1. As I read the Christel and Sullivan introduction, I feel quite resistant to the idea of incorporating too much media into my classroom. I am fairly comfortable with technology, so it is not that I feel utterly lost, but the idea still rubs me the wrong way. Do others feel this way? If so, why do you think that is?
2. The Alverman article discusses the postive characteristics of video games that help children/adolescents learn. However, there are so many hegative aspects to vieo games (violence, lack of social interation, etc). So does the good (problem-solving, learning from nonverbal cues, etc) really outweigh the bad?
3. The Silverblat text game me a better appreciation for the need to incorporate media literacy into the classroom. But my question is: to what extent do we replace important, historical, and/or famous authors and texts with more media literate texts? Will there come a day when Shakespeare is NOT a familiar name in the English classroom?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2. The article does admit that educationally worthy video games "are in their infancy" and I think that is obvious to many, if not all (p25). But perhaps if educators show more interest and support of the notion that video games have the potential to be an effective learning tool, improvements and new concepts will be introduced sooner as possible enrichment.
ReplyDeleteAre there no great writers in our generation? I hope there isn't a time when students aren't learning great texts of the past, but I think that in putting such a strong emphasis on centuries old literature we deny the fact that people are writing, and writing well, today. Maybe it isn't a matter of not teaching these writers at all, but of teaching them less often. It reminds me of my high school history class in which we never got past the beginning of the Vietnam War. It's important to know our history, but at some point that needs to be compressed to make room for more recent developments.
ReplyDelete