The Grammar Game: Does this make me a filmmaker?

While it isn't the coolest or most appealing video ever made, I learned something. Now, you can, too. Write like you know what you said. My new favorite line. Ever.

Seriously, this is a quick lesson on how to correctly use its, it's, their, they're, your, and you're in your writing that you're doing for people.

Updated at 6:25 p.m. for quality control, and your viewing pleasure.
(Translation: I completed some edits and uploaded this as a YouTube file.)

Marilyn Monroe: Iconic America

 

Abby, Hannah, and I worked on a photo analysis project together on Marilyn Monroe. Similar to our previous project on Frosted Mini Wheats, we analyze the message sent by this image and the aspects that made it an iconic image of Marilyn. We discuss various elements of the photograph, such as color, position, angle, and the subjects (Marilyn and the dress). A separate page offers additional details on Marilyn's iconic status. Enjoy the classroom applications we offer for high school students. Be sure to leave comments to let us know how we can improve the project.

In the end, does it really matter?

FINAL Response to The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30) by Mark Bauerlein

Here's the deal. Bauerlein complained a lot in this book. So much so that I was ready to call him up since he teaches here in Atlanta. I get that he has his own agenda and opinions, but one of the basic writing principles is to combat readers from saying, "Yeah, but what about (fill in the blank)?" I got encouraged from a few pages when he wrote about the ArtShow: Youth and Community Development. Then he ruined it when he complained about the work not carrying over into the kids' attitudes about school. Come on already, Bauerlein. Stop complaining and offer some solutions.

I have shared in previous posts how conflicted I feel about technology. I still feel conflicted. After a ton of reflection, I have come up with a few more questions.

1. This is a question I have already posed, but here it is again. Are teachers part of the technology problem? I mean, the printables from the teacher handbooks are all about finding the answer to fill in the blank. Those are easier to grade. Teacher use them. 
2. Is the problem that teachers are only working for summer break? Obviously, I don't think the answer is an unequivocal, "YES!" I do, however, think there are far too many teacher who hate their jobs, and it shows in their teaching.
3. If we are to complain about technology stupefying a generation, shouldn't school systems STOP pushing edutainment software that promises to improve test scores?

Obviously, I had to do some pop culture research about how people feel in regard to technology in schools. I stumbled across this gem:

Please watch the entire video, otherwise my comments won't make sense. 

Maybe Ellen earned auto correct. But today's kids haven't earned anything. I like that Ellen equates writing to thinking. Awesomeness. Ellen gets it. When she brings up cavemen and communication, she does miss the idea of visuals and pictures as language. Cavemen had primitive iPads if you consider their hieroglyphs as app icons. They communicated for a purpose, which is explained well in this site I found called Caveman Communications. This guy gets it. He admits that he is a caveman, primitive. He also gets that getting back to basics is the way to go. (Okay, maybe he doesn't completely say that, but that is my take-away from him.) My point is that this Caveman offers some solutions.

But getting back to Ellen. She has a good point about iPads for kindergartners. If pediatricians recommend limiting screen time each day, why are schools pushing it as a significant part of the curriculum? 

As I am writing this, I can't help but think of the Pixar movie, Wall-E.  Is this where our future is headed?

About 2 minutes in, there is an incredibly brief scene of babies in bouncy seats watching the screen (Ellen's point about iPads?), becoming brainwashed with branding. Face-to-face communication does not exists. You talk to the person next to you via screen messaging. There is no human interaction. I get that Bauerlein is giving me a grown up version of Wall-E, but I need solutions. I know there is a problem. I am walking away from The Dumbest Generation even more dejected than before about the challenge of engaging students to become critical analyzers of the information they consume. 

I wonder if technology in the classroom is just this generation's hot topic. Back in my school days, administrators still used corporal punishment. Then it was class size and test scores. Every few years there is some reason for American kids performing poorly on tests. We don't keep up with the rest of the civilized world. I don't think technology in the classroom is destroying the American work ethic. History is. We teach kids that each generation more advanced than the previous. But are we really just teaching them to mindlessly follow along and accept whatever information they are fed? 

While this push back text offered plenty of stats to support a decision to utilize less technology in the classroom, I don't think it is realistic. Kids are too "plugged in" to their devices. If teachers come in and tell them they are the dumbest kids ever, teachers might as well hang it up. The trick is to find an appropriate curriculum that balances student-centered technology with learning-centered education instead of entertaining students with short sound bytes and watered down handouts. The problem is more far-reaching than Bauerlein would have his readers believe.


In the end, does Bauerlein have a point? We all know what he is telling us. He just dazzles us with enough statistics that make teachers want to nose dive from their mountains of federal mandates right into the falling test scores.

Who's the problem and where's the solution?

Intermediate Response to The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30) by Mark Bauerlein


A couple of disclaimers are necessary before I go any further with this blog:

1. It has come to my attention that my posts are "lengthy," so don't feel obligated to read them unless you are grading them. Read to enjoy it, not out of obligation.
2. If it hasn't been clear yet, I have not committed to a side on the debate about technology in the classroom. I think it is overused. I think kids engage less critically in their lives (in broad terms). I think there is more to the problem than technology. Make of that what you will.

Now, back to The Dumbest Generation. I am bothered by the chapter "Online Learning and Non-Learning." I feel like Bauerlein is blaming the kids for not knowing how to appropriately use technology. Kids don't know how to use anything until you teach them. I had encyclopedias in my house as a kid (I know, I'm old), but I didn't know how to correctly "use" them until I learned about plagiarism and copyright in school. So why doesn't Bauerlein place any of the blame on educators for not keeping up with the kids? Aren't we supposed to be one step ahead of those we teach? If kids don't know how to cite resources from the Internet or figure out the validity of a website, I think teachers are the problem. If kids use the Internet to connect to the world, educators should teach them to connect responsibly.

I do agree with Bauerlein and his stats about the massive amounts of money spent on technology in schools. It seems wasteful to funnel funds to technology if it isn't helping kids get "more educated." It is great to have computers and Internet in every classroom; but if you shove 40 kids into a class, does it matter how many computers you have? There is definitely a crisis in education, and I don't think technology and its use are the root of the problem.

I also wonder this: if test scores didn't change when school went "digital," doesn't that mean technology is NOT the problem? I think there are lots of problems that have NOTHING to do with technology! Aarrgghhhh! I feel like Bauerlein is so busy bashing technology in schools instead of offering any practical solutions. Maybe there is more wrong with kids and schools than the Internet.

Bauerlein brings up some valid concerns about language acquisition in the digital age. If kids only text, email, and play video games, where do they learn communication? I get that he thinks kids get the watered-down vocabulary of popular culture. But I think it is even worse. Kids are lacking in communication in general. Like basic communication. Like making an actual phone call. Or learning to interact in an interview for a job. Digital natives are lacking in some basic skills, and I think educators the part of the problem. They expect students to come to school on day one with an advanced skill set, so they neglect to teach the basics from day one. If you miss the basics in elementary school, kids are at a deficit when they hit middle and high school. Since Bauerlein wants to bash technology in schools, spread the love and bash elementary applications, too.

In order for me to commit to a side of the debate, I need more than endless statistics thrown in my face. I want to hear about possible solutions and changes. I want to hear promise and compromise. I want to know that people are doing more than sitting around complaining. I guess I am frustrated with Bauerlein because he is doing a lot of trash talk without taking off the researcher hat and spouting some solutions. If he doesn't start offering me a ray of hope in this book, I might cry.

Success with Non-Traditional Texts

Response to:

• Apps in Education, a blog
• "Telling Stories with Video" by Carl Young and Sara Kajder
• "Empowering Children as Critics and Composers of Multimodal Texts" by Phyllis Whitin and David J. Whitin

I feel like I am complaining a lot about technology in the classroom, and I haven't committed to a side in the debate. Maybe it is bad. Maybe it isn't.

I decided to research a little to see what I could find in support of non-traditional applications of technology in the classroom. First of all I thought about non-traditional texts (like cereal boxes, movies, still photographs), but then I thought about popular technology. This response is a little bit of both. I started with the thought, "There's an App for that!"

I came across this pretty cool blog that breaks down apps by subject. A fairly practical list, it includes a variety of categories and price points. If we all know that kids are using their phones, can't we use it for their benefit (and ours)? If Reading Rainbow has an app, shouldn't we just accept technology as part of the curriculum? I think successful educators embrace the tools available. And apps are available. This blog, Apps in Education (linked above), offers twenty applicable apps for the English classroom. These twenty have been reviewed for usefulness and list the cost associated with each. Half of the apps reviewed are free, and the remaining ones range from $0.99 to $3.99. Additionally, nearly 80 unreviewed apps are listed. WOW! And that is just for English!

While trying to find classroom applications for new technology, I ran across this article which offers a variety of alternatives, ten to be exact, for the traditional book report. There are some limitations to integrating technology as a requirement (I would guess), but as long as the appropriate resources are available during class time successful implementation is possible. I do wonder how long it will be before all students are expected to have access to the Internet and a computer at home. These technologies seem prevalent; but when I observed in a local high school in the spring, a number of students required access to the classroom computers before or after class to complete/correct/print required assignments. Students completed potions of the assignments on their phones, but they lacked the other components necessary to turn in an assignment. The article I talked in a previous post, talked about blogs as a location for "publishing" homework. That seems like a practical solution in this case.

Here is another article which encourages the use of technology in the ELA classroom. Written by two assistant professors, this article is short, sweet, and to the point. Their ideas are in line with the content of ENGL 7741 here at KSU.  

Students writing with multimodal tools, such as digital video editors, should use them selectively, intentionally, and it ways that leverage the unique capacities of the tools and media to accomplish a specific goal. As in print-centric writing tasks, the principles of choice and form matter, as does the larger context in which the writing is situated. To be fully literate, students must know how to use tools, but more important, they must also know which forms of literact will best support their purpose for a given audience and a specific context.  ~From "Telling Stories With Video" by Carl Young and Sara Kajder

There really isn't much to say about it because Young and Kajder sum things up nicely. I like how easy this article was to read and how straightforward they were with content. It is work the two-minute read.

One of the projects I was part of during this semester analyzed product packaging and its intended message. I ran across "Empowering Children as Critics and Composers of Multimodal Texts" after we completed the project bookmarked it as a site for reference. It is a study of cereal in the classroom. Basically, fifth grade students analyzed packaging and advertising of a product and created skits, ads, and PowerPoints to market the product themselves. I mention this article because the study was with FIFTH GRADERS. If they can critically engage with cereal, high schoolers should be able to do even more. I think that introducing students to multimodal texts earlier in the academic lives could encourage them to engage more critically in the future. The take away for me is that students need to be consumer AND producers of their language: multimodal texts.

The main point that I am trying to make with this seemingly unrelated group of articles is that technology isn't going away. The Internet is a great resource for teachers AND students if we teach everyone to use it responsibly. Nearly every educational article I could need to support methods in my future classroom is a few keystrokes away. If I am going to teach the digital natives, I need to be fluent in their language. Maybe we can all just learn from each other. Or maybe not.

At this point, I think it is about advocating responsible use. As Young and Kajder imply, you have to know the system before you can work the system. And it works both ways.

Am I THE Problem?

Response to Lack of Leisure Reading by Ali Swank (in response to The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30) by Mark Bauerlein)


Okay, so I don't completely buy into Bauerlein's theory that technology is ruining America. I don't think he is crazy either. My classmate Ali posted a response to Bauerlein that I COULD NOT ignore. Bauerlein goes to great lengths to talk about the amount of time kids spend "plugged-in" to the screens in their lives. I get how easy it is to point the finger at parents, because I was once one of those parents.


You get the true-life confessional from a mother of two, a reader and a non-reader.


My kids are polar opposites. They come from the same genetic makeup. They were raised in seemingly the exact same way. We read to our kids every night. Individually. I have read Are You My Mother? more times than should be legally allowed. I have read every Dr. Seuss book multiple times to multiple children. We have had bedtime read-alongs for their entire lives. We listen to books on CD. We are regular visitors at the public library. We have been the proud members of Zoo Atlanta and High Museum of Art on alternating years for more than a decade. With family memberships. Only one of my children has a cell phone (which I still don't feel good about it, but it came in handy when she missed the bus). My kids do NOT have televisions in their rooms. We have a family computer in the middle of the dining room. And they only have one gaming system. That they share. (It actually collects dust more than it collects points.) 


One of my kids reads everything. I mean, everything. She reads more books than I can read in a semester. She knows more about literature than most of her peers. But she hates the literary canon (which broke my heart when she refused to finish To Kill A Mockingbird because it was boring). She has finished The Hunger Games Trilogy, the entire Harry Potter series, the complete Twilight saga, and won a trophy for reading more than any other kids in her grade level one year. A trophy for reading. That could have been my sport.

Then there is my other kid. As a school system employee and (hopefully) future teacher, I am always a anxious when people ask about his reading habits. He is nine. He completed third grade with a sixth grade reading level. He HATES really doesn't like to read. I still read to him most nights (go ahead and judge me: some will say he is too old for such while others will say I should do it every night). He feels like it is a waste of time. He gets bored with it. He can't sit still to read for extended periods of time (and he doesn't have ADD), and he prefers not to listen intently while others read. When I read to him, he draws illustrations for the books. Or plays with Hot Wheels while he listens. He loves Claude Monet and knows more about hermit crabs than seemingly possible. He climbs trees and builds elaborate fortresses out of Jenga blocks and Scrabble letters. He writes amazingly complex stories (according to his teacher) with HORRIBLE grammar (as in spelling and punctuation and capitalization). But he doesn't care.

So why doesn't he like to read? Hell if I know! I did everything I thought I was supposed to do, and I still managed to mess up according to some people. If he knows a ton of useless information and writes impressive fiction, how do I get him to read? He would rather climb a tree or learn origami or fly paper airplanes from the upstairs windows. He isn't hanging out with the television and the computer all day, he has been exposed to culture, and he still won't read.  We have tried Geronimo Stilton and Goosebumps and Flat Stanley. We had the most success with Goosebumps, but most of the others don't get more than half read. 


According to Ali's post, I must be partly to blame. 

Why aren’t kids reading? Parents are not making them!–If adults started exercising their parental rights and were actually parents, maybe our youth would be well read. Parents are the ones who buy the fancy technology gadgets and allow their kids to spend countless hours in front of the TV. Parents are the ones who buy the upgraded SUVs for family vacations with the built in TVs to the headrests. Heaven forbid you would have to SPEAK to your child while on an eight hour road trip, or listen to a book on tape, or read an actual book in the car.

If children are raised in a household where reading and cultural activities are cherished and encouraged, they are more likely to pick up a book in their spare time. Instead of parents taking their kids to the latest movie, where they spend an astronomical amount on tickets and junk food, they could spend that money on a membership to a local museum for the year. If we want our kids to be cultured and well read, we have to pursue the proper channels to ensure they are.

I know that Ali is not personally attacking me. I get it. But what happens when I don't buy the fancy tech tools, force the kids to listen to books on CD in the car, partake in annual art museum memberships (and heavily utilize said membership) only to STILL have half of my kids refuse to read? I admit we do enjoy a movie now and then. But not at the expense of cultural exposure. My kids do watch television, but not as a solitary activity.

I can pinpoint when my non-reader became a non-reader. It was in kindergarten. The teacher required him to read in front of the class. And he hated it. Every minute of it. He was reluctant to read to his class for whatever reason. His first grade teacher understood that, and his reading scores increased as did his writing (both skill and enjoyment). His second grade teacher required him to read for Accelerated Reader points. He doesn't do competition, and he doesn't choose his books from a list. His third grade teacher gave up when she realized AR points meant as much to him as the federal deficit. She allowed him to choose something of interest to research. He chose Galileo and hermit crabs. And he searched the web and printed enough information to kill an entire forest. Then stood up and told the class a number of trivial facts about Galileo and hermit crabs.

He won't read a book no matter how much I bribe him. But if you ask him what GTO stands for, he knows without hesitation. Do you?

So is it my fault that he doesn't read? Who can we blame next?

Don't Hate Me Because I Read

Intermediate Response to The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30) by Mark Bauerlein
Since this book is about four years old, I guess the disclaimer should read "Or Don't Trust Anyone Under 34." 


So I am fairly committed to finishing this book even if I alienate the people I meet. I am trying to follow Stephen King's advice in his memoir on the craft of writing, so I have been taking this book with me whenever I anticipate the time to read. So far I have been condemned at the skating rink, the orthodontist's office, and now Starbucks. My favorite barista at Starbucks was sincerely offended, so I felt compelled to defend my choice of reading material as a line formed behind me. I now know that my barista Justin is 25 years old as of June 21 and has a masters degree in exercise science, and he hopes to work in a high school as an athletic trainer to prevent injuries in young athletes. And he is interested in older women.

Most people who know me know that I equate coffee with love, so I cannot afford to make my barista upset. Especially the barista who knows my drink order. Let's hope I can still get good coffee, but it may have to be a sacrifice in the name of research. 

At this point, I am hopeful that you have read/are reading this book, so I won't bore you with a summary (you can read that on the link above or here). I have THREE pages of notes so far, but I am planning to be as succinct as possible. But I am fired up.

Bauerlein does a great job of dazzling the reader with supported statistics about "screen time" for kids and parental lifestyles that may or may not be the reason for the excessive screen time. I will admit that I am on the fence about whether or not technology is "to blame" for kids lacking critical analysis skills or a fundamental love of reading. I do know that kids are reliant on technology. But is it as bad as Bauerlein makes it out to be? Every generation has some new convenience that the one before wasn't fortunate enough to have. Examples? Electricity, cars, telephones, supermarkets, profit sharing, automation and industrialization, assembly lines. The list is truly endless. This article shows the advances in the classrooms throughout history. It definitely helps to prove my point.

The important question for me (as a parent and hopeful future educator) is this: Is technology actually preventing progress?

Part of me says yes because these millennials or Generation M have lost the face-to-face aspect of socialization. They take everything they see and read as fact and need to be spoon fed critical interaction. They are a generation of aliterates and eliterates. They are an entire generation who don't understand that one generation ago people were embarrassed by illiteracy. This generation hasn't struggled with the aftermath of Vietnam when soldiers came home hated. They think wars are heroic endeavors that create great sound bytes and causes to anonymously rally behind. 

The other part of me says no because these same millennials have centuries of history and culture a mouse click away. They can find the answers to questions in seconds rather than the hours it took when I was young. They have a plethora of opportunities.

But they suck.

They don't care about anything other than the lastest status update or viral video.

Kids have televisions in the bedroom. And a gaming system. And a cell phone. And a computer. And internet access. And text messaging. And i-pods and i-pads. They are plugged-in. 24/7.

Bauerlein talks in chapter three ("Screen Time") about the amount of time kids zero to six and eight to eighteen spend with the screen, which included television, video gaming, computing, video watching, and prerecorded programming. The shocking thing for me is how these kids are enjoying on-demand viewing. They learn about instant gratification with Elmo DVDs at the age of 2. I think this carries over into education. They don't have time to wait for us to teach them anything. I guess that means we have to teach is fast. Teach it concisely. Teach it when they want it. Great, I have a plan. Now how to I make it work? Again, I need to have my entertainer hat so that I can find a job in edutainment.

I think this article  from Bauerlein is an interesting companion for this post since he DOES admit that these kiddos do actually READ, even though it is mostly casual text and email messaging. I come back to a question over and over again. Is it an attention issue or an interest issue? Are kids unable to focus because of their faux muti-tasking? Are they really less smart and unable to comprehend complicated ideas? Are they just disinterested in anything beyond themselves?

Stay tuned because I am certain I haven't finished with Bauerlein yet.


P.S. I won't be posting from Starbucks again. The quality of my work seems to have diminished as I shared air with so many millennials in one location.