June 30, 2009 Class
Class started with a mental exercise regarding where the future of technology may be taking us. The technologies are available to keep individuals “wired” to their environment so that surroundings, like billboard signs, would reflect the person’s interests. Advertisements might be for restaurants that an individual likes or for music that one likes. I think a system like this would result in people who only live in the world that they are comfortable with. They will never be exposed to new ideas or experiences. Being bombarded with stimuli that is known to be pleasing to someone will cause them to be inadaptable to less favorable situations. One might argue that to some extent this is already the case today. If one has personal information about themselves “floating around” in the air around them it might also give people seeking to do harm another avenue to do so. This technology, as with all technology, gives not only people who wish to do good more tools, but it also gives those who wish to do bad. It might make these people more powerful and capable of harming others. I think overall the negative aspects of such a situation outweigh the positive.
The two digital domain reviews included a simulator that allows someone to input details of a particular lifestyle, like food consumption and physical activity, and watch the effects on the body; and the other was the computer game Spore. The simulator can be found at http://phet.colorado.edu/simulations/sims.php?sim=Eating_and_Exercise. This simulator would be good for a health, or to a lesser extent, biology class. This simulator would be beneficial for adolescent children who need to make lifestyle decisions. With guidance, this technology would allow students to draw conclusions about what type of lifestyle is most healthy and allow them to alter their habits to ensure a strong heart and body. The Spore game can be downloaded after doing a Google search for the game. I am not sure how beneficial this would be to studies in biology. It looks like a fun game; however it may lead to misconceptions about life and evolution. Scientists are not sure how life started so implying that it was from a meteor coming to Earth may lead students to believe this. Also, designing a creature to survive may not allow the students to realize that the changes are random. Certain species might be better suited for the environment, natural selection, or may survive due to chance, genetic drift. I am not sure if these aspects of evolution are easily understandable from this game so I would have to learn more about the game before deciding that it is worth using in a biology classroom.
We then worked on creating rubrics to aid in assessing student achievement. We were introduced to the website http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php. This site allows teachers to view other rubrics or design one’s own. This opens communication among teachers to create strong rubrics that assess students’ progress better. In groups we created rubrics and task lists to be used in grading our lesson plans.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
You exhibit well the “healthy dose of skepticism” regarding these technologies, present and future, Ryan. I wonder if adaptability and survival of the fittest could be profitably applied to the regular uses of these ingratiating technologies. Are we becoming too “soft,” too accustomed to customizing everything for our particular pleasure? Should there be a 12-step program? Konrad Lorenz, the ethologist, wrote an eye-opening book in the late 70’s “Civilized Man’s Eight Deadly Sins,” which raised serious questions about our survivability given that we’ve risen so far above the immediate touch of nature through our technology. What would he have to say today?!
July 7th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
I think you state one main problem with the commonly used technologies of today, being the computer, cell phone, ipod, etc. The general public uses technology for pleasure, often mindlessly. We often “play” with these technologies and lose a bit of what it means to be human and to advance our cause. If people decided to read some document online during the times that they choose to play a game, they would end up much smarter and better off. While walking around I pass many people with ipods in their ears. With little acknowledgement of myself or others around, they continue walking with no interaction. We don’t notice or distinguish the different bird sounds when we cannot hear them. We can only feel the breeze and not hear its strength. As you mention Lorenz may be correct in that we have lost our connection with both the wild nature and the interactive and mental expanding nature of the human being. We would much rather associate with earbuds and flat screens.