I am just checking to see if my blog now leaves my pic when I reply. This is something my hubby taught me to do, so any questions ask him definitely not me.
The guidance for this came in the form of discussing the material, what questions do I have for my classmates, use the discussion questions in ICEK as a guide. Pretty general; I don't do well with general.
Questions at the end of Ch 6:
Is it right to break into someone's computers? Would you do it just to learn how they work?
No. No. Using something that is not yours without permission is tantamount to stealing. Theft of service is mentioned as a crime.
When is it OK to break into a computer? Whose computers would it be OK to hack into?
My first thought is "never". Then the question of our national security comes up. If the CIA got a tip that plans for a 911-like attack were on a computer in the Iranian defense department, would it be OK for a government white hat to hack in and see? The answers get a little fuzzier when the issue is In My Back Yard.
What are your cyber-ethical beliefs on breaking into computers?
Generally, all hacking is wrong. When theft of services or damage to a web site are involved, hacking is wrong. The question about US national security still troubles me. It brings to mind what Winston Churchill had to do with regard to the British city of Coventry during WW II. The Allies had gotten their hands on the Axis decoding box & called it Enigma. With this machine, the Allies could decode all Axis radio traffic. The Allies uncovered a plan to bomb the city of Coventry. Churchill had to decide: evacuate Coventry and let the Axis powers know we can hear them? Or let Coventry be bombed and keep using Enigma to the Allies' advantage? He let Coventry get bombed. I wonder what the outcome of WW II would have been had the Allies given away their possession and use of Enigma. Consider this when ruling out all hacking.
What if by messing around on the Internet, you accidentally broke into a company's computer. What would you do about it? What if you were caught? How would you prove it was an accident?
Key word is "messing around". Children are not neurologically well-developed enough to envision potential trouble. They call adults doom and gloom when we adjure them to take care. They just want to have fun. This is why children need very careful supervision while on the Internet. Computers should be in an area where parents can easily see what their child is doing. Parents should limit the time their children spend on the Internet. If a child "accidentally" hacked into a company's computer and isn't sure how they did it, they should immediately tell their parents. The parents should call the police. Being up front about mistakes is better than trying to hide the mistake; this makes it look like you had bad motives. If the company does contact the authorities, armed with the family's up-front admission of error, the police could offer the explanation and offer to contact the family. I'm not sure a child could prove the hack was a mistake, though. Confessing up front is the best insurance.
If you are in someone else's computer and accidentally caused damage through a mistake, what would you do?
Tell them immediately. But, back up. I hope the child has permission to use that computer. I hope the owner and said child borrowee agreed on who is responsible for problems should they occur on your watch. The child would say "gloom and doom, nothing's going to happen!" When it does, no one is a winner. Unless agreement is reached beforehand, and put in writing, the owner is responsible for what happens on his computer. No one wins.
Most computers are not used all the time. Do you have a right to use some else's computer as long as they are not using it....and you do not keep them from using it?
Same as above. A person MUST have permission from the owner before using their machine. In addition, agreement must be reached as to who is responsible for all that goes on with the computer.
Generally, I have no issues or questions about computers and their use. They are tools for our use, to us more efficient. Computers should not become our masters. A person could spend endless hours tweaking a PowerPoint presentation. People DO spend endless hours in on-line chat rooms. People ARE addicted to computer games. People CAN become addicted to surfing the net/shopping. No addict is going to come forward without a crisis: interference with job, conflict in relationships, financial problems, health problems. This includes computer addicts. If anyone out there thinks they may have a problem, no kidding, make an appointment with a mental health professional. L
In Germany, it is illegal to have a gun outside of a shooting/hunting club; all guns stay locked up. If a person wants to harm another person, they must do it hands-on and risk harm themselves. Not so with a computer or a gun. They both can do horrible damage from a distance that allows the shooter or hacker to be emotionally distant from the damage they do. But such is NOT the case with the antagonist, Phate, in "The Blue Nowhere". He uses the computer as a tool to get a person close enough to him so he can enjoy killing them in a VERY hands-on manner.
With every technology man has developed have come ethical dilemas. Just because we CAN doesn't necessarily mean we SHOULD. Gak should never use his rock or club to kill his tribe-mates in anger. Phate shouldn't hack to find and set up his victims. Does this mean that Wyatt Gillette isn't allowed to hack in order to bring Phate to justice? The situation seems to boil down to motivation. Why was Gak mad at Zog? For being a better rock thrower? Or trying to have sex with Gak's daughter? Which would justify the skull splitting? What justifies hacking? It boils down to morivation: legal vs illegal, moral vs immoral...but who gets to decide what's moral? That is what this class is all about, deciding what is good and bad...at least on computers.
The true hacker is a sad, out of balance character. He seems obsessed with cyberspace, spending every possible waking hour online seeing how things work and what he can do. Gillette said the line between cyberspace and reality gets a little fuzzy sometimes. These true hackers remind me of another out-of-balance, brilliantly talented man, Vincent Van Gogh, who said, "It is only too true that a lot of artists are mentally ill--it's a life which, to put it mildly, makes one an outsider. I'm alright when I completely immerse myself in work, but I'll always remain half crazy."
Of Phate, Deaver writes, "This was his reality, the world inside his monitor." Phate was comfortable, at home on the net like Van Gogh was with his painting. Both lives ended tragically. L
1) Computer technology itself. What we do with light and electrons is amazing. And Wyatt Gillette says we're moving toward "molecular electronics". What is that?!
2) The tenacity of these hackers. Are their lives so empty they have to fill it with keystrokes? Read a book, join a club, work out, play cards with friends, get a pet, get a job, GET A LIFE!!!
Afraid of:
1) The tenacity of these hackers. They, by God!, get in and do some technologically amazing stuff. I hope my cyber-stuff remains unappealing.
2) The range of hackers' abilities. Hacking into defense computers, emergency response networks, hospital information...this is scary!
Angry about:
1) Hackers' cowardice. They use their talent to insulate themselves from everyone, even each other.
2) A white hat has to learn to think like a black hat. Forcing good people to look at and respond to deliberate, senseless damage hurts people.
3) Lack of limits to content on the internet. All manner of sexual situations can be offered visually on the net.
4) Virus writers can't be found and prosecuted. Could it be they have turned their destructive practice into a living? Could it be that virus writers are the ones who write the anti-virus programs?
5) Parents who let their children spend hours on the net unsupervised. They are removing the limits parents should provide to protect their children. Yes, children protest, but they don't have the brain development to conceive that their parents might be right!!! L
22 June 2007 Ed Tech Articles Blog #1: How Teachers View Technology
The article shows that 99% of teachers surveyed have computers at school; 96% have them at home. This shows the life-long, or continuing, learner inside a teacher!! We're willing to try new approaches and make the best of the resources we're allowed. I could use computers in my classroom if I had them at a 2:1 student to machine ratio. Any more students on a machine is in the "too hard" box. It's heartening to hear teachers express satisfaction with their hard- and software; we just need more of it. I truly believe computers can enhance student learning in the classroom, but there is no substitute for the "warm body" in the room. The Army tried distance learning before everyone else and they dropped it for this very reason. L
22 June 2007 Ed Tech Articles Blog #2: In Classroom, Computers Often Yield More Glitz Than Guts
Just like adults learning to use technology, students need to learn to use technology. At first we want to see what the computer can do, all the bells and whistles. If, like the students who did the tiger presentation, we get stuck in the weeds of special effects, layout, font, etc., we have wasted our time. At the close of the article the author reflects on the reason for using computers; it comes down to us wanting our students to “think in newer, deeper ways”. We have to teach them the difference between content and special effects. Our rubrics for projects should demand more content and fewer effects. Technology should serve us, we should not let technology become the master.
22 June 2007 Ed Tech Articles Blog #3: The Internet Safety Debate
Children "negotiate" with their parents to set rules about using the internet. Negotiate. With parents. Perhaps parents' abdication of their role as adult rule-setters is contributing mightily to danger on the net. There is no other way to protect a child than to have a responsible adult who loves them to supervise them while on the net. This is the way for children to learn to "deal with the net as it is". Because schools are full of children who have few boundaries outside of school, they must block websites. Bottom line is this: if you want your child safe, supervise them directly or do not have the internet at home. The article mentioned the "minor inconvenience" of supervising children. The investment in a child's safety should never be considered an inconvenience. Be a parent or don't have the net. L
Leadership. Do community and district leaders think student fluency with technology is important? This is what the issue of digital division boils down to. If it’s important, school districts will make a place for technology education. What type of technology education? Computer-delivered content-area modules? Keyboarding? Excel? PowerPoint? Internet website construction? Writing programs? Leaders need to decide, rationalize, and implement.
As a society, we have to ask ourselves which areas of computer capability are most essential in the work place. Right away we see a wide variety of jobs requiring a wide variety of computer skills. We need to identify once and for all who is responsible for computer training: parents, school, or workplace? This article said 15% of teachers have had at least 9 hours of computer training. If on- or before-the-job training is the place, communities and their school boards need to institute more training for their teachers. If schools are the place, communities and their school boards need to find room in their curricula, maybe extend the school day. They also need to provide transportation for students who need to stay after school to make-up missed work. Home? No. Not enough homes have computers and fluent adults and time.
Urban families have a much lower percentage of internet access in homes. Should governments provide computers with internet access to families who don’t have it? Where do we draw the line between unhealthy choices individuals make and the obligation of the government? As a society, we have to decide how important it is for everyone to have a computer with internet access. We decided at some point that when homes are sold they must have a refrigerator and stove. Will the day come when computers are the same way?
#2 Laptops, Handhelds, or Tablet PC’s?
Quote from article: Calling laptops "a transforming vehicle for our grade 5-8 curriculum," Pamela Livingston, head of technology at The Peck School in Morristown, New Jersey, says the secret to success with laptops at her school was a strong preparation years earlier in the K-4 technology program.
Most teachers in this article cited the laptop as best for their school setting. I agree. Their similarity to a desktop eliminates the need for training. Their size makes monitoring students easier. Laptops need to be returned to their power source to recharge; accountability is easier, too. The handheld computers facilitate “collaboration”. Among students it could be called cheating. Handheld sets are too small to make monitoring students anything but a headache. Their small size also makes them easier to lose or be stolen. I don’t even know what a Tablet is, so am unable to comment.
Pamela Livingston shows insight when she notes that “strong preparation years earlier in the K-4 technology program” was the key to “transforming” their 5-8 curriculum. I’d like to know what they taught and how they taught it. Learning the basics of a word-processing program, how to type, very basic PowerPoint should be part of that “strong preparation”.
#3 Desktop Videoconferencing: Novelty or Legitimate Teaching Tool?
Like the calculator, typewriter, tape recorder, and television, videoconferencing can be either a distraction or a learning tool. In EIA, Quinn says each advance in technology brings its own double-edged sword of good and bad.
SOME BENEFITS OF VIDEOCONFERENCING In addition to bringing experts into the classroom, interactive videoconferencing has other benefits. · Videoconferencing appeals to students' different learning styles; students who are visual and auditory learners can benefit. Brain research indicates people learn better when taught in their preferred learning style. Using VC would include the concrete and auditory learners. · Using the technology allows multiple classrooms at various locations to collaborate while learning about other cultures from primary sources. Using VC as a virtual field trip would save money. Collaboration with peers in other locations brings a positive form of peer pressure to perform well. · Videoconferencing increases many students' motivation to learn. The only novelty should exist in VC being another teaching pathway. When a definite purpose is set, students can be stimulated by the VC, yet move purposefully through their learning goals. · Students are able to practice and improve their presentation and communication skills. Ironically, computer-style communication is blamed for our students’ poor writing and verbal communication skills! Instant messaging, chat rooms and email are full of sentence fragment and sound bytes, all abbreviated with a few letters or emoticons. “What goes around comes around.” Here we have technology remediating a technologically rooted problem. · Students improve their research skills as they prepare for the conferences. The human fear of failure is strong! Failing in front of those we want to impress is one of the worst experiences we can imagine! If students have clear guidelines for their presentation, they WILL carry it off in the best way they can! · Students practice graphing and other skills as they create pictures, graphs, or drawings on whiteboards for use during videoconferences. All content areas can use VC. Any visual aid constructed to enhance learning addresses the concrete and visual learners. Students will learn how they need to make visuals for a presentation, which is different from a visual on standard sized paper. The higher-level thinking skill of compare and contrast will serve them well in life.
Deception, lying, manipulation, stealing. SELFISHNESS. These are the reasons we have to write and read books like Ethics for the Information Age. People don’t have things they want, so they pursue them through dishonest means: hacking, phreaking, flaming, voyeurism, pornography. Blaise Pascal, mathematician and philosopher, commented that all people have a God-shaped hole inside them. They try to fill this hole with all kinds of things and remain hungry, unfulfilled. Only an authentic relationship with the God Who created them will satisfy this longing. If all the hackers, phreaks, on-line predators, and porn addicts would turn to the God Who loves them and try living His way, we would have very few laws, few people who break them, and need very few jails. Simple, but the SELFISHNESS is a powerful force. We want, and we want, we take and we take, but remain unsatisfied. We take more. We refuse to believe the wisest man of all time who said, “He who loves money will not be satisfied with money, nor he who loves abundance with its income. This too is vanity. When good things increase, those who consume them increase. So what is the advantage to their owners except to look on?” Expecting material things to satisfy us is like drinking seawater, it leaves us even more parched. Internet/information abusers are starving for meaning in their lives, maybe even happiness. Happiness is not a goal, however; it is a by-product of a well-lived life. The best-lived life is based on the example of Jesus. Not Kant, not utilitarian philosophy, not relativism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Islam, Kabala, wiccan. God, the Maker.
12 comments:
Hey, Luanne! I found you with no problem. Stac
You are so good, Luanne! I found you, too!
Kris
I am just checking to see if my blog now leaves my pic when I reply. This is something my hubby taught me to do, so any questions ask him definitely not me.
Luanne,
I'm soooo proud of you!! You did it!!! Yahoo! Lori
The guidance for this came in the form of discussing the material, what questions do I have for my classmates, use the discussion questions in ICEK as a guide. Pretty general; I don't do well with general.
Questions at the end of Ch 6:
Is it right to break into someone's computers? Would you do it just to learn how they work?
No. No. Using something that is not yours without permission is tantamount to stealing. Theft of service is mentioned as a crime.
When is it OK to break into a computer? Whose computers would it be OK to hack into?
My first thought is "never". Then the question of our national security comes up. If the CIA got a tip that plans for a 911-like attack were on a computer in the Iranian defense department, would it be OK for a government white hat to hack in and see? The answers get a little fuzzier when the issue is In My Back Yard.
What are your cyber-ethical beliefs on breaking into computers?
Generally, all hacking is wrong. When theft of services or damage to a web site are involved, hacking is wrong. The question about US national security still troubles me. It brings to mind what Winston Churchill had to do with regard to the British city of Coventry during WW II. The Allies had gotten their hands on the Axis decoding box & called it Enigma. With this machine, the Allies could decode all Axis radio traffic. The Allies uncovered a plan to bomb the city of Coventry. Churchill had to decide: evacuate Coventry and let the Axis powers know we can hear them? Or let Coventry be bombed and keep using Enigma to the Allies' advantage? He let Coventry get bombed. I wonder what the outcome of WW II would have been had the Allies given away their possession and use of Enigma. Consider this when ruling out all hacking.
What if by messing around on the Internet, you accidentally broke into a company's computer. What would you do about it? What if you were caught? How would you prove it was an accident?
Key word is "messing around". Children are not neurologically well-developed enough to envision potential trouble. They call adults doom and gloom when we adjure them to take care. They just want to have fun. This is why children need very careful supervision while on the Internet. Computers should be in an area where parents can easily see what their child is doing. Parents should limit the time their children spend on the Internet. If a child "accidentally" hacked into a company's computer and isn't sure how they did it, they should immediately tell their parents. The parents should call the police. Being up front about mistakes is better than trying to hide the mistake; this makes it look like you had bad motives. If the company does contact the authorities, armed with the family's up-front admission of error, the police could offer the explanation and offer to contact the family. I'm not sure a child could prove the hack was a mistake, though. Confessing up front is the best insurance.
If you are in someone else's computer and accidentally caused damage through a mistake, what would you do?
Tell them immediately. But, back up. I hope the child has permission to use that computer. I hope the owner and said child borrowee agreed on who is responsible for problems should they occur on your watch. The child would say "gloom and doom, nothing's going to happen!" When it does, no one is a winner. Unless agreement is reached beforehand, and put in writing, the owner is responsible for what happens on his computer. No one wins.
Most computers are not used all the time. Do you have a right to use some else's computer as long as they are not using it....and you do not keep them from using it?
Same as above. A person MUST have permission from the owner before using their machine. In addition, agreement must be reached as to who is responsible for all that goes on with the computer.
Generally, I have no issues or questions about computers and their use. They are tools for our use, to us more efficient. Computers should not become our masters. A person could spend endless hours tweaking a PowerPoint presentation. People DO spend endless hours in on-line chat rooms. People ARE addicted to computer games. People CAN become addicted to surfing the net/shopping. No addict is going to come forward without a crisis: interference with job, conflict in relationships, financial problems, health problems. This includes computer addicts. If anyone out there thinks they may have a problem, no kidding, make an appointment with a mental health professional. L
Blog #1 for "The Blue Nowhere"
In Germany, it is illegal to have a gun outside of a shooting/hunting club; all guns stay locked up. If a person wants to harm another person, they must do it hands-on and risk harm themselves. Not so with a computer or a gun. They both can do horrible damage from a distance that allows the shooter or hacker to be emotionally distant from the damage they do. But such is NOT the case with the antagonist, Phate, in "The Blue Nowhere". He uses the computer as a tool to get a person close enough to him so he can enjoy killing them in a VERY hands-on manner.
With every technology man has developed have come ethical dilemas. Just because we CAN doesn't necessarily mean we SHOULD. Gak should never use his rock or club to kill his tribe-mates in anger. Phate shouldn't hack to find and set up his victims. Does this mean that Wyatt Gillette isn't allowed to hack in order to bring Phate to justice? The situation seems to boil down to motivation. Why was Gak mad at Zog? For being a better rock thrower? Or trying to have sex with Gak's daughter? Which would justify the skull splitting? What justifies hacking? It boils down to morivation: legal vs illegal, moral vs immoral...but who gets to decide what's moral? That is what this class is all about, deciding what is good and bad...at least on computers.
The true hacker is a sad, out of balance character. He seems obsessed with cyberspace, spending every possible waking hour online seeing how things work and what he can do. Gillette said the line between cyberspace and reality gets a little fuzzy sometimes. These true hackers remind me of another out-of-balance, brilliantly talented man, Vincent Van Gogh, who said, "It is only too true that a lot of artists are mentally ill--it's a life which, to put it mildly, makes one an outsider. I'm alright when I completely immerse myself in work, but I'll always remain half crazy."
Of Phate, Deaver writes, "This was his reality, the world inside his monitor." Phate was comfortable, at home on the net like Van Gogh was with his painting. Both lives ended tragically. L
Blog #2 for the first half of "The Blue Nowhere"
Fascinated by:
1) Computer technology itself. What we do with light and electrons is amazing. And Wyatt Gillette says we're moving toward "molecular electronics". What is that?!
2) The tenacity of these hackers. Are their lives so empty they have to fill it with keystrokes? Read a book, join a club, work out, play cards with friends, get a pet, get a job, GET A LIFE!!!
Afraid of:
1) The tenacity of these hackers. They, by God!, get in and do some technologically amazing stuff. I hope my cyber-stuff remains unappealing.
2) The range of hackers' abilities. Hacking into defense computers, emergency response networks, hospital information...this is scary!
Angry about:
1) Hackers' cowardice. They use their talent to insulate themselves from everyone, even each other.
2) A white hat has to learn to think like a black hat. Forcing good people to look at and respond to deliberate, senseless damage hurts people.
3) Lack of limits to content on the internet. All manner of sexual situations can be offered visually on the net.
4) Virus writers can't be found and prosecuted. Could it be they have turned their destructive practice into a living? Could it be that virus writers are the ones who write the anti-virus programs?
5) Parents who let their children spend hours on the net unsupervised. They are removing the limits parents should provide to protect their children. Yes, children protest, but they don't have the brain development to conceive that their parents might be right!!! L
22 June 2007 Ed Tech Articles
Blog #1: How Teachers View Technology
The article shows that 99% of teachers surveyed have computers at school; 96% have them at home. This shows the life-long, or continuing, learner inside a teacher!! We're willing to try new approaches and make the best of the resources we're allowed. I could use computers in my classroom if I had them at a 2:1 student to machine ratio. Any more students on a machine is in the "too hard" box. It's heartening to hear teachers express satisfaction with their hard- and software; we just need more of it. I truly believe computers can enhance student learning in the classroom, but there is no substitute for the "warm body" in the room. The Army tried distance learning before everyone else and they dropped it for this very reason. L
22 June 2007 Ed Tech Articles
Blog #2: In Classroom, Computers Often Yield More Glitz Than Guts
Just like adults learning to use technology, students need to learn to use technology. At first we want to see what the computer can do, all the bells and whistles. If, like the students who did the tiger presentation, we get stuck in the weeds of special effects, layout, font, etc., we have wasted our time. At the close of the article the author reflects on the reason for using computers; it comes down to us wanting our students to “think in newer, deeper ways”. We have to teach them the difference between content and special effects. Our rubrics for projects should demand more content and fewer effects. Technology should serve us, we should not let technology become the master.
22 June 2007 Ed Tech Articles
Blog #3: The Internet Safety Debate
Children "negotiate" with their parents to set rules about using the internet. Negotiate. With parents. Perhaps parents' abdication of their role as adult rule-setters is contributing mightily to danger on the net. There is no other way to protect a child than to have a responsible adult who loves them to supervise them while on the net. This is the way for children to learn to "deal with the net as it is". Because schools are full of children who have few boundaries outside of school, they must block websites. Bottom line is this: if you want your child safe, supervise them directly or do not have the internet at home. The article mentioned the "minor inconvenience" of supervising children. The investment in a child's safety should never be considered an inconvenience. Be a parent or don't have the net. L
Module 3 Blogs for Ed Tech Articles
Ed Tech Articles for MOD #3
#1 Debate Rages Over ‘Digital Divide’
Leadership. Do community and district leaders think student fluency with technology is important? This is what the issue of digital division boils down to. If it’s important, school districts will make a place for technology education. What type of technology education? Computer-delivered content-area modules? Keyboarding? Excel? PowerPoint? Internet website construction? Writing programs? Leaders need to decide, rationalize, and implement.
As a society, we have to ask ourselves which areas of computer capability are most essential in the work place. Right away we see a wide variety of jobs requiring a wide variety of computer skills. We need to identify once and for all who is responsible for computer training: parents, school, or workplace? This article said 15% of teachers have had at least 9 hours of computer training. If on- or before-the-job training is the place, communities and their school boards need to institute more training for their teachers. If schools are the place, communities and their school boards need to find room in their curricula, maybe extend the school day. They also need to provide transportation for students who need to stay after school to make-up missed work. Home? No. Not enough homes have computers and fluent adults and time.
Urban families have a much lower percentage of internet access in homes. Should governments provide computers with internet access to families who don’t have it? Where do we draw the line between unhealthy choices individuals make and the obligation of the government? As a society, we have to decide how important it is for everyone to have a computer with internet access. We decided at some point that when homes are sold they must have a refrigerator and stove. Will the day come when computers are the same way?
#2 Laptops, Handhelds, or Tablet PC’s?
Quote from article: Calling laptops "a transforming vehicle for our grade 5-8 curriculum," Pamela Livingston, head of technology at The Peck School in Morristown, New Jersey, says the secret to success with laptops at her school was a strong preparation years earlier in the K-4 technology program.
Most teachers in this article cited the laptop as best for their school setting. I agree. Their similarity to a desktop eliminates the need for training. Their size makes monitoring students easier. Laptops need to be returned to their power source to recharge; accountability is easier, too. The handheld computers facilitate “collaboration”. Among students it could be called cheating. Handheld sets are too small to make monitoring students anything but a headache. Their small size also makes them easier to lose or be stolen. I don’t even know what a Tablet is, so am unable to comment.
Pamela Livingston shows insight when she notes that “strong preparation years earlier in the K-4 technology program” was the key to “transforming” their 5-8 curriculum. I’d like to know what they taught and how they taught it. Learning the basics of a word-processing program, how to type, very basic PowerPoint should be part of that “strong preparation”.
#3 Desktop Videoconferencing: Novelty or Legitimate Teaching Tool?
Like the calculator, typewriter, tape recorder, and television, videoconferencing can be either a distraction or a learning tool. In EIA, Quinn says each advance in technology brings its own double-edged sword of good and bad.
SOME BENEFITS OF VIDEOCONFERENCING
In addition to bringing experts into the classroom, interactive videoconferencing has other benefits.
· Videoconferencing appeals to students' different learning styles; students who are visual and auditory learners can benefit. Brain research indicates people learn better when taught in their preferred learning style. Using VC would include the concrete and auditory learners.
· Using the technology allows multiple classrooms at various locations to collaborate while learning about other cultures from primary sources. Using VC as a virtual field trip would save money. Collaboration with peers in other locations brings a positive form of peer pressure to perform well.
· Videoconferencing increases many students' motivation to learn. The only novelty should exist in VC being another teaching pathway. When a definite purpose is set, students can be stimulated by the VC, yet move purposefully through their learning goals.
· Students are able to practice and improve their presentation and communication skills. Ironically, computer-style communication is blamed for our students’ poor writing and verbal communication skills! Instant messaging, chat rooms and email are full of sentence fragment and sound bytes, all abbreviated with a few letters or emoticons. “What goes around comes around.” Here we have technology remediating a technologically rooted problem.
· Students improve their research skills as they prepare for the conferences. The human fear of failure is strong! Failing in front of those we want to impress is one of the worst experiences we can imagine! If students have clear guidelines for their presentation, they WILL carry it off in the best way they can!
· Students practice graphing and other skills as they create pictures, graphs, or drawings on whiteboards for use during videoconferences. All content areas can use VC. Any visual aid constructed to enhance learning addresses the concrete and visual learners. Students will learn how they need to make visuals for a presentation, which is different from a visual on standard sized paper. The higher-level thinking skill of compare and contrast will serve them well in life.
EIA Text Chapters 5-6 One Blog
Deception, lying, manipulation, stealing. SELFISHNESS. These are the reasons we have to write and read books like Ethics for the Information Age. People don’t have things they want, so they pursue them through dishonest means: hacking, phreaking, flaming, voyeurism, pornography. Blaise Pascal, mathematician and philosopher, commented that all people have a God-shaped hole inside them. They try to fill this hole with all kinds of things and remain hungry, unfulfilled. Only an authentic relationship with the God Who created them will satisfy this longing. If all the hackers, phreaks, on-line predators, and porn addicts would turn to the God Who loves them and try living His way, we would have very few laws, few people who break them, and need very few jails. Simple, but the SELFISHNESS is a powerful force. We want, and we want, we take and we take, but remain unsatisfied. We take more. We refuse to believe the wisest man of all time who said, “He who loves money will not be satisfied with money, nor he who loves abundance with its income. This too is vanity. When good things increase, those who consume them increase. So what is the advantage to their owners except to look on?” Expecting material things to satisfy us is like drinking seawater, it leaves us even more parched. Internet/information abusers are starving for meaning in their lives, maybe even happiness. Happiness is not a goal, however; it is a by-product of a well-lived life. The best-lived life is based on the example of Jesus. Not Kant, not utilitarian philosophy, not relativism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Islam, Kabala, wiccan. God, the Maker.
Post a Comment