"PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely"

Tufte (2003) famously said "Power corrupts; PowerPoint corrupts absolutely." I find myself among these critics who feel that PowerPoint can ruin an educational experience. Our textbook mentions that many people believe PowerPoint "makes people focus on the slides, rather than the message." I have absolutely found this to be true.

Though the theory of using PowerPoint in education is valid and having information presented visually while a teacher is discussing does have advantages for students to see and hear information, I often find that, as a student, I have to choose whether to listen to the teacher or read the slides. This is not a choice that students should have to make. The slides and the teacher's presentation should support each other, giving students the opportunity to process the message of the lesson, instead of feeling the need to choose: slides or teacher?

A teacher should be very careful when deciding what to put in a PowerPoint presentation. It should support his/her lesson and message without distracting students from valuable engagement with the teacher and classroom discussion. I have rarely seen this done well, but appreciate so much when a teacher understands how PowerPoint can truly enhance a classroom experience instead of detract.

Wikipedia, My Love

There has been a lot of discussion lately about whether or not Wikipedia is a valid research resource in the classroom. I've spent a lot of time ping-ponging back and forth on this subject, truly understanding both sides of the court: Wikipedia is useful, constantly updated and contains more information than any text or scholarly source; or, conversely, Wikipedia is not moderated or reviewed by academic controllers, making the information unreliable.

After considering both these points, here is where I've landed on the question of whether or not I would allow Wikipedia as a source of research in my classroom: yes, as long as there are other sources too.

I love Wikipedia. It constantly feeds my curiosity about different and varied subjects. Since it is constantly edited and reviewed by people like me (regular people!), the information provides perspectives from thousands of writers and contributors. There are more articles on Wikipedia than in any print encyclopedia and more are constantly added. Additionally, scholarly sources are cited and linked to at the bottom of many pages, making it a great place to find articles and texts written by experts in different fields.

I know it has its limitations in academia. You can't ever be 100% sure that what you're reading is accurate, but I have faith in the system of Wikipedia and its contributors. I wouldn't want to discourage Wikipedia use in my classroom because I want my students to love learning the way that Wikipedia allows you to. So yes, I would allow it as a source as long as other sources (from textbooks, peer-reviewed articles, etc.) were also included.

Stanford Study Shows Texting Parents Gets Results for Preschoolers

I recently read this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/to-help-language-skills-of-children-a-study-finds-text-their-parents-with-tips.html?ref=education&_r=0

It talks about a study done by researchers at Stanford University that showed how sending text messages with tips and advice to parents led to better results in pre-schoolers' reading evaluations than by students whose parents did not receive the text messages.

The messages said things like: "Let your child hold the book. Ask what it is about. Follow the words with your finger as you read." Which reminded the parents to take a few moments with their children to show them some reading skills. It made a huge difference.

I think this is so creative and inexpensive. What a neat way to help your students build literacy in their homes with their parents. Research has always shown that interaction in the home and exposure to varied vocabulary helps students learn to read.

Media Literacy vs. TV Production

The reason I'm getting certified to teach is so that I can teach "Media Literacy" in high schools. I often tell people that I want to teach "TV Production" because that is a term with which they are more familiar, but the class I want to teach is very different than many "TV Production" classes in high schools today.

Many of these classes as they exist now involve putting together a daily news show, where students learn to use cameras, editing software, teleprompters, microphones and other media technology. I would keep with this tradition, but would dedicate a large portion of class time to identifying messages in media and the ways that they are communicated. We would watch short films, music videos, ads, YouTube videos, etc. and identify what the author is trying to communicate and how they are communicating.

We would study sound, editing, acting, production design, costume and make-up, cinematography and have a study on writing and directing in order to discover how these elements combine to help communicate messages in the medium.

Then, having gained a better understanding of communicating messages in media, students would create videos of their own, demonstrating command of these elements in communicating a message of their choosing. These could be incorporated into news blips for the daily news show or exist independently of this program.

Students would leave this class with a better understanding not only of the technology used to create video, but other various tools at their disposal to put their unique voice into the media they create. They would also be more aware of messages in all media they consume, helping them to be more informed viewers, more active members in the media and more independent thinkers.

Technology in the Classroom

One major difference between my schooling experience and what is available in classrooms today is the technology used on a daily basis. The days of the overhead projector are gone. Many schools have digital projectors in each classroom. This is great news for me, as I hope to be a Media Literacy teacher. I would used the computer and projector daily to show students videos and clips from movies, television and advertisements. Without this new technology in the classroom, these lessons would not be possible.

However, not all school districts have the resources needed to have this technology in the classroom. I'm curious to hear from my fellow students: if a school district had to choose between using a certain amount of funding for installing projectors in the classroom OR funding a more robust physical education program, what choice would you make and why?

Video Games

Earlier this week, I stumbled upon an article from the American Psychological Association. It describes a study that found video games, especially first-person shooter video games "may strengthen a range of cognitive skills such as spatial navigation, reasoning, memory and perception."

The article further posits: "This has critical implications for education and career development, as previous research has established the power of spatial skills for achievement in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.”

I personally find this data exciting and energizing. As a student, I never understood why learning couldn't be more fun. When teachers take the time to explore the technology available to them and apply it in the classroom, students respond.

These findings show teachers that using fun, engaging technology can help students develop and cement spatial skills. These tools could help interest more students in science, technology, engineering and math. Done right, this could also be useful in bridging a gender gap in these areas.

What do you think of this study, fellow students?

My First Post

Hello technology class!

My name is Asia and I'm delighted to share this blog with you. I hope we can learn from each other's posts and develop skills in educational technology that will make us all better educators for today's students.

Happy November!

Asia