From Conversation to Collaboration

                    

Michael Wesch's article “Anti-Teaching: Confronting the Crisis of Significance” focuses on the most crucial problem that modern educators face: student’s don’t see the importance of education. He describes a population of students that are going through the motions. They attend class, collect information, and ask “administrative questions”. Part of the issue is the way schools and classrooms are structured. Students are conditioned to believe that learning requires a more rigid process, where creativity is not nurtured and the most important thing is the grade. Wesch argues that in order for students to find meaning in their educations, teachers need to create learning environments that inspire deep questions and allow students to pursue what they really want to know. The focus should be on learning and how students navigate this process, rather than on “teaching” that aims to cram knowledge into their brains. This type of education requires rethinking our educational spaces and finding what motivates students.

The discovery of motivation is often complicated by the modern era of cell phones and other technologies. Sherry Turkle’s article “The Flight From Conversation” outlines how people have lost the ability to connect and communicate face to face, which are two crucial aspects of the learning that Michael Wesch describes in his own work. In comparing the two articles, I thought about how we responded when Kelly Reed asked us to find the answers to five questions. With laptops in front of us, we worked silently and individually, not even acknowledging those around us. We modeled the type of society that Turkle is describing, participating in a way that is the exact opposite of what Wesch would want. In that moment, “we are together, but each of us is in our own bubble, furiously connected to keyboards” (Turkle). What is most interesting, and disheartening, is that we did this by default. Individual achievement is so ingrained in our value systems that most of us probably didn't even consider asking someone else for help. We took on the task as our own, and though we acquired knowledge, did we really learn? Luckily, as we become aware of this as educators, we can influence a new generation of learners to move away from this type of classroom participation (if you could call it that).

Though the topics seem very different at first glance, underlying both Turkle and Wesch’s ideas is the need for human interaction. Turkle wants us to have conversations while Wesch wants us to ask questions. By asking our questions, we are able to create conversations that lead to meaningful exploration and learning. Allowing these conversations into our classrooms will (fingers crossed) help students recognize the significance of their learning, and can drive curiosity and motivation.

Text Overview

Text Overview

Who needs lipstick anyway?

When you think of beauty supplies, what comes to mind? Lipstick, mascara, face serum, moisturizer; all items that provide an aesthetic ideal of what is beautiful, as determined by society. Beauty standards isolate and reject anyone who doesn't conform to them, diminishing their self worth.  But beauty is so much more than the tone of your skin, the sheen of your hair, the perfection of your contour. There are so many different things that make a person beautiful. We decided to reconceptualize beauty supplies not as products, but as a mindset. What makes a person beautiful? Their smile. The way they love. The support they receive from the people around them. A positive mindset. With these things and many more, a person displays beauty. Who needs lipstick anyway?

                                 

A review of: My Year with Nike

My Year With Nike: A Story of corporate sponsorship, branding, and ethics in public schools


By Rachel Cloues





In this chapter, Rachel Cloues writes about an opportunity her school had to partner with Nike and participate in a yearlong program meant to promote health and wellness. She writes that they were offered “four field trips, including the buses. They would help us meet the state physical fitness standards. And our school would receive money for each hour spent at the Nike Campus, to be used for new P.E. equipment” (67). Sounds like a dream, right? Schools are underfunded enough. She also describes the previous school year, when McDonalds hosted a night for teachers to get behind the counter and serve their students, as a way to raise funds.


Cloues, however, saw beyond the veil of opportunity to realize that Nike was treating her school as a way to promote their products and get free marketing. Each example of an “opportunity” seemed instead to be a corporation weaseling their way onto the radars of unsuspecting children. As Cloues goes on to explain the distribution of Nike branded shirts and viewing of Nike ads as a “fun activity” it becomes even more apparent what Nike’s goal was. Indoctrination is a term that she uses, and it’s not inaccurate. Though Cloues acknowledges some of the positives of the partnership, she recognizes the danger of a corporation sinking their claws into the impressionable minds of young people. She asks, “what is really in the best interest of students?” (70). This is a question that schools need to consider if they are going to form relationships with corporations that aren’t driven by a need for more funding.

As I read through this chapter, it made me think back to my high school years. When we won the Division 1 state soccer championship, Nike wanted to sponsor us by providing new uniforms and equipment. Our athletic director rejected the offer because we would be the only team benefitting, and I remember thinking that it was incredibly unfair. We had worked so hard, we deserved better. What I definitely wasn’t thinking about was what this deal would mean for our school. Cloues story highlights how a partnership such as this could be twisted, so even if it seems great, there might be fine print or ulterior motives. I know that schools need more funding, but schools need to make sure they are seeking out help in ways that are not detrimental or taking advantage of their students.




                                       

Wakelet: A tool for collecting resources

As described in my title, Wakelet is a platform that allows users to compile content into one neat space. You can add links to webpages, videos, images, and so on, that cover any topic you want. A tutorial of how to use Wakelet can be found here.

Personally,  I have only used Wakelet twice, as I just learned about it at a professional development at the end of May. I created a Wakelet of resources that my students needed to access for a pre-reading jigsaw activity. They were assigned a topic, and using the links on the Wakelet, conducted research that they then shared with a larger group. I also created vocab practice quizzes and posted them on their own Wakelet.

I have found that Wakelet allows me to post multiple resources without cluttering up my Google Classroom page. Having a visual collection lets students find their resources easily, as it is less wordy thank a Google Doc of hyperlinks. It also allows me to make sure they are accessing vetted sources rather than finding inaccurate sources. I plan to use it a lot more in the future because of how easy it is to make and use. It could be another way to have students collaborate as well!

Princess Perfect

I grew up in the 90s, when Disney animated films were extremely popular. The Disney

Princesses were some of my favorite characters; particularly Alice and Belle. I identified with

Alice’s quirky adventure and Belle’s obsession with books. I also loved the stories, from The

Lion King to Pocahontas. My parents still have all of the pre-2000s Disney movies on VHS. On

TV, Disney Channel, Nickelodeon, and Cartoon Network were the only channels my parents would
let me watch, because they believed the shows to be relatively wholesome and age appropriate.

Most of my childhood pop culture interests were based around what are now considered
classic children’s movies and shows.  I know for a fact that I never considered any Disney movies
with a critical lens prior to college. To me, they were just for entertainment. Although I read a lot
of literature that provided ample social commentary, I never considered the deeper implications of
the films I enjoyed. Linda Christiansen describes how young people often internalize the
messages put forth by popular media without considering the issues embedded deep within
them. She writes, “the messages, or ‘secret education’ linked with the security of their homes,
underscore the power these texts deliver,” (176). Because our parents condone and even
encourage our viewing of such material, we never question that it’s good and true.  Frozen is a
somewhat complicated movie compared to other princess films. In many Disney movies, the
princess wants to find her prince, or has to struggle with something that stifles her, whether it’s a
strict family or societal expectations. Frozen has two princesses who are involved in these tropes.
I’ll be honest; when watching Frozen, I much preferred Anna. Elsa’s role is somewhat
stereotypical. She’s a woman with power, who must stifle her emotions in order to be a good ruler.
It’s a commentary about women being required to hide who they really are before they can have
a positive impact on the world. Elsa is absent in her ice castle for much of the movie, while Anna
must employ bravery and quick-thinking to solve her sister’s problem. Eventually Elsa learns to
control her magic and shake off what people have said about her, but again, I feel like there’s an
implication that if she loses it and hurts someone again, she’s to blame for not keeping herself
together. I find Anna’s storyline to be more freeing from the expectations of what it means to be
a princess. Because she’s second in line, the expectations for her are different, and thus she can
be a bit more adventurous and can buck tradition for more autonomy.
One thing that Frozen has that many other Disney Princess movies don’t is that it challenges the
idea that a princess’s only goal should be to find a prince. Multiple characters say how ridiculous
it is to marry someone you just met that day, and Anna comes to realize it herself when Hans
does his evil 360. Love is important in this story, but it’s not all about romance; it’s also about
sisterhood. The movie gives some strength to female characters and lets them save each other.
  Still, both princesses are white, blue-eyed, and conventionally attractive with “their beauty and
their fashionable attire” (182) that are so common in fairytale women. Anna is a bit of a mess,
and Elsa has dangerous powers, but they still clean up well. So, although the movie definitely
makes some strides on the feminist front, I don’t think it’s as revolutionary as many would argue.
This article highlights some of the ways that the movie falls short.

I can’t say I dislike Frozen from an entertainment standpoint, but I don’t think it’s as progressive
as it has been made out to be, and I really don’t understand the obsession with Elsa when it is
more of a story about Anna. When looked at critically, it’s not particularly feminist, and it still
maintains many of the tropes that Linda Christiansen warns against. The beautiful white
princesses still end up with everything they want and need. This film is the perfect example to
use when being critical; take it with a grain of salt.

References: 

Marshall, Elizabeth, and Sensoy Özlem. Rethinking Popular Culture and Media. Rethinking Schools, 2016.

Messy Room by Shel Silverstein

Messy Room

Boyd vs. Prensky

The crux of Boyd’s chapter is that “digital native” is not a term that can describe every person belonging to a specific generation. Just because a person has used technology does not mean that they are comfortable with all aspects of it. People’s experiences with technology are just as varied as their experiences with other parts of life. The purpose of separating digital natives from the digital immigrants is to see how those whose lives revolve around technology differ from those who have to work to adapt to it. It should not be used to delineate which age groups of people are better or worse at navigating digital media.





Prensky’s work makes claims that Boyd attempts to refute. Prensky continuously refers to “all” youth as being able to navigate the digital world, and claims that they “all” have undergone changes that separate them from older generations. He implies that if a person is a “digital immigrant” they will never be able to teach those who are “digital natives”. He makes the very generalizations that Boyd argues are harmful. In categorizing educators as the immigrants and students as the natives, Prensky pits people against each other when they should be brought together, and unfairly labels those who may not be deserving of such titles.





Boyd writes, “by not doing the work necessary to help youth develop broad digital competency, educators and the public end up reproducing digital inequality because more privileged youth often have more opportunities to develop these skills outside the classroom” (180). I have found the assumption that kids growing up in the modern era automatically have the digital literacy to navigate technology to be quite inaccurate. When we assume that students know something, we miss the opportunity to ensure that they actually do.





Though I don’t think the terms themselves are particularly harmful, what we do with these assumptions is key. I look at my own students who have such poor typing skills that one might think they have never typed before. Yet there is an assumption that they should be good at typing without ever having learned how, simply because of when they grew up. They have access to so many digital resources, yet often don’t know what to do with the influx of media. Calling all youths “digital natives” disadvantages those who are not as competent as others.

What we need to do is instruct rather than label. We can’t expect kids to pick up literacy skills on their own, just like we don’t expect them to be able to do algebra just because they’re sitting in an algebra classroom. As Sir Ken Robinson said in his TED Talk, just because a person is taught something, it doesn’t mean they have learned it. Educators have to be aware of digital media literacy deficits and actively ensuring that students have the skills they need. This also means that educations themselves need to become more digitally literate.


References:

Boyd, Danah. It's Complicated: the Social Lives of Networked Teens. Yale University Press, 2015.

Prensky, Marc. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. Marc Prensky, 2001.

What's a digital native?

I'm a millennial. Born between the years 1981 and 1996, we grew up in the advent of technology.  Before 1998, my family didn't own a computer, so my aunt gave us her old Gateway desktop. Besides dying on the Oregon Trail and chasing Carmen Sandiego around the world, I used the computer for schoolwork. I remember typing my first school report in third grade, when I had to research a landmark in town and write an essay about it. My elementary school had a library full of computers where we played games and learned how to type, and so I began using technology as an educational tool from a young age.

Does this make me a digital native? According to Technopedia's definition, I am. For the past 20 years (almost 3/4 of my life!) digital technologies have played an important role in my life. From that first typed essay to now, in graduate school, I have used technology almost daily. At first, it was just computers. I was a Myspace kid. I watched all of those weird Youtube videos way before you could have a career as Youtuber. Note: Keyboard Cat is not NEARLY the strangest video that we obsessed about back in high school. 

In 8th grade I got a cellphone for the first time. My mom wanted me to have it so that I could call her for rides home from soccer practice. At the time, iPhones were still a few years in the future and texting cost 10 cents per message. Peep this beauty:

Thus, an expensive texting obsession began. I've watched as phone culture evolved slowly through my high school and college years. I didn't have a smartphone until I was 21, but I quickly adapted to the new social media options that were out there. Instagram, Snapchat, Spotify; these have all become part of my daily life. I strongly believe that my technology opportunities as a child have influenced my ability to use and explore new technologies as an adult. I have never had a problem incorporating new methods into my learning or teaching. When my school went 1:1 with Chromebooks, I fully embraced the change.  

Although I didn't spend my earliest years with personal technology, I do believe that I am a digital native, and I am excited to spend the next two weeks learning how to transfer this into my teaching. 

Welcome

Welcome to my blog! My name is Ally Fortier, and I am a seventh-grade English Language Arts teacher in Massachusetts. I have just finished my fourth year of teaching, and I look forward to exploring the world of digital media literacy. My summer vacation started with a beautiful weekend in Newport, Rhode Island, where I was honored to be a bridesmaid in my high school best friend's wedding. Just check out the venue!

As the summer continues,  I plan to spend a lot of time outside camping, playing soccer, and relaxing on the beach. But first, I get to spend two weeks thinking and learning about a topic that is so important as an educator: digital media, and how myself and my students can grow increasingly literate.