Website Link

Dave's Website

Concept Map Link

The following is a concept map I made for EDT 6460.

I was conceptualizing a project-based learning opportunity for my students. The students will design a project to research the science and history behind vaccines and the anti-vaccination movement, and design an intervention for at risk populations.

Screencast

I will link the screencast in lieu of embeding; I didn't want to make the video public. It would spam my subscribers with content not relevant to my channel.

I didn't want to sign up for another tool; especially one which isn't particularily useful.

I believe you most will find my screencast interesting though so take a look:
Tips on using screencasting to flip a classroom!

Best watched in 1080p. :)

Lesson Description

Globes are pretty rare in classrooms these days. Often instructors use the rough 2-dimensional equivalents, i.e. maps.

Take a look at a world map sometime. Compare Canada and Africa. Look about the same size? They aren't even close. Africa is much larger; three times in fact.

I want to give students a chance to experience how disproportional these maps really are.

I would have students create their own maps on Google. Then I would have them look at the maps, and guess which one is larger and by about how much. I would have them encircle Canada, and Africa using the shapes tool; it tells the editor what the area and edge length of the shape is. Similar to what I have done below.



The difference will surprise them. Even though Canada's coastline is only only marginally larger (less than 50%) it will take them significantly more time to encircle it.

I can then hit home the experience with one of these.



OR

XKCD

Audio Link

Dave's Podcast

Video Embed

Old video of mine.

Maps Embed

The trip I take to get to class every Monday.

Photobucket Link

Dave's Photobucket

Check out a free and open office suite!

Pinterest Link

Dave's Pinterest

In lieu of Delicious.

WMU EDT 5410 Wiki

Link to Wiki

A Response to 'Of Luddites, Learning, and Life' and 'Beyond Technology Integration'

Cassidy, D. P.

When constructing an argument piece authors should rely on a mixture logistics and data. If an author is not making an argument, they should make that known, and instead try to convey a belief through a lens of experience. In line with this, I will first deconstruct Postman's primary argument. I will then assert my own belief, which in part-coincides with Postman's. Finally, I will contrast both with Joseph's argument.

If Postman's intent was to say, 'progress for the sake of progress is ill sought', then I agree, especially if it is sought within the context of learning. Unfortunately the author did not provide evidence that such ill sought progress was occurring. Instead the author smithed empty words in the form of anecdotes and parables.

Postman's argument relies on questioning the reasoning behind progress, 'What problem does this answer?' I would turn to the author's story about shopping for a new car. In this story the author asks a car salesperson, 'What is the problem to which cruise control is the answer?' The author iterates that he has no need for cruise control because he can simply use the gas pedal. He reiterates this logic and transfers it to other scenarios; e.g. he has no need for automatic windows because he can roll them up himself, and he has no need for educational technologies because most offer no solution to any problem that he does not already have some answer to.

I would ask Postman, 'What problem does the car itself answer?' The author should have no need for the car, because he could take the less advanced horse to work. But wait! What problem does the horse solve? The author should have no need for the horse, because he could just live closer and walk to work. Of course the argument I am using is a fallacy, a slippery slope, but it does convey the flaw in the author's logic. That it is impossible to transfer this logical across scenarios, and the retrospective evidence is no evidence at all.

The only way to identify progress and it's impacts after the fact; something we do not have the luxury of doing. For every technological advancement that has been made there has been opposition, and those who held on to the old paradigm. There were even those opposed to the popularization of the printing press. They believed that the ease of access to knowledge would be detrimental. This was mirrored at the end of Postman's piece. I would like to emphasize my belief, there is no such thing as an 'information glut'. I personally find it appalling that any educator would ever imply the conveying information is cause or consequence of any problem. Instead I choose to believe it is the solution to all problems.

Joseph's (2002) piece suffers many of the same logistical problems as Postman's. Those aside, the author's greatest transgression seems to be that he does not adequately warn the reader of the price of progress. Each technological advancement comes with a price. Take the advent of the motor vehicle as an example. How many people have died because of this advancement? How many are now dependent on it? What type of damage is it doing to the environment around us? The same can be said for technology in the classroom. How many students will we loose to these advancements? How many will be come dependent on them? What type of damage will they do to the learning environment?

I believe the trick will be to find ed tech's airbag and seat-belt before we have lost too many students to the ever hastening speed of the learning process. As a consequence of the cumulative nature of knowledge, every year our students need to learn more than the last. If technology isn't the answer to the problem, How do we keep up? I do not know what is.

FIRST

I'm sorry Dave; I'm afraid I cannot let you do that.