Miriam,
It's an interesting topic. Does a single event impact us enough to
change our entire outlook? And what causes a person to be so impacted
by a single event, while another individual shrugs it off? My mother
used to say it was because I was "too sensitive". My ex wife said I
wasn't sensitive enough. Oh well...
Carl Jarvis
On 8/15/20, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So, I, too, have a blackboard story. I have always been terrible at math and
aside from whatever my natural proclivities, I suspect it has to do with a
traumatic experience in first grade. There I was, sitting in the front row,
while Miss Bird, my first grade teacher gave the class our first lesson in
how to add up numbers. I couldn't see the numbers. I could see the line and
I could see that there were numbers above the line and numbers beneath the
line, and I could hear what she said. But I couldn't see what she was doing
and I didn't understand. I remember going to my aunt's house for lunch that
day, right after that math lesson, and I remember being very upset. I
attribute my math disability to the challenge of that day. Now, a bit of
explanation. My eye specialist filled out forms describing my visual
disability for school. If he would have written down my far vision, I would
have been placed in a school with a braille resource room. But he wanted me
to be placed with sighted children so he wrote down only what my close
vision was at the time, and that qualified me for a sight conservation
resource room. The teacher in charge of that room, did, in fact, teach me
math. She taught me to read while I was still in Kindergarten. And she
enlarged all the work books that I used in the regular class by hand,
pasting in all of the pictures. So I was certainly taught how to do
arithmetic. Probably, she started the very afternoon of that morning lesson
in the regular class. Nevertheless, it left its mark.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2020 8:05 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Scores of Education Experts Call on Schools
to Reject Screen-Saturated Return to Learning
After reading Erica's comments, I went back and read the article a bit more
slowly than my usual skimming. Thanks for the post, Miriam, and thanks for
the thoughts, Erica.
Deviating somewhat, the bit about eyestrain got me wandering back to those
"carefree" days at John Hay grade school(K through
8)(1940-1949) As one of the three tallest boys in the school I was always
seated in the back of the room...so, as my teacher put it, the other
children could see the chalk board. As a boy burdened by the weight of
bifocals, along with being among the shyest of students, I was unable to
read the writing on the chalk board, and far too shy to tell the teachers.
Fortunately I was an avid reader, spending most Saturday afternoons at the
local public library, because in class I did a great deal of faking.
But those chalk boards were never Black, as the name Black Board would
imply. Dusty grey and with the sun shining in, the glare finished wiping me
out. Oddly enough I did not seem to have the eye strain during high
school...maybe due to more handouts and less chalk board.
But when I attended the U, prior to becoming totally blind, I would spend
the day in class and the evening working in a restaurant, I did much of my
reading for class late at night and in poor lighting in my room. By this
time I'd lost the sight in my left eye, and when my right eye had done its
best, it just shut down.
And yet, I find myself smiling longingly as I reflect those tortured days.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/15/20, Erica R <ericarosemotz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Agree with this perspective. The privacy issue of virtual learning has
been a debate in nursing programs as well, as in my program and in
others, nursing students are submitted to so-called remote proctoring
of our examinations. We're required to download an application that
accesses our webcam so we can be monitored while testing, and are
required to provide a scan of our government-issued identification and
our living space to prove our identity and show that there are no
potential cheating materials laying about. What happens to this
information and footage? I believe other disciplines are now beginning to
use this type of software.
Rachel Walker, a nursing educator at University of Massachusetts
Amherst, wrote the following on this phenomenon:
"We make a mistake when we introduce a carceral approach that assumes,
from the very beginning, that students will cheat and copy. Because
these assumptions, even if they do occasionally happen, are
dehumanizing to students and also to the educators that foster them."
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 8:18 PM Miriam Vieni
<miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Scores of Education Experts Call on Schools to Reject
Screen-Saturated Return to Learning "Now is the time for parents and
teachers to come together and demand what children really need."
byAndrea Germanos, staff writer
Seven-year-old Hamza Haqqani, a 2nd grade student at Al-Huda Academy,
uses a computer to participate in an E-learning class with his
teacher and classmates while at his home on May 01, 2020 in Bartlett,
Illinois.
Seven-year-old Hamza Haqqani, a 2nd grade student at Al-Huda Academy,
uses a computer to participate in an E-learning class with his
teacher and classmates while at his home on May 01, 2020 in Bartlett,
Illinois.
(Photo:
Scott Olson/Getty Images)
As school districts across nation make plans for the fall
semester-with the ongoing coronavirus pandemic forcing varying
degrees of reliance on remote learning-scores of education experts on
Tuesday sounded the alarm over the very real threat to students posed
by increased screen time.
The warning comes in a new statement (pdf) that cites risks to
student privacy, the potential entrenchment of controversial
educational technology (EdTech), and students' need for authentic and
human engagement.
"Our children and our nation deserve nothing less than safe schools
and low-tech, child-centered, educator-driven learning."
-Education experts joint statement"With no end in sight to the
pandemic, school leaders would do well to remember that remote
learning does not have to equal online learning, and to emphasize
offline approaches to support children's wellbeing and learning,"
said Faith Boninger, Ph.D. of the National Education Policy Center at
the University of Colorado Boulder's School of Education.
Boninger is one of 70 experts that signed onto the statement authored
by the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood's (CCFC) Children's
Screen Time Action Network. The call is also backed by three dozen
advocacy groups including the Massachusetts Teachers Association,
Badass Teachers Association, Boston Teachers Union, and
ParentsTogether.
The groups say their message applies "whether school is in-person,
remote, or some combination thereof" and suggest educators eye with
suspicion claims from the companies that sell educational technology
under the guise of personalized learning. As the joint statement
explains:
Seizing an opportunity to capture a larger portion of the $10
trillion global education market, for-profit EdTech vendors are
selling families and policymakers the false premise that EdTech
products offer effective and budget-friendly ways to learn. In
reality, the products are costly to purchase and maintain, and
frequently crowd teachers and staff out of the budget. The products
also ensnare students, whose data and brand loyalty are harvested,
and who often become targets of relentless marketing efforts.
These efforts include the insidious practice of upselling, through
which students and their families are pushed to purchase premium
versions, thereby exacerbating inequalities among students. Equally
important, these programs reduce the roles played by creative,
compassionate teachers in educating the whole child.
"Learning happens best in the context of human relationships and is
lost when the balance is skewed toward online platforms," the groups
argue.
The statement goes on to cite research debunking technology's claims
of boosting educational outcomes and adverse physical impacts-from
eye strain to worsened sleep-from prolonged screen time.
"We're at a critical juncture when it comes to the education of our
children, and we cannot let pandemic profiteering set the educational
agenda for our children for years to come."
-Josh Golin, Campaign for a Commercial-Free ChildhoodMore insidious
impacts are possible with increased digital device time as well, the
groups say, giving as one example the threat that "sensitive student
data, once processed into 'de-identified data,' can be used for
non-educational, profitable activities. Worse, de-identified data can
be reconstituted as personally-identifiable data."
Simply put, "reducing screen use during the pandemic has to be a
priority-no matter the adopted reopening plan," say the child
advocates.
To make that happen, the statement outlines five guiding principles
for educational institutions as schools reopen during the ongoing
pandemic:
Limiting screen time so that's used only for necessary and
intentional purposes. "Algorithm-driven adaptive learning platforms,
gamified learning, and similar apps that incorporate persuasive
design to keep kids online should be avoided."
Remote learning "should be driven by human interactions and designed
to maximize student engagement and agency through use of project-and
place-based pedagogies and other self directed projects."
Hands-on learning must be maximized through activities such as
"reading actual books, writing by hand, art, movement, outdoor play,
real-world math projects, and nature exploration."
Investment should be made in educators, not EDTech.
Schools must be mindful of privacy protections for students when
bringing any technology into the learning environments.
"Our children and our nation deserve nothing less than safe schools
and low-tech, child-centered, educator-driven learning," says the
statement.
According to CCFC executive director Josh Golin, the choices schools
make now will have reverberations well beyond the coronavirus crisis.
"We're at a critical juncture when it comes to the education of our
children, and we cannot let pandemic profiteering set the educational
agenda for our children for years to come," Golin said in a
statement.
"During remote learning last spring, millions of parents saw
firsthand the ineffectiveness and downsides of EdTech," he said. "Now
is the time for parents and teachers to come together and demand what
children really need."
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike
3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.