"So What" and "Who Cares" about Technology

When it comes to the topic of new technology involved with education, most of us will readily agree that it is an advantage to students to be taught with technology rather than by only teachers. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question of if students are actually smarter today because they were taught with new technology. Whereas some are convinced that electronics fully capture the viewers’ attention and concentration, others maintain that when the technology is turned on in the classroom, “we don’t have to think” (Stoll 46). My point here—that technology is taking over education—should interest those who are educators or students. Beyond this limited audience, however, my point should speak to anyone who cares about the larger issue of the future of education in the world.
Will computers change the way we learn? Shaffer confirms in his article Video Games and the Future of Learning, that “computers are already changing the way we learn—and if you want to understand how, look at video games…they are new ways to learn for a new information age” (Shaffer 1). In other words, the virtual worlds allow people to interact with information in a new way that is more beneficial because the knowledge gained coincides with everyday activities. Video games introduce a new method of learning that is not solely based on facts, but rather based on knowledge gained through interaction and experience. Shaffer recognizes that the next step in introducing new technology into the educational system is for teachers to trust them and “follow suit or risk being swept aside” (Shaffer 6). Video games do teach some things, they are not nearly as effective or inspirational as teachers. Although some might object that you create relationships through video games, a game will not respect you, give you advice, or help you through your life problems, but a teacher will. This issue is important because it affects knowledge and social skills of future generations, and we need to fight for a balance between technology and teachers, otherwise the future minds of our children are in jeopardy.
“From an educational perspective, computers often do kids more harm than good…in fact, a great school doesn’t need them” (Stoll 46) Stoll insists in his article Who Needs Computers. School systems around the United States are now becoming wired and providing students each with their own computer, believing this enhances their students’ educations. Technology can have a positive effect on education as long as it is used in moderation. For instance, using blogs to promote interaction between classroom writers allows writers to compare their writings and feed off of other’s techniques. In addition, I find that some graphics and examples on video or in virtual worlds can be easier to remember than from a lecture given by a teacher. Both new and traditional forms of teaching methods are more effective if alternated, eliminating a loss in students’ concentrations. Stoll reports that a large percentage of students will pretend like they are taking notes on their laptops during class, but are actually checking their e-mail or playing on-line games. In addition, computers promote a copy-and-paste attitude that encourages plagiarism, something that stunts creativity in writing. Stoll concluded, “I’m furious to see the debasement of learning by technology…our finest weapons are books and libraries” (Stoll 49).

Video Games and Computers Draft

When it comes to the topic of new technology involved with education, most of us will readily agree that it is an advantage to students to be taught with technology rather than by only teachers. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question of if students are actually smarter today because they were taught with new technology. Whereas some are convinced that electronics fully capture the viewers’ attention and concentration, others maintain that when the technology is turned on in the classroom, “we don’t have to think” (Stoll 46).
Will computers change the way we learn? Shaffer confirms in his article Video Games and the Future of Learning, that “computers are already changing the way we learn—and if you want to understand how, look at video games…they are new ways to learn for a new information age” (Shaffer 1). In other words, the virtual worlds allow people to interact with information in a new way that is more beneficial because the knowledge gained coincides with everyday activities. Video games introduce a new method of learning that is not solely based on facts, but rather based on knowledge gained through interaction and experience. Shaffer recognizes that the next step in introducing new technology into the educational system is for teachers to trust them and “follow suit or risk being swept aside” (Shaffer 6).
“From an educational perspective, computers often do kids more harm than good…in fact, a great school doesn’t need them” (Stoll 46) Stoll insists in his article Who Needs Computers. School systems around the United States are now becoming wired and providing students each with their own computer, believing this to be a positive factor on their students’ education. Stoll reports that a large percentage of students will pretend like they are taking notes on their laptops during class, but are actually checking their e-mail or playing on-line games. In addition, computers promote a copy-and-paste attitude that encourages plagiarism, something that stunts creativity in writing. Stoll concluded, “I’m furious to see the debasement of learning by technology…our finest weapons are books and libraries” (Stoll 49).
I have mixed feeling on both sides of the arguments presented by Stoll and Shaffer. In my view, technology can have a positive effect on education as long as it is used in moderation. For instance, using blogs to promote interaction between classroom writers allows writers to compare their writings and feed off of other’s techniques. In addition, I find that some graphics and examples on video or in virtual worlds can be easier to remember than from a lecture given by a teacher. Although, both forms of teaching methods are more effective if alternated, eliminating a loss in students’ concentrations. Shaffer fights for the video game education method insisting that it enhances students’ knowledge. My own view is that although video games do teach some things, they are not nearly as effective or inspirational as teachers. Although some might object that you create relationships through video games, I reply that a game will not respect you, give you advice, or help you through your life problems, but a teacher will. This issue is important because it affects knowledge and social skills of future generations, and we need to fight for a balance between technology and teachers, otherwise the future minds of our children are in jeopardy.

Computer Dilema?! Different opinions all coincide in the end

Synthesis:
Are video games and virtual technology changing the education system for the better or for the worse? Shaffer claims in his article Video Games and the Future of Learning that video games are making a dramatic positive revolution on the way we learn and interact in both our education and in our everyday lives. In contrast, Stoll stresses in his article Who Needs that, "from an educational perspective, computers often do kids more harm than good. In fact, a great school doesn't need them" (46).

Outline:
My main points to hit:
1) Does using technology in school settings actually advance a students education?
-are kids smarter today because of new technology?
-does technolgy capture a student's attention or does it allow them to slack off?
-are teachers using technology as an excuse to sit back and not work as much themselves?
2) Do educational games actually help students education or not?
-do they teach kids to like education or just like it so that they can play the game?
3) What are the disadvantages and advantages of learning from technology?
-social skills
-work ethic
-creativity

"Wired Schools" a pain or gain?????

You walk passed a typical classroom in New Jersey and what do you expect to see? Most would imagine your everyday classroom of kids sitting at individual desks, each with a notebook in front of them taking notes, and listening to the teachers words of knowledge. But in the introduction to Computers and Technology, Richard Ohmann provides a different scene of a once failed school district transformed into "one of the most 'wired' urban school districts in the U.S." (62). Specifically, the classroom was full of students who each had their own grant supported wireless computer placed in front of them. Ohmann uses his article to stress that the false ideas of technology enhancing learning abilities is not always the case. As the author himself puts it, "thirty percent of college courses had websites a year ago, and sixty percent used e-mail 'as a tool for instruction' but only fourteen percent of the administrators...held that 'technology has improved instruction on my campus'" (63). Although some people believe that technology can save U.S. education, Ohman insists that students use the computers more for recreational purposes and have found it easier to plagiarize by using the Internet. In sum, then, his view is that many schools are spending too much money on technology believing that it is improving the value of the education they are giving, when in reality it can even decrease educational values and knowledge.
I have mixed feelings on this issure the Ohman presents in his article. In my view, he is completely right on the issue that students who have computers in front of them in class will surf the net instead of listening to the teacher and using the technology for learning purposes. On the other hand, I believe that the Internet is a very effective form of an educational aid if used properly. For instance, kinistetic and audio learners could gain an abundance of knowlege by seeing movies and pictures on slideshows while the lesson is being taught. In addition, the Internet is a great source for projects and research and can expand students horizons. Yet I would argut that students are more likely to plagarize and cheat through the use of the Internet. Overall, then, I believe that technology must be used effectively only--an important poin t make given to educators around the world.

Fast Food's fault...or our own??

 Summary 1

    

     In a recent article in the New York Times, David Zincenko argues that teenagers are forced onto unhealthy eating habits.  Teenagers want cheap food so they are inclined to eat dinner at fast food restaurants, increasing obesity.  He complains “where, exactly are consumers—particularly teenagers—supposed to find alternatives?”  If a person really wants to find a reason for their weight gain, why do they always have to blame someone else?  It is not extremely difficult to find healthy food at a grocery store or at someone’s home.

     “Shouldn’t we know better than to eat two meals a day in fast-food restaurants,” Zincenko admits.  Americans tend to be lazy and blame their weaknesses on something other than themselves.  There are grocery stores in most towns that have stocks of healthy food options, people just need to take the initiative to take an extra step to find what they want.

 

 

 

Summary 2

 

     David Zincenko fights in his New York Times article that the “lack of information about what, exactly, we’re consuming,” is becoming ridiculous.  Health professionals argue that there are no calorie information charts on any fast-food containers today, which is unfair to consumers.  Fast food companies are the target of many law suits today for causing childhood obesity.  They fail to market to the children the lack of nutritional value in their food and fail to place warning labels on their products. 

    What is the world coming too? Every year there is an increase in childhood obesity, making more people sick, angry, and overweight.  If we want to make our world a healthy place to live in, fast food companies need to make an effort to warn people of the damage their food can do to the body if eaten too often, or change their menu to have more health value.

ITunes "They Say/ I Say"

Recently, countries in the European Union have been fighting with Apple, the founders of iTunes, to make it possible for them to play their music that they buy on iTunes to be easily played on an MP3 player or other device. They feel that if they buy the music, they should be able to play the music where and on whatever device they want to. This is the "They Say" of the argument between many people and iTunes. They say that once they purchase their music it is their property and they should have the freedom to use it as they please.

N.J., the writer of the article, argues that it will only take a matter of 20 minutes to convert the music and is a simple process. The "I Say" of the argument is that people are becoming to lazy today and that they still can convert their music to play on an MP3 player. All that they have to burn a CD and then convert the music to an MP3 format. In fact, he says that Apple has never claimed that you can use an MP3 player to play their music, so how can people be upset over an issue that is not even part of the program? He states that until a "slick" device is made to cheat the system, "the whiners - and their lawyers - will continue to cry about problems that don't really exist."


http://www.snipsof.com/reality/2006/08/apple-itunes-and-problems-that-dont.html