Just do it!

I really enjoyed Kathleen's post and the NYT article she points us to, but especially the discourse on fluency in "poetry language" having been pushed to the brink by the emergence of the novel (the apocalyptical language is mine:).  I couldn't help but think of my mother being loathe to read anything on the internet--I think she is as uncomfortable with what she finds there as any of my students are when I put poetry (modern or not) in front of them.  And I tell her, without meaning to be patronizing, just do it!  Just as I tell my students that they will learn to read poetry (and maybe to like it, although that isn't as essential to me as they think it is) by giving themselves permission to read poetry.

Ellen Filgo was featured for her per-twitter-formance with Gardner's class last semester--in the Chronicle of Higher Education.  A great experience for the students to have a research librarian at their fingertips, even reading their virtual minds via their conversations in the class. Magic, they say!

Taken to heart

The wild week is flying to its end, I can't wait for the space that the weekend provides--for thought, as well as recreation, that I didn't fit in this week.  And I can't help but take heart Nelson's "You can learn anything (even computers!)" and Emily's points about how "vague impressions" are a fine place to start, and we don't have to be ashamed of it as we try to gather insights and learn what we want to know.  It is not a weakness to show that you don't know something.  It is not a weakness to what to know more.  If we have the nerve (Nelson, not me) we can learn/do/create/know anything.  I want this for my children, and I want it for me!

Tools v learning: what is essential?

Hello all!  I miss you what with these snow/ice/60 degree days that we've been having.  I'm trying to put my finger on things for New Media when all I can think of is "re-newing" learning.  If this goes too far down the education path, feel free to join or chide me. 

Problem: when did "let's google it" become the answer, instead of the tool?
It seems to me that all the assembly, augmentation and linking of material, facts, items, information, stuff, is only as good as the one who actually "googles" and finds out something s/he needs to know.  If you google anything and are satisfied that the first entry (read: wikipedia) and in fact, just skim that for whatever "fact" you needed in order to answer the question...is this less or more dangerous than not knowing the answer in the first place?  It is a false sense of knowledge, it is limited in perspective (and I am actually a fan of wikipedia, not a critic), and it certainly doesn't make you think--because you have the answer, right?  So suppose you don't have any natural curiosity left? You don't look at other links, you don't even use the links that wikipedia authors have provided--you certainly don't notice the alert that occurs on almost every wikipedia page (for example) reminding us of what is missing (absence...hmmm....that is another post entirely).

When did you become curious?  intellectually curious?  we associate this with childhood, and we even said in class (weeks ago) that K-12 as currently designed doesn't seem to subscribe to the importance of intellectual curiosity.  Is it a function of our disciplines?  If so, why am I curious about math and science (and not just their history which I would call part of my discipline)?  And how do we "breed" that sort of curiosity in our students?