Comments on danah boyd on handheld social networkingTypePad2008-10-14T14:57:17ZEwan McIntoshhttps://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2008/10/danah-boyd-on-h/comments/atom.xml/John Connell commented on 'danah boyd on handheld social networking'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451f00f69e20105359fd7db970c2008-10-21T14:50:09Z2008-10-21T14:50:09ZJohn Connellhttp://www.johnconnell.co.uk/blog/Which, of course, is precisely what Joe is arguing.......I hit POST just a little too quickly there.<p>Which, of course, is precisely what Joe is arguing.......I hit POST just a little too quickly there.</p>John Connell commented on 'danah boyd on handheld social networking'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451f00f69e20105359fd519970c2008-10-21T14:47:17Z2008-10-21T14:47:17ZJohn Connellhttp://www.johnconnell.co.uk/blog/"I not only know why I would choose to teach Shakespeare in preference to Webster; Milton in preference to Blake;...<p>"I not only know why I would choose to teach Shakespeare in preference to Webster; Milton in preference to Blake; Anthony Powell above Evelyn Waugh or Margaret Attwood instead of Jeanette Winterson, I could if necessary, argue very articulately the critical reasoning behind those choices."</p>
<p>Is it better to teach Shakespeare in preference to Webster or instead to teach both in order to convince why Shakespeare is a better writer than Webster?</p>Ewan McIntosh commented on 'danah boyd on handheld social networking'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451f00f69e20105358be906970b2008-10-17T08:56:16Z2008-10-17T08:56:17ZEwan McIntoshhttp://edu.blogs.comThe views in this post are danah's and not mine, reported best I could. I think I agree with you...<p>The views in this post are danah's and not mine, reported best I could. I think I agree with you both that there's more to learning that she stated, and joy is a big part of that with the role of teacher as informed guide.</p>Joe Nutt commented on 'danah boyd on handheld social networking'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451f00f69e201053588c173970b2008-10-16T16:56:02Z2008-10-16T16:56:02ZJoe Nutthttp://joenutt.squarespace.comHave to agree with Chris on this one Ewan. I became a teacher because I believed there was a lot...<p>Have to agree with Chris on this one Ewan. I became a teacher because I believed there was a lot I’d learned about the rich and varied culture I’d been lucky enough to inherit, that was worth passing on to a younger generation. One of the least understood, and most successful of all pedagogical strategies is the successful transference of knowledge, not information but knowledge, by individuals who have distinguished themselves as highly successful learners. We conventionally call them teachers. </p>
<p>This actually ties in rather neatly with the fascinating discussion about literacy which I kick-started on John’s blog recently. In the curriculum for excellence review of language and literacy compiled by Vivienne Smith and Sue Ellis from the University of Strathclyde, you’ll find this statement in section 4 on new literacies, “we are challenged to consider whose literacy practices we are promoting in school, and why some types of text have more status than others,” Some of us aren’t challenged by this at all because we know we are promoting a priceless cultural inheritance, built up over centuries through the painstaking efforts of writers, artists, musicians and their critics. And we know, literally not metaphorically (see my point about knowledge above) because we have learned to make the very sophisticated judgments necessary, which texts have more status than others. Put in practical terms that means I not only know why I would choose to teach Shakespeare in preference to Webster; Milton in preference to Blake; Anthony Powell above Evelyn Waugh or Margaret Attwood instead of Jeanette Winterson, I could if necessary, argue very articulately the critical reasoning behind those choices. And in my experience, that learned ability commands respect, even in the most barbaric classroom. </p>
<p>On the different issue of the Demos video and teenage online behaviour. I enjoyed the paper by Danah Boyd although couldn’t find much that was new in it, and agree completely with her concluding remarks: “As a society, we need to figure out how to educate teens to navigate social structures that are quite unfamiliar to us because they will be faced with these publics as adults, even if we try to limit their access now…Perhaps instead of trying to stop them or regulate usage, we should learn from what teens are experiencing? They are learning to navigate networked publics; it is in our better interest to figure out how to help them.” I don’t believe Demos was helping them one bit by suggesting “I am whatever I say I am” is a safe, honest or reasonable way to go about creating the online persona, that will probably stay with them for life.</p>chris commented on 'danah boyd on handheld social networking'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451f00f69e2010535897bf4970c2008-10-14T19:04:00Z2008-10-14T19:04:00Zchrishttp://blethers.blogspot.comThe reason we taught literature, film, mathematics in the past was to provide a reason for people to think. D'you...<p><i>The reason we taught literature, film, mathematics in the past was to provide a reason for people to think.</i><br />
D'you think? Not to enlarge their experience, not to share beauty (well, maybe not the maths...), not to give them joy?</p>