To filter or not to filter, and yet another question.

Feb 18th class

Thank you Mike for getting us started with such a thought provoking presentation. Two of your points really screamed at me given my recent experiences. First, the idea of filtering and the challenges that comes with it. Secondly, we started talking about assessment, what are we assessing, the trouble with setting criteria and separating artistic expression and content.

The dreaded filter. Where do we draw the line and who decides? Most of us, being the technology savvy educators that we are, have a multitude of online resources that we have sourced, researched, and apply to our teachings. Nothing is more frustrating then planning a lesson at home only to have the whole thing fall apart because the website that you want is blocked. In class Ben mentioned that we need to protect our students from the extremes, like pornography. Many parents would argue that schools need to protect further, but how far? Due to the unfamiliarity and constantly changing nature of sites like Youtube, Facebook, and other personal content sites, control is impossible unless you just block it completely. There are, as Roman stated, ways to go around the filters and access blocked content, so the students that want to use it inappropriately will do so regardless.

The odd thing about technology and the internet is that the onus is put on the school to protect (filter) students from misuse. If a student were to use gym equipment to injure another student, or used art supplies to create inappropriate imagery, the fault would be with the student. If a student were to bring in pornographic magazines into the school, the student would be at fault, but if the student actively sought these images online at school and was able to access them, the school would be questioned. With technology for some reason the fault seems to be placed on the school. Since the school is the provider of the means, in this case they are also responsible for controlling the content. I don’t feel that this is a fair distribution of responsibility to put on schools alone.

We also can not have completely unblocked content either. Where and how the line gets drawn though is definitely beyond my narrow scope. The line does need to be constantly examined and free to be moved. It should be negotiated by parents, students, teachers, administrators, divisions, province, and lastly the IT person that flips the switch.

The second idea of how and what do we assess is something that I have really struggled with as a teacher. Is it our job to only assess content? To answer it quickly, no. We need to go beyond content. I can not think of any job in which I will get hired based on my knowledge of grade 11 physics, history, or pre-calculus math. There are not too many everyday life situations that are going to call on that content either. We have to teach it though, but I would argue that the content can and should be the means by which we teach life skills. Aspects of education include teaching the whole person. To make a student a valued member of society through life skills and citizenship. This is where the artistic (and many other skills) would come into our assessments. If the expectations are made clear that your classroom, and the school community at large, is more about the content mastery, then it is valid to assess these other skills.

We dug Heidegger

Feb 4th class

We seemed to be on the verge of a lively debate on technology and control in class and seemed to run out of time. The idea of technology no longer within our power or control summons to the mind Hollywood images of the Terminator or some other post apocalyptic nightmare in which “the machines” have taken over. Einstein said in response to the dropping of nuclear bombs on Japan “It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” An understandably bleak assessment given the situation at the time. 65 years later there have been no additional nuclear bombs offensively detonated suggests that there is some hope, at least a little, that we are capable of escaping the fate that Einstein had in mind. But has day to day technology use condemned us to a worse fate? Are we all just mindless drones, sitting in front of the idiot box for the purpose of entertainment? Depending on how far back you want to go, take your pick of the computer, television, radio (War of the Worlds anyone?).

My opinion is yes and no. Humankind has developed many technologies that have added many hours of leisure time to our lives, there is no arguing that. Society has certainly found many ways to fill those hours of leisure with technology. Radio and Television were one way media, in that the audience was a passive viewer of the material. There were certainly educational aspects to these media, as we saw with Grierson and the documentary, but entertainment became the focus and the audience had very little say in what programming was produced for them. Control was regulated to a few powerful people that made decisions that were probably in their best interest. The masses had no power, and were controlled by the technology.

Internet technology, as it grows and expands, is taking that passive element out of our leisure time entertainment. As we saw with the Kaiser Report, we are devoting even more time then ever (at least our young people) to technology use. While this would imply that there is only greater levels of control by technology, I would argue that the interactivity that these developing technologies adds is starting to turn the controls back into the hands of the users. Creative outlets are being formed that allow people to explore in many new ways. It has a long way to go, and its full potential may never be realized, but I am excited about the possibilities. I am sorry that I forget who said it in class, but someone mentioned the two guys that created Facebook. A perfect example of how someone small can alter the world (sources put Facebook number of active uses between 100-350 million worldwide). With the recent proroguing of parliament here in Canada there were several rallies planned and organized on Facebook to demonstrate against the governments actions. The speed with which these actions are organized is phenomenal, and would not have been possible with technology even 10 years ago.

Technology is inescapable, more so now then in Heidegger’s time. Does the creative potential that new technologies promise allow for humans to escape the enframing model of thought that Heidegger speaks of? I think that it is a push in the right direction. Thoughts?