Monday, June 26, 2006
re: EdTech Blog
Kennedy cheated on his spouse.
Johnson was dishonest about the war.
Nixon lies...Ford pardons.
Carter is brutally honest and get in trouble for being a bit too honest.
Bush Sr. was head of the CIA. I am sure he never lied.
Clinton only lied about certain things and women.
Bush Jr...well, the jury is still out on that one....we'll see what history says.
And it's not just limited to presidents or even politicians. Enron, Arthur Anderson...et.al. Oh, you get my drift.
Cheating is not new, nor is it as pervasive as it first seems and it is not just the underdog that does it.
The reasons for cheating are myriad and in fact, I am not seeing a tremendous effort to squelch it. In fact, it is somewhat unnatural for many cheaters to actually suffer any punishment.
The history of this country and for that matter of most nations is littered with lies. And yet, the countries still survive, and most of them have a fair footing on morality. Cheating appears to be a fascinating subject for news, and if you can't find it on the regular nightly, there will surely be a lot of marital hanky panky on one of the entertainment/actor shows for the public's prurient interest.
Now, I must admit that when I was growing up, I did not steal watermelons out of people's fields. I always gave back the excess when someone miscounted my change. I never cheated on a test or exam. I never copied a statement from another person. In fact, I never had an idea that was not originally mine. Of course, I did fib a bit.
At the bottom of it all, is an assumption that all these test that we are cheating on, is really going to tell someone what I know. Well, the reason I do so well on test is because of steroids, Ritalin, Ginko Biloba and Huperzine A, Phosphatidylserine, and/or Acetyl-L-carnitine and a handful of other performance enhancement drugs. Then before I take and exam, I have a straight person pee into a condom, so I can dumb it in the little test bottle that they use for testing my blood. I even tuck the condom up under my arm before I empty it so that when they test the temperature it will be close to body temperature. Then during the exam, I have a proxy give me high pitched phone rings that only dogs can hear so the proctor can't see what's going on. Do I feel guilty...nah....I feel above average, because in today's world who wants to be average.
If we want to put an end to people doing disservice to themselves by not learning certain materials, then perhaps we ought to look instead at what we are doing to help them learn the materials.
Now that we have convinced you that some of your students are cheating, can you spot the cheaters? Can you use your own personal dislikes and prejudices to place people into categories that you really have no evidence that they belong in. "That person looks so dumb that he must be cheating." "Most people of that race cheat." "He was held back in an earlier grade, so he is probably cheating." Instead, why dont we just truly care about every student in the room. Why not spend a little time getting to know their habits and quirks. Why do we offer our kids UNCONDITIONAL love, but these jerks have to pass a test.
Let's ask trick or loaded questions. Lets phrase them in such a way, so that the person taking the exam is likely to be confused and answer one way one time, and another way another time, proving that they are cheating. Furthermore, let's not tell them that we will be watching to see if there is cheating. In fact, let's leave the room and watch secretly through the window, instead of telling them honestly that you are there to moniter the test and to make sure that they don't copy the wrong answer from someone else's exam.
Let's give those who cheat, all the attention that we can muster, while totally disregarding the exceptional student. Let's reward only those who get the "A's" but not those whose grades have improved the most. Let's spend a lot of time telling what we are going to do to cheaters instead of spending time to talk about the importance of honesty and personal integrity.
Let's not even consider the amount of work we are giving to a pressured class. Let's just assign it and expect them to stay up into the middle of the night studying for the exam. Let's not consider how many of them have to have jobs to help their families pay the bills or for them to belong to all the costly extracurricular activities that seem so important. In fact, let's get them to take their work home with them, while we tell ourselves that it's ok to leave our work at school, instead of admitting that we have trouble keeping up with all the kids in class and all the work we have to grade so quickly. Let's not even admit that we might be giving them more than they can possibly do without cheating.
Lets tell them what we expect from them (including that a certain percentage will cheat), instead of listening to what they expect from themselves. We sure don't want to let them sign any kind of personal contract that might allow them to put in print what they have agreed to do with their abilities.
It seems to me, that unless schools start hiring behavioral counselors, the a lot of you are going to be the closest thing that a student ever gets to a counselor or a personal coach. You have in your hand the potential of a persons life. If we attend to it, in a postive way....if we expect nothing but the best....if we listen, and empathise...maybe, just maybe there will not be a need for a cheating proctor.
re: EdTech Journal entry "Will Libraries Survive the Digital Revolution" of June 11, "
Humans have probably kept data for their entire existence of the species. We might not recognize it at first because it might be little more than notches on a stick or slash marks on a rock...but there have probably always been ways to keep up with data. Now, I already hear you saying that libraries store more than just data. Well, perhaps, though I am not totally certain that books are much more than the recording of data. If you look at the history of libraries, most of them were created by wise men or women based on the idea that a record needed to be kept. From the Assyrians through the Rockefellers and Gates, libraries are meant to contain lots of data. In fact, libraries in modern time have yet to completely overcome the data storage space problem. In order for libraries to continue to exist, they must find ways in which to preserve maximum amounts of data in units that take up the least space. If your library is not already looking at digital storage, then it is probably doomed. And what library designer of our day and age would be so foolish to overlook the need for storage space whether that be shelves or digital storage.
Large scale digitization projects are underway at Google, the Million Book Project, MSN, and Yahoo!. With continued improvements in book handling and presentation technologies such as Optical Character Recognition and ebooks, and many alternative depositories and business models, digital libraries are rapidly growing in popularity as demonstrated by Google, Yahoo!, and MSN's efforts. And, just as libraries have ventured into audio and video collections, so have digital libraries such as the Internet Archive.
I think, over the years, that I have had instructors whose vision of knowledge repositories was limited to the university library. And I suspect that I frustrated them by my utilization of search engines and data that exist on the internet. The fact is, that in terms of the sheer amount of information available, the internet wins hands down. No library can possibly hold as much information. Nor can it hold it in such a portable manner. I supposed that we could argue that some of the information on the net is of little value because it may or may not be accurate, but over time, we could have made the same arguments about book type libraries. In fact, there were probably as many misrepresentations in those notches on a stick or slash marks on a stone, or clay tabets, or papyrus scrolls as there are on todays internet. It may look like the the amount of useless information is greater on the net, simply because the database from which is it culled is so much larger itself.
In a report from UC Berkeley's School of Information Management and Systems, (2002),
"Print, film, magnetic, and optical storage media produced about 5 exabytes of new information in 2002. Ninety-two percent of the new information was stored on magnetic media, mostly in hard disks."In this sense, the change in the structure of storage has already started. We are now storing most information in formats other than books. Most of it is now being stored in much larger and more secure containers than in the past. These containment vessels hold greater units than ever before. It would be unusual to find a library with the needed space and electronic software and servers to store all the necessary data that we can access from the net by storing it in separate but interactive nodes.
Since the majority of the information is stored in digital format (the new text or book), we can sense the urge to fine even more effective and efficient methods of retreival. This means that the our early search engines are changing at an increasing rate all the time. They are unflinching in their quest to locate and categorize information. Even in their early days, search engine strategists realized that human capability would pale in light of the mountain range of information that had be sorted. So the first thing they did, was to create robots who could endlessly search for fresh data, photograph it, note it's location and then categorize it. Once that was done, it was a fairly small step to create a way to summon up that photo of the information from the location the robots had posted. No library in the world would even dare to attempt to catelog all of the other books in all of the other libraries in the world. And even with such advanced techniques we are still only cataloging a small portion of the total amount of data that exists and is accessible. It may be that until we actually create an artificial intelligence that exactly mimics human quirks of looking for information, we will never find a search engine that can prowl through all the available information that exists, and show us only the items that relate perfectly to our information inquiries. (Tim Bray has written an awesome explanation of not only the history but also of the future of search engines in his "On Search; the Series" essays...it's well worth the read).
Will libraries survive the digital revolution? If you mean the physical location, then "yes". And in addition, they may look more and more like internet cafes instead of the Library at Alexandria, but yes, a place will exist where one can go and freely or at least cheaply access a huge amount of information. Of course the answer is also "No". If I can search all that information from home and get the same results, then what is the purpose of going to the library? Then on the other hand, there are social and psychological elements of library visitation. And maybe I will comment on that on another day.
If the question of survival of libraries as repositories of data is being asked, then definitely "yes". However, we are already pushing the limit of how much data the feeble human mind can deal with at any given time, so I suspect that the manner in which data is stored is likely to change. In fact, I beleive that we are moving more toward a multimedia type of data than in the past(or one could say that we are going back to early forms that worked well). Visual language in the sense of symbols, or aural meaning in the sense of auditory information, and perhaps other methods of utilizing other human sensing mechanism (touch, smell, and perhaps even taste) will be utilized at greater and greater rates. I also suspect that we will eventually learn to use robot type "workers" to cull through some of that data and make it more "digestable" to human mental processors (we already use Ipod robots to search through all of a days podcasts while we sleep, find those that the robot has been programmed to beleive that we would be interested in, and then download them into a "book" format, that we can listen to, as soon as we wake up, thereby saving us an immense amount of time).
One final note:
The name of this blog, "Rebuilding Indianola" has several meanings. It came to mine originally, when I was thinking about how humans respond to their environments. It reminded me of New Orleans, and the daring willingness to of man to always exist on that narrow ledge between terra firma and the aqua world. Indianola suffered the same fate as New Orleans, but Indianola didn't have the kind of consultants at hand to rebuild. I think the name also directly relates to this post. Virtually every great library that has ever existed has been burned, drowned, plundered, demolished or otherwise somehow destroyed. That has never killed the concept of data repository in the guise of "Library". The library as a concept is much greater than the sum of all the data that it contains. Furthermore, in every case where one was destroyed, another was built to be bigger, stronger, more beautiful and better able to store data than the one that was destroyed. And finally...I have put this post off for a week or so, even though I extensive posted my feelings about libraries on the "...on the road to the Royal Library at Ninevah..." blog , that was in use in a "Multiliteracy Class" last fall. At that time, I became more familiar with Library, Cybraries and modern Librarians and the way they view the world. I have come to follow many of their blogs fairly closely (See my Bloglines ). Last week, the American Library Association had it's annual convention. This convention was the first convention to be held in New Orleans, since the terrible flood of last year. Who knows....perhaps Indianola will be rebuilt.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]