Comments on: Letting Go

By: Jady

Jady — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 17:21:31 +0000

I think that the more aware and prepared a teacher is the more useful our profession will be in the future.

By: Response to Phaedrus’ Letting Go | EDUC 628-Spring-08

Response to Phaedrus’ Letting Go | EDUC 628-Spring-08 — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:25:16 +0000

[...] Lowell http://durandus.com/phaedrus/2008/03/30/letting-go/ posts an article linking to Alec’s Letting Go blog, and the links to Bob Cringely’s [...]

By: Angie Hinson

Angie Hinson — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:59:12 +0000

I think the article Letting Go, by Alec and it’s references to Bob Cringely’s writings really makes a person think about how much, and how quickly things need to change, or the students will simply not care to learn. Espeically if the system continues with the same approach it has for the past 100 years. I watched the Mr. Winkle video, and the clips of the students sitting there, bored and uninterested is a real eye opener for me.

By: Jady

Jady — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:49:08 +0000

Change is not coming quick enough for some of our teachers. They think if they keep their head stuck in the sand it will just go away. Unfortunately I fear that they will go away it they don’t learn how to keep up in this new age.

By: Barbara Nantz

Barbara Nantz — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 02:32:28 +0000

I do believe that we have change over a 100 year period, but I don’ t think we have changed in the way that benefits the students. We have changed from chalk boards to dry erase boards. Overheads are now projectors linked to our desktops so that we can show our word documents or power points with ease. We also have the use of a smartboard or interwrite board where we can change things on our computers from the boards as if we were using a mouse. We can also write on them like a chalk board. So we are only changing the way we deliver the information not what information we are delivering. We are also not allowing the students to work up to their abilities or capabilities by keeping them in the classroom and not taking advantage of the flat classroom capabilities.

By: dancingnancy533

dancingnancy533 — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 18:11:06 +0000

Ongoing change is a necessary thing. After all, life in today’s world is not the same as the beginning of 20th century. With these changes, I think we retain the skeleton of our instruction, but instead add new types of meat to its bones. Joe, you’re right. The future of education is a little fuzzy right now and without a clear depiction to assist us in planning for it. Maybe within the next couple of years we will begin to see where we are headed and take the necessary action to deal with those issues.

By: Joe McConda

Joe McConda — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:58:18 +0000

I’ve often heard it said that change for the sake of change is worse than not changing at all. I’m not sure why reading the post on open thinking and watching Matthew’s video makes me think about that, except that I do think education has been changing over time and some of the changes have been just more of the same, only in a different format or method. I’ve also heard people say that technology for the sake of technology is not a good thing either. I’m musing that people who see it this way, feel that change is not really necessary. I believe that change is necessary and I agree with the writer here that if things don’t change, students will be “checked out” in mass like we’ve never seen before. The video makes a good (although exaggerated) point. Students are using technology more and more, but I wonder if the computers are just a different way of doing the same thing that’s always been done. Even though the teacher may not be lecturing or otherwise directing the class, the technology is carrying out what the teacher imposes. I think we all have a fear of the unknown. It’s hard to “Boldly go where no one has gone before” . We don’t know what education will really look like and without a model, it’s a frontier left to be tamed by those with the most unrest in the current system.