altavista.com, the second entry is wikipedia's page on the DHMO hoax. Then a website devoted to the Dental Health Maintenance Organization comes up. Go.com provides the very same results. Yahoo.directory.com only provides sites connected to the website in question and another entry on uncyclopedia.wikia.com which is clearly nothing but nonsense. Teoma.com provides the same results. In looking for the author through easywhois, I discovered that Tom Way from Newark, Delaware was the sole author. I find it hard to believe a single individual,especially if he is from Newark,Delaware. In using this web source, it was hard for me to give any weight to what was written on the website. In using archive.org, I discovered that practically nothing had changed on the website from the time it was first created to the present date. I would imagine that if water were really that detrimental to the community and the health of its members, there would be some kind of development, but like the movement to save the tree octopus, there is nothing to it. Even if one does not want to go through the trouble of looking up the specifics about the website, one must merely read about hos dihydrogen monoxide is related to cult rituals, the KKK, the NAACP, death camps, school violence and other sinister aspects of life, to realize that it is merely a joke. The truth is that even before the dot.com bubble and the new Web 2.0 renaissance, people tended to be rather gullible. Why else would advertising be so lucrative and so much money spent on figuring out how to direct customer behavior? The sad fact is that people will believe almost anything. This website, like the website about harvesting velcro and nineteenth century robots, is a good joke. Unlike these two examples, one can almost be taken in if the reader only briefly looks at the site and lazily uses it in a report. It is almost as good as allaboutexplorers.com, but anyone who received a C in seventh grade science will remember that two plus two is four and the H20 is water. Likewise, anyone with any common sense will read through that site and realize that the information provided is sprinkled with complete nonsense.

Blog Reflection 4

The premise of getting with the times is clear in the questioning, but I do not like being forced to support using computer games and technology in every facet of my life because it is new. DDT was new at one point and look at how wonderfully the revolution in fertilizers and pesticides worked out. Nuclear power is an extremely useful tool and most people support its utilization, except for maybe people who live in Belarus and Ukraine or those who survived the nuclear explosions of World War II. When asked whether I am more comfortable composing documents online than writing it down a piece of paper, I can remember having to go the computer lab every time I had to write a paper. It was easier for the teacher to read, but I spent a considerable amount of time going back and forth to the lab. I think it is much easier, but at the same time, I have to say that I remember fondly receiving letters. There is something personal about it that emails have stolen. Human kindness and consideration have taken a back seat to the need for immediacy. Spam used to be a term used for less than nutritious meat. Now, we spend hours of our life going through letters that should never be written. I think a lot of the technology we are discussing is analogous to the introduction of air conditioning on such a wide scale. In some countries, regardless if it is scorching hot or not, people survive without air conditioning. Better yet some people actually still walk to stores. What I see happening to society is what the movie Wall-E intended to portray. Wall-E was an excellent film in that it showed what will possibly become the future of humanity. Junk will pile up so high and people will become floating whales that do nothing more than hit buttons to have everything done for them. I remember fondly the days when I visited my friends unannounced. I remember when people had to make plans and stick to them. Now, our commitments are whimsical half-promises. People no longer make decisions and follow through. Everything is malleable and respect has been chucked out the window. There was a time when it was understood that it is rude to talk loudly on a cellphone. That notion no longer makes much sense to most people who could not care less about the people in their vicinity. There is another issue right there. With the ability to communicate with whomever at almost any point in time, there is no need to be aware of the people standing right next to you. Most Dallas residents do not even care about the lives of people driving on the road near them. Whatever they are blathering on about is more important. There is also nothing more assuring that seeing a driver's head faced down reading that important text message. While I was attending Texas A&M as an undergraduate, only the most ostentatious of people would have their laptops with them. A computer was an instrument of work. Who would try to simulate a cubicle around them while not at work? I can remember the first issue of having a cellphone and being on call. I refused to buy a cellphone until 2003 because I simply did not want a lease around my neck for anyone to yank. I do not know how many times my employers have made liberty with my time and expected me to be "flexible". I suppose slave masters also lectured their property on flexibility. Another important factor that seems to simply not come up in this conversation is money. Five hundred dollars for a phone used to be simply preposterous. Instead of spending eight dollars on a quality notebook, I have to spend a thousand in order to write up documents on my notebook. Our society's understanding of technology stems from Rockefeller's irate reaction to Tesla's plan to provide energy for free. If there's no meter, there is no reason to introduce it. I can remember maybe six phone numbers. This means the very instrument that was supposedly intended to make my life easier owns me. When Facebook become unbelievably popular, my professor whose degree was from Harvard came right on and said how stupid do you have to be to put all of your personal information on the web for everyone to see. When it comes to a task, I focus on the work I am doing at that time. When someone skypes me, they are distracting me. When I get a text message at the library, it does not make my life easier. It makes it harder for me to accomplish what I have set out to do. Multitasking seems to be a catch word for employers who dump more and more responsibilities on their employees. At the current time, my school has kindly explained that attendance is now online for my convenience. In reality, I have been given more work to do that is unpaid. Instead of being able to take care of this course, or better yet live, I am doing more for my employer's business and in reality helping fill up my employer's bank account. The subject of computer games could fill up volumes of books. Instead of skipping rocks at a creek like I did, children now decapitate figures for fun. Those famous words "Finish Him" have filled out kids with the most perverse and I would be willing to say evil aspects of the human soul. Grand Theft Auto enables people to live out fantasies that only the most amoral could ever even think of. Yet, it has a hefty price tag, and if it sells, it is unassailable. Instead of living life, people choose to live through their avatars. World of Warcraft has left so many people completely socially inept, yet it sells and thus we should incorporate such technology in the classroom. Why? In Korea, there are instances of people dying in front of computers. In some instances mothers play their children's games because the student refuses to go to school if the mother does not keep his or her status where he or she wants it. I am part of the NetGen which seems to be incapable of spelling out whole words or even bothering to spell them correctly. Instead of simply embracing with open arms, I look at how my generation was given flight simulating games to bomb, destroy and kill, and then I have to scratch my head when I watch videos of UAVs in actions. The desensitizing of our people is rampant. The scariest and most horrifying idea is what would/will happen when the lights go off. I am afraid that I will not want to live and see what comes afterwards. I may be stretching the context of this question, but I am truly saddened that these issues have been so thoroughly muted. My criticism does not come from shamanistic rules that say one is not meant to fly on an airplane. Neither am I affiliated with the Quaker movement. I simply want educators, the very people meant to mold young minds into I would hope better and more morally-guided human beings, to take a step back and ask themselves if they should blindly line up in support of the agenda so many private actors are leading.

Blog Reflection 3

From the ten research-based principles of AFL, the one tenet that I can identify with is the first one which states that AFL should be part of effective planning of teaching and learning. The productive aspect of the assignments we have been doing is that I have created a web-based storeroom for some of my teaching material. My wiki will come in handy, and I will continue to develop it to assist me in performing my job. The class I am currently enrolled is helping me acquaint myself with the programs and software. I am essentially paying an overseer to whip me into doing much more than I would in the event that creating a blog and wiki were completely voluntary. Thus I have a positive feeling about what I am working on right now. From the article I have come to conclude that the literature on this subject makes a distinction between assessment for learning and assessment of learning. Though I have just said that I am happy to be doing this, I am happy because I am forcing myself to adjust to external standards so that I may find a position where I continue my learning, help others learn and be able to support myself by working in the field of education. Throughout my post-secondary education I have had problems with the underlying contradiction between what common sense dictates and how standards assessment is presented. When a project is assigned to a student with the full understanding that their future opportunities are affected by the final assessment of that project, whatever conversation pedagogues entertain themselves with, maintaining learner intrinsic motivation is not going to happen. Whatever models are created to explain the problem of creating genuine enthusiasm, such as the positivist-constructivist dichotomy, the portfolio is still initially forced on the student or something done to students. How that student runs with it is the only thing that can really be measured. Since I entered the education system, I do not ever recall owning my learning. On the contrary, I have noticed how my mind has been systematically rewired to conform to the standards outlined by society in general. When being told to create an advertisement to sell myself, I always accepted it as just that. Whether I believed that I had been the main decision-maker or not was a moot point. In my opinion, there is no need to even ask if this is “deanware” or not. The statement that the portfolio should support an environment of reflection and collaboration is nice to read, but the very meaning of “should” betrays the truth of the matter. This being said, we have to do what we have to do. The primary motivation for me to fulfill the requirements of this assignment is rooted in complying with the standards of the education system within I am trying to find employment. The state education board, and the teaching faculty of our institution has created a rubric with which to assess pre-service teachers. This is not a bad thing. The statement that “I Just Did It it to Get it Done” is not a horrible thing to say. We all work and have families. Anyone with a strong sense of morality coming from whatever religious background would, I hope, say that they work so that they can be with their families. They work to live, and not live to work. To me, the entire argument stinks of corporate team development in sales where sales personal circle a room giving high fives and making claims of breaking their previous record this coming quarter. Bridging the gap between individual self-realization and external assessment is a slippery slope if not outright unobtainable. A culture of lifelong learning and professionalism are not things that we hope will manifest from nowhere. We all have to survive and just like all other living organisms, we have to adapt to outside pressures in order to survive. We have to keep learning to stay competitive and whatever it is we need to do in order to remain in good favor with our 21st guild, we have to do. If I need to construct a digital resume highlighting my competence in my field, then so be it. The truth is the more a student attempts to explore and pursue his or her goals while doing an assignment, the more that student has to work. To get by and regurgitate what the teacher obviously wants to hear, see, or read is infinitely easier than exploring ones interests while still fulfilling the requirements laid out. With all this taken into consideration, I am still energetic to get my wiki up and running. I plan to use the benefits of its construction this week in the ESL classes I am currently teaching. Because I am absolutely in love with language learning, this will be fun for me. I will be making an archive of my work that I can use in my classroom. In organizing it, I am working in an environment where I am creatively reflecting on my work for the past four years and creating my very own digital story. This is most likely providing me with a vehicle to grow metacognitively. I am having to make a decision on what direction I will start taking in making use of technology in the classroom. It is becoming more and more obvious that I have been confined to using generic tools, while I should be mastering the use of information technology to strengthen my teaching. I fear that using power point presentations is becoming outmoded. Regardless I have compiled thousands of images and made connections about the subject matter I will be teaching for the rest of my professional life. I am becoming more acquainted with the new face of education. I am working on improving my methods. I hope that I will later be able to share this with colleagues and receive constructive and specific feedback. With my work so accessible, I will most definitely receive feedback with substance and hopefully will have the wisdom to make the necessary adjustments.

Blog Reflection 2

I believe that Lori has captured the exact feeling that I had while doing the assignment. I was unbelievably frustrated with trying to embed my mapping. There is an interesting paradox between the justification for the extensive use of technology being that students want immediate results and the never-ending process of gaining a working understanding of the programs. While working on the idea map, I was in the same situation my students will be. I will be giving them assignments. Due to time constraints, I will not always be able to explain the advantages of mastering the skills they are learning and how later this will enrich their lives. The students often see the exercise as arbitrarily drawn up by the teacher in accordance with whatever belief he or she has. They want to finish the assignment and return to aspects of their lives they deem important. While working on the assignment, I simply want to finish this project and move along with my life. I fear that students will have the same reaction. No matter how we present education, like ourselves when we were younger, students see this as a chore and not a life-altering positive experience. On the other hand, there is the final result of feeling a sense of accomplishment in having done something for the first time. Thought the amount of time spent trying to complete the task may detract from other interests, everyone enjoys the feeling of completion. It is also incredibly important that our students face less of the anxiety some of us feel right now in using new technology. We grew up with transparencies, blackboards, notebooks and cassette tapes. We can still remember when we gawked at touch screens and tiny cellphones even if they did not have smart features, and let us not forget the magic of caller identification. How one week of instruction has changed my entire approach to searching for information on the web is a rather odd question. I believe that things change gradually and old habits die hard. It is my hope that after this class, I will have moved into a position where I make better use of technology in designing lessons and activities. The question raised in my mind is whether as a potential high school social studies teacher, I am expected to chuck the textbook, forget about the content and use my subject as a mere input for the expansion of technology courses. I am slightly opposed to the idea of discarding the emphasis on critical thinking skill for practical computer skills. If we want systems operators who merely follow protocol, then this is exactly what I will have to do.

Idea Mapping Educational Technology

Blog Reflection 1

After having completed the exercise, I have created my first blog page. Unfortunately for me, I am a bit of a technophobe. As listservs popped up, I noticed the entire dynamic of human interaction change drastically. I opted to avoid such discussions, especially when it was just as easy to discuss various subjects with people face to face. Social network sites such as Myspace and Facebook are supposedly meant to keep people in touch. With friends located all over the country and in other parts of the world, I should theoretically be in a situation to make use of these tools. Though I use skype to talk to my parents in Abu Dhabi, I have given up on Facebook. It focuses my energy on people far away to the detriment of my understanding of my immediate environs. To me it is a dangerous influence that causes me to be nostalgic and unwilling to consider the present and the future. In my opinion, there is also something rather lifeless about the discussions that take place on Facebook. This being considered, I sincerely doubt that my core beliefs about using this technology will change. On the other hand, as a Czech saying says, whose bread you eat, whose song you sing. This basically means that the sensible individual espouses the merits of whatever his or her benefactor espouses. Thus, I believe that it was meaningful use of my time and has opened my eyes to the possibility of using such technology to enhance the level of learning my students receive.

Writing down my personal philosophy of not only education, but also my stance on the role of technology allows me to consider the set of biases I hold and how I can change to meet the challenge of the 21st century. The potential for blogging is huge. One of the major concerns of my classes has been getting students to write. Pulling teeth in comparison seems to be a cake-walk. With students spending so much of their time typing random sentences here and there, this gives the students the opportunity to work on something a bit more substantial, but still in the environment they are more comfortable. In response to the article Stephen Downes wrote in 2004, I am extremely skeptical, but appreciative that he included Will Richardson more down-to-earth assessment. Downes uses the statements of fifth-graders from a Quebec City school to argue that students are receptive to a complete re-haul of the education system.When reading that an 11-year-old student wrote "the blogs give us a chance to communicate between us and motivate us to write more", large explosive flares go up. I cannot remember how many times I felt that teachers or administrators were trying to put words in my mouth for their own purposes. The great level of enthusiasm reported from students seems as authentic as teacher evaluations written before grades have been finalized.  Though I believe that students need to reach out and contact the rest of the world, I look around me now and see few adults bothering to consider the opinions of others.

The possible benefits are unimaginable and any theorizing in my opinion is mere baseless conjecture. What we know and most of us accept is as follows. It is imperative to help students and teachers make greater use of the technological tools available to reflect, learn and become part of larger communities. As Will Richardson states more and more teachers are employing blogs to communicate with students and their parents. Regardless of the evolution and the definition of blogs, they offer students, teachers and parents the opportunity to share ideas, opinions and suggestions. Instead of a lifeless webpage, the blog allows for more interaction. It also allows for continuous dissemination of related links and resources. The blogs help organize in-class discussion.  The nature of the discussion is markedly different though. Students are able to analyze their differences and similarities in a non-threating way. Blogs can be more than extra work. They can become the assignment itself. The programs available now are often free and extremely easy to use. As another fifth-grader states, the impact of the blogs on her day to day life is that she writes a lot more and a lot longer than the previous years. In addition, she pays closer attention to correct composition. In Mark Pilgrim's "Weblog Manifesto", the idea of writers yearning to write freely is presented.

Pilgrim either intentionally prepares for the counter-argument or accepts the heterogeneity of thought and concedes that those who feel neither impathy nor twinge of recognition for his words will not have the same high opinion of blogs. The darker side of what seems to be a flawless addition to education is added. How do we link the free environment with blogging with the restrictive environment of public education? Slip-ups are assured to occur and eventually students will not see the blogging as free at all. Another issue is the by Will Richardson's standards assigned blogging becomes contrived. Once the course is over, students will "drop blogging like wet cement". Blogging can also veer away from authentic and relevant conversation and become trivial. As a student, I can distinctly remember asking myself the question "Why am I doing this?" The answer invariable was that I have to, and if I do not I will be punished. Though I believe that blogging can bring education to life, how this process develops is impossible to predict. I strongly believe that in the near future the kinks will be worked out and blogging or another version of sharing will bring together the isolated learning that characterizes our school systems today and the rest of the world.

In addressing the coming changes within educational technology, Alan November lists six areas of change including perceived credibility of information on the internet, video surveillance of all classrooms, greater integration of the teaching community, the usefulness/uselessness of technology plans, informating instead of automating, and reorganization of the educational apparatus. The one change that alarms me the most and is the most understated aspect of technological integration is further widening the social inequality gap. Under the subtitle of automating vs. informating, November introduces the subject by mentioning Todd Oppenheimer's article in The Atlantic Monthly titled "The Computer Delusion". November wants to take this criticism and use it to support his stance that technology automaters are doing a disservice to the expansion of technology. A $2,000 pencil is still in essence a pencil. November argues that informating is concerned with creating an entirely new way of teaching that "builds capacity in every family for learning". He states that if technology is not infused into all families, the schools will help further widen the social inequality gap. From this line of thinking, one must wonder, who is going to provide each and every family with an up-to-date personal computer? While the government is handing out the money, could I also receive a free Apple? I personally cannot understand people when they say that technology will be an equalizer in society. As with the automobile, there are still people who cannot afford one. For those who do own or lease their own car, they are in the city of Dallas with which I am most familiar chained financially and metaphorically chained to the very machines that supposedly make their lives easier.

When November argues his opinion that every high school should require every student to take an entire online course, I am personally revolted. I remember having a conversation with an older gentleman about the outrageous cost of attending university. He posed the idea, why is it not online and why is it not free. The online courses seem to be coming, but the free element is nowhere to be seen. I see no difference in the cost of traditional tuition and online tuition. As an A student, I may be a very small eccentric minority, but all the same, I enjoy school not only for the matter-of-fact business to be attended to, but the human interaction. Elearning completely and categorically strips education of that human factor. If more than 50 percent of communication is non-verbal, one can read another's statement, but with no gestures to acknowledge, it is impossible to "read" someone. Another issue is public opinion of degrees obtained online. There is the real threat that students who work equally diligently online to obtain such degrees with face discrimination from those who received their degrees in the more conventional manner. From a friend of mine with seven years of teaching experience in the Houston ISD, I was told that the superintendent supported hiring teachers with degrees from only the top-rated Texas public universities. When one considers how this person will react to online degrees, my assumption is even more ominous.

Though I am a technophobe, I am also a realist. I strongly desire to help students prepare themselves for the challenges they will face. If I take the stance, that the new developments occurring within education technology are a mere fad, I do a horrible disservice to the very people I want to help. Limiting students because of personal prejudice is an odious injustice. Therefore, I will work hard to absorb as much as I can from the content and try to conceptualize how I will use this technology to improve the learning experience of my students. I want my students to take the information I present in class and apply it to the outside world. Equally important is that we bring the outside world with us in class discussion. The search for truth is the one pursuit I christen as holy. Whatever helps and enables my students and myself to forge ahead in this pursuit deserves its due recognition. Idealistically, I hope that after this course my suspicion and reservations are dismissed and I find myself a strong proponent of technology with a solid foundation for justifying its inclusion.  

The most fundamental question few openly answer is what the purpose of education is. America is without question a new experiment in a nation-less state with an ideologically-based identity. Though all the ethnic groups of the world are arguably mixed considering the migrations of people over time, nation-states around the world build their identity firstly around this characteristic. Since the Civil Rights Movement, the scientific racism and apologies for imperialism gave way to a shaky state-sanctioned program of inclusion in the name of making up for lost opportunities and de jure exclusion domestically. What we teach our students and what we omit are questions that confront teachers around the world from Saudi madrassas, Jewish religious schools, North Korean political science departments, and Harvard law classrooms.

The philosophy I adhere to is primarily realist with existentialist and re-constructivist sympathies and both an aversion and respect for pragmatism.  Simply put, I am a bitter idealist who sees institutional and practical constraints as the brakes placed on the wheels of individual self-realization.  My own education seems to come out of the idealist school. There was an emphasis on higher-level thinking, facts, ideas and the canon of knowledge concerning Western Civilization. These classics were taught to help students perform well on standardized tests that often cover such subjects. This also prepared students for university course work.

The search for truth, focus on self-realization, character development and moral growth were possible because of the high stakes involved. The high level of education of the parents, the high average incomes of the households and the general trend for parents to strive to help their children with their educations meant this philosophy could be put into practice. On the pyramid of needs, these students were free to address the top tier of self-realization. The holistic approach was sometimes annoyingly abstract, but the point was to keep the students thinking. Students were constantly asked to piece together connections between factors after in-depth analysis of the subject matter coming from lectures, research and projects. I agree that the model is elitist, but I think the reverence for such institutions as Ivy League education, Oxbridge tuition and other prestigious forms of education shows that our societal model is inherently elitist. Though the approach is considered bookish, my high school instruction prepared me so well for university coursework that I simply did not have to exert myself mentally until the fifth semester. The argument against such an in-depth approach makes me think of an image including cavemen drawing pictures of their action-packed hunts, scholars reading in the great library of Alexandria, and twenty-first century Americans either sitting in front of their thin-screen TVs watching football or mindlessly perusing the web on their slick laptops.  The cycle has come full circle.

               What I see as ideal is existentialism, but there still exists the problem of helping children grow up to be functional adults who can adapt to the demands of society and market forces, which do not always hold individuality high on their list of priorities. In my teaching, I try to incorporate reflective and metacognitive thinking, but I remain focused on what affects their lives in the form of assessment and graduation. In teaching history, I believe there should be an understanding of both the embellished version of a story and the sootier reality of the issue. Because I believe educational systems can stifle creativity and infringe on the development of individual maximization of talent, I want to improve this by allowing for more student input and leadership. On the other hand, once students have come to accept school as an institution that primarily decides what they can and cannot do according to behaviorist conditioning with rewards and punishments, giving the students free rein can be a disaster. Rather than embracing their newly-found freedom, some students simply play a game of discovering what limits the teacher will enforce by trial and error, which leads to nothing but disruption and wasted time. In theory I would love for my lessons to be 100% student-driven, but the problem is that by relying on their cues, I fear they will not coincidentally choose topics they will be responsible for on standardized testing.  In sum I believe that financial constraints make idealism untenable for state-supported schools. Societal pressures and market-driven corporate culture make instructing with the existentialist philosophy an act of defiance on the behalf of the teacher at the expense of the students’ futures.

               On the other side of my preferences are pragmatism and constructivism. I have taught high school and university students. Naturally-motivated students are not what I encountered every day. Real life situations are difficult to simulate in a 100-year-old classroom, and flexibility can be anathema to organization and understood expectations. Though I support a general education and experimentation, students face tests that determine their future. Diversified education is a good thing, but time constraints must be considered. Honestly, I think students should be in school until 8, 9, or 10 pm. I saw this in Korea and their standards are not at all behind ours. Plus plenty of social problems we have do not exist there at all. The criticism that pragmatism rejects traditional values in religion, ethics, and society makes me think what similar pressure would have existed during the Jim Crow Laws, Anti-Chinese Immigration Acts, the Indian Removal Act, and the McCarthy Era. Regardless of my preference for realism, I recognize the anointed position constructivism currently enjoys. Though I do believe in multiple representations of reality, and see oversimplifications as horrible concepts to disseminate, the suggestion of creating “authentic tasks in meaningful contexts” is rather abstract and ill-defined. The collaborative construction of knowledge through social negotiation and not through competition runs directly against the grain of our mainstream society that prides competition and individual perseverance.

Re-constructivism to me is both essential for this country to heal its wounds and possibly the greatest threat to freedom of expression. Every tightly-controlled state has tightly controlled historical interpretation. The mark of a free country in my perspective is the liberty to address the most controversial and divisive of topics with conflicting opinions given the same respect. Proponents of the opposing opinions must use logic and reason to reach a compromise of sorts or at least agree to disagree. Until this country lays out a codified list of state-sanctioned beliefs, God willing this day will never come, correcting social ills can be very tricky. The attempt to eradicate discrimination and make amends for ignoring subjects deliberately to justify dubious assumptions about society can lead to equally tyrannical demands of conformity.  For teachers to focus so much energy on convincing students of the need for change, training them to be social activists and petition the government, the political atmosphere of the country would have to be drastically different. It is my understanding that parents, citizens, policy makers and politicians do not believe that teachers are in a position to determine the beliefs that students are supposed to hold close to their hearts. All the same, I strongly support instructing students to pay attention to world issues and read literature from around the world.

               This leads me to the philosophy I identify with the most, realism. Perceived logic can easily lead to incorrect conclusions and what we think exists does not always exist. In order to gain as much understanding while simultaneously taking into account limitations, realists attempt to be as objective as possible.  Students are asked to deduce meaning from their observations and not to force previously conceived notions on the subject of their investigation. Students study systems, arrangements, order of processes and deduce theories about the relationships being observed. Though the scientific method may not be impeccable, it is the best model we currently have. Watered-down courses waste students’ time, mislead audiences, and result in meek outcomes. I do not like being a guinea pig. Thus I assume my students do not either. School, like work, must be goal-driven. People in whatever capacity work harder when they have a stake in the result and the goal is not obscure, convoluted, and based on the interests of someone out of touch with their realities. Though lectures seem to be out of vogue, I see lectures as productive, and when people do not have a frame of reference for a historical event such as the partition of India, it is best to give them some background information. With students who reliably read, this can be done as homework. With students who are a bit more recalcitrant, lecture may be the only input they receive concerning the facts and figures. The questions given on standardized tests measure students’ ability to use background information already stored to make logical assertions. If the students are not even remotely familiar with the topics, there is no way they will be receive positive marks. As out of vogue teacher-centered classrooms are, the research still states that teacher-talk-time has decreased only marginally regardless of concerted efforts to flip the ratio.  I try to use the teacher-centered classroom to mine as much student participation out of the students as possible. In my opinion, the best teacher walks the tight rope balancing a preconceived understanding of which directions the class should go and an ability to adapt to the personal needs and interests of the students authentically. It is this authenticity that cannot be trained for. This comes with luck, subconscious adaption and not only a lot of experience, but the intelligence to piece together the lessons of past failures and successes. 

               The critics of realism state the realist approach is inhuman, mundane, rigid, scientifically cold, and inherently classist. It also purportedly fails to consider the totality of man and overemphasizes hard work and discipline. This is where my opinions come forth. I face a wretched job market and accept that I will probably have to deal with pay cuts, that unemployment will probably rise, that I will possibly be added to its ranks, and that job skills are not well-matched with those of our educational system’s products. I think our country needs a large dose of realism. I have worked with a Spanish company and envied my coworkers who could take siestas. On the other hand, the high number of unemployment makes getting a job there a bit trickier. A Cypriot I knew used to tell me about the slow and leisurely pace of life in her homeland. They, like other EU members, are being forced to ask for bailouts. Other first world economies like France and Italy with their work ethic heavily tied to humane treatment are not doing as well as other economies with cultures based heavily on relationships of responsibility. As Americans, we face competition we have not seen since before the U.S. took its place as world hegemon. Our lifestyle, our status, our way of life depend on our ability to create the most innovative and effective system of education. We have a long way to go.

A great teacher cannot be defined in the way an acute triangle can. Teacher accountability and the obsession civil servants have concerning how to designate such wastes valuable time. A great teacher is one who when allowed the freedom to create a wonderful learning environment without restrictions, fulfills his or her duties. This is a vague, but I believe you cannot quantify success for this profession.  

The various needs I had as a student, a child, an adolescent, and a young man were met at different times by individual teachers who have affected me greatly. My second-grade teacher never allowed me to lazily just coast through class. Whether IQ testing has any justification or not, my scores at this time were extremely high. Being close to the bottom of the socio-economic barrel in such an elitist neighborhood can be overwhelming. She helped me gain the confidence to shine academically in an environment where my peers may have had wealthier family backgrounds, yet less developed cognitive skills. My high school English teacher helped me formulate reasonable and defensible arguments against draconian rules with faulty foundations. If we sincerely believe that the cultivation of democratic principles is the primary task of our state school systems, it is imperative that students be given a chance to construct their own arguments. At the university level, I had a wonderful German professor who pushed me to work harder on my German even though I had never visited the country and was taking advanced composition. The wealthy will always be able to pay for SAT prep courses, private tutors, and astronomically expensive university tuition fees. It is the talent that lies in the muck of lower-class and middle-class mediocrity that needs to be nurtured and unleashed.  

As a fifth grader, I can distinctly remember a teacher telling my friend that he would never amount to anything. Like myself, my friend had recently moved into the neighborhood from a less than an affluent area.  Our teacher seemed to be a self-designated inspector of appropriate character and thought. He made learning a matter of conflict. Regardless if I was interested in the subject matter, his legalist way of thinking only made me feel imprisoned in his classes. Thus, all learning from this teacher stopped. Trying to beat a sense of inferiority into an 11-year-old is simply despicable. In high school, I witnessed world history be butchered by a football coach who belongs in the recruiting office instead of the classroom. Some teachers respectfully admit their limits, while others brow beat their students into being afraid to ask questions.  I dreaded going to that class because instead of receiving anything insightful, I was forced to listen to football locker-room jokes for more than half the period. At university I remember another “teacher” who supposedly taught us intermediate German. The class met only twice a week, so his frequent cancellations amounted to theft. Though I resented his completely visible disdain for teaching practical German classes, I was aware that his career depended on publishing at the students’ expense in the hopes of raising university prestige. My ability to speak German was but a minor concern and their neglect was an unfortunate but unavoidable result. Lastly, there were my University of Texas professors. The head of my Czech department was in the process of resigning and relocating, and quite frankly could not be bothered.

The best teachers set the benchmark for what I need to become. The other teachers are the benchmark for what I should never become. I want to wake up and feel that if God is looking over my shoulder, he or she has nothing to criticize. I want to help people the way so many good people helped me. I want to be someone who makes students feel comfortable exploring ideas instead of rehashing the same stuff that has weakened our economy, made us the most obese nation on earth and the primary suspect in the humanity’s disastrous alteration of ecosystems. In lieu of my experience with the University of Texas, I want to be a teacher who remains loyal to his obligations by being a helpful mentor even when the district is about to start lay-offs, even when my coordinator is in a bad mood, or there are family problems at home. A professional, like a soldier does not allow these factors to influence his or her performance. Teaching and waging war are both in the interests of the entire population of a state. Thus a fitting synonym for teachers are warriors fighting ignorance and helplessness.

The reason for my desire to become a teacher can be looked at cynically or romantically. Within our own society, there is the saying that if you can’t do anything, then teach, and if you can’t teach, teach at the university level. Having taught at the university level, maybe I fit in both the former and the latter. The romantic perspective of my choice of profession is that I hope to take the information I have accrued and help students think critically, avoid oversimplification and grapple with the complexities of this world so that we may advance as a people, a nation and more importantly a species. From questioning rampant cultural bigotry in Korea, the foundation of institutional racism toward the Roma in the Czech Republic to my Saudi students’ perceived need for the destruction of Israel, I have tried to instill in student’s a notion of world community.

I personally consider myself passionate, approachable, and willing to walk the extra mile for students.

As a prospective social studies teacher, I want my students to learn that the black and white painting of the world they have been presented is a far cry from reality. I want my students to think for themselves, create their own opinions and most importantly be able to back up those opinions with logical arguments regardless if they resemble my own opinion. The goal is to help students regardless of their beliefs be able to stand by their assertions, yet be able to accept constructive criticism. Another goal in teaching history would be to make students recognize that their understanding of the wider world is riddled with huge holes in the hopes of prompting them to learn more and more. Many adults become complacent with ignorance. No one at the age of 17 has a firm and intricate understanding of the world. Only in the curious days of our adolescence do we care to find out more information. Upon receiving the never-ending list of responsibilities that accompany adulthood, many simply learn what they have to and call it a day.

Pedagogical research seems to have produced many new and innovating theories, yet the quality of our education in our age of information has progressively plummeted. With this understanding, I accept the works of prominent scholars, yet try to be as practical as possible. Each individual is different. Every group of individuals interacts differently. Teachers need to be able to adapt to these ever-changing circumstances and avoid applying theories to entire groups with the justification that it is new and research-based. If the students want activities, give them the opportunity to enjoy their learning. If the class is not as interested and the group work is more of a hokey experiment in cooperative learning than a genuine method of instruction, I will revert to what they know. Teachers are not omnipotent beings that can convince students at all times that their lessons are designed to enrich the students’ lives.  Experimentation is great, but having been a student, I prefer not to be used as a guinea pig. It did not make me feel more respect for my teacher’s ability. It simply made me distrust the teacher’s sincerity.

It is worth noting that I have made no conscious decision to study technology. As a youth, I poked fun at my friends who spent hours playing video games. The sad truth is that the people who isolated themselves from society and lived out their lives through avatars proved to be at the forefront of our new age. Working with glorified chalkboards, I find myself in a catch 22. We need to use more technology because the students do not respond the same as they used to. Bombarded by images, videos, podcasts and other blips, students need more technological interaction. The question is whether teachers have become sales representatives for Microsoft, Apple or other technology-based companies instead of distributors of knowledge. Realistically I have heard over and over again that we need to incorporate technology into the classroom. One funny consequence of this at one of my schools was that we had a smart projector sitting in the corner of the classroom because it interfered with the lesson. As a university lecturer in the Czech Republic, I noticed that whatever technical skills an American educator could have, it would not matter in an environment with 20-year-old computers intermittently running on XP without Microsoft Office, and not enough money to fix the copy machine, from which the students get their texts. American school districts dole out more and more cash on technology while firing teachers. Logically, some teachers will see themselves replaced by written programs in the next fifty years, yet all are judged according to their “correct” incorporation of technology in their classes.  To appease these pressures, I try to be an informator instead of an automator. I want the addition to have a purpose and not simply be an exercise in teacher technological competence. Another pressing issue is to help students understand which sources are reliable and which are simply drivel written in the heat of the moment by an individual with no desire to back up his or her theories. The technological addition has to help students cross the bridge to understanding. As a teacher, I need to be aware of changing trends, standards and norms. Time is always an issue in classrooms and if technology supports the biggest bang for their buck, then I use it.

Facing the problem of educating our multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic and class oriented society, I base my methodology around realism. I see the situation here in the United States tipping into an abyss most of us are not ready to accept. With the world transforming exponentially at a rate no generation before us can even fathom, change is essential. The question is what kind of change. When we consider the state of our nation and our species, whatever methods have been employed in the past have created the society we live in today.  Far from perfect these methods need some alteration. The problem is when teachers obsequiously follow trends in education and neglect the actual work of educating. In my own teaching, I constantly consider how I compare to the most effective of my former teachers and the most ineffective of them. The most pertinent problem I face is that there is no precedent for the incorporation of technology. With this stated, I will stand on the sidelines and let the more dare-devilish of teachers do the experimentation, yet I will accept their findings and change my practices appropriately.