Okay, I'm reading stuff about tech and schools and all these tech guys are talking about blogs and podcasts and wikis and even online teachers as necessary components of my classroom if I "accept reality." Maybe so, but . . . like we always say, the education should direct the tech, not the other way around. Still, we do have to recognize a reality, i.e., the kids are more and more expecting that info, curriculum, skills, etc., will be or can be delivered to a great extent via tech. Do kids, for example, make a serious distinction between a chat room and a class discussion? And why settle for me as your teacher when you can access the recognized fabulous teacher online? Why go to my wonderful school, for that matter, when there's the Stanford online high school?
I know my school has been in the vanguard of tech ed, and we will most likely continue to be, but we all need to be on the vanguard of tech ed with a healthy perspective.
An anecdote: At a seminar for educators at the Stanford Design School, teachers were broken up into groups and given a problem to solve using the design process we'd been taught. Our problem to solve: American teenage obesity. I think there were about 8 groups and all but one attempted to solve this problem using iPhone apps that help with shopping, dieting, healthy choices, and cooking. To the extent that the tech educated consumers and families, the education consisted of very brief statements about nutritional components and comparisons with healthier choices. Everything was an app and a bar code and a wand. And it was fun!
And the folks in our group thought that these "solutions," taken by themselves, were actually indicative of the greater problem. These app "solutions" treat food -- I don't use the word "meals" here -- as little more than nutrition and calorie delivery systems. Worse, this app solution seems to be co-opted by a "food as fun!" ethic and the fun is more a matter of using the tech than eating food, though eating food is treated as a recreational activity, too. God forbid, however, that anyone should opt for a cake or even a piece of cake. The tech treats the human body as engine that can only ingest nutritionally optimal products. And worse still, this app promotes a celebration of speed.
My group took a different tack: We decided to ask foundations and other funders, perhaps even the gov't, to fund community organizations and elementary schools and churches, etc., to teach people how to eat. To teach that eating is not just a festive, quick, and often solitary visit to the fuel pump, but a profound moment when we should connect with the natural environment and share in it with others. There should be an element of ritual involved, a profound coming together. As I've said before, it was the Last Supper for a reason.
So we didn't have an app. We had a table set for a family dinner.
Sure, we were inspired by the Slow Food movement which, of course, doesn't denigrate technology. It simply asks that we recall what's truly important even to the point of asking us to ponder what is profound and mysterious about breaking bread.
So what is the Slow Ed movement? How do we make sure that tech doesn't become an info delivery system that treats education as a commodity, even a game, i.e., as a commodity that should be delivered quickly and with as much of a fun quotient as possible? Education should be a rewarding challenge that makes us more human.
Would have preferred sharing this concern over a meal.
g
