Educational Discourse

Well, this was a tough decision but I’ve decided to pack up my tent and move. I am still using Educational Discourse for a title but I’m over at Wordpress so come on over for a look and re-enter me in your RSS or subscribe, if you’d like.

Well, as Dan points out, this tv thing has sure been a real discussion maker. Now, a few weeks ago, I wrote about Andrew Keen and his comments about the internet, professional media and monkeys. It was picked up by Vicki Davis who did a wonderful job in her post. Now, the one thing that struck me was her comment:

Insults do not accomplish anything, nor does stopping your ears

It also reminds me of those who would stop their ears as they rushed to burn heretics at the stake. Listening to the opinions of others (yes, even Keen’s) is a good thing. Listening to only one side is not.

So far, in various posts, I’ve been referred to as a hypocrite and a tv snob (in a good natured, teasing way.)

Let’s put the names away. There is no place for this when having a discussion or debate about something.

On that note, I took exception to Dan’s comment that this is a
nifty personality test for teachers. From my vantage point, this thing really defines you.

Now, as I replied to Dan, I wonder if he is really that shallow (in a teasing kind of way). I wonder how my thoughts or stance on a particular media can define me as a teacher, administrator and educator or be a test of my personality? I’m curious about this.

As a leader, I work very hard not to do such things to the teachers I work with or the students in the hallow halls of our school. I don’t dismiss parents ideas or points of view even when I dont’ agree with them. As many of you know, I have used these points as reflection moments for me on a topic - seeing where they are coming from and trying to find solutions for what is going on. This topic is no different, kinda.

See, I’ve had 13 years to reflect and think about this and look at the different sides. I don’t wear this a badge of honour, it’s a lifestyle choice just like eating organically or exercising or smoking or drinking or… However, for the first time, it has been suggested that this decision makes my professional integrity and my ability as an educator questionable. Whoa!

Now, I’ve had many a thing said because my family doesn’t have commercial tv but to make the leap to question my entire personality and professional integrity is a first.  Dan goes on to quote Michael K who left a comment from which I borrow:

To blindly eliminate television from ones environment isn’t a stand against television at all, it’s an admission that one cannot exist - simultaneously and in moderation - with an inanimate device; it isn’t a statement of intelligence, but an admission of ignorance.

So Dan, I do wonder at the shallow (again, in a teasing kind a way) suggestion that this defines me as a person or in any way has any reflection on me as a teacher. I hope you really don’t mean that, by not viewing a particular medium, I’m less professional or less able to do my work as an educator than you. That, in some way I’m ignorant because of a lifestyle decision. That in your desire to prove you point, you misrepresented yourself. As Vicki Davis summizes:

Listening to the opinions of others (yes, even Keen’s) is a good thing. Listening to only one side is not.

My discussion goes much beyond just the physcological effects of tv. I look at the physiological and physical effects and how that is impacting our society. I examine how such shows as Ultimate Fight have influenced events that have seriously affected the community in which I live.  I’ve watched how particular viewing habits of a spouse have had detrimental effects on a marriage, particularly two which were very close to me.

Also, I have 7 children, 5 of which go to the school in which I am a principal. You know what. They fit in and, gasp, aren’t freaks. Now, curiuosly, many of their friends “hang” at our house and one of the reasons is the activities that take place. So, besides just my children’s viewing habits, I get to hear what is going on with the viewing habits of other kids their age and we discuss everything from Pokemon to  Big Brother, American Idol, Sweet Sixteen plus a whole host of others.  I get to discuss and question and all those wonderful things that take place when discussions are lively. So, Dan, I probably get to discuss tv and programming much more than most teachers, to hear the reasons for viewing habits. And because I teach Communication Prodcution Technology, I have the students study the impact of radio, television, music, internet and other communication medium on society and on the individuals in my class. Blanket statements of “hypocracy reeking” need to be made when you are positive that your blanket will cover the whole. I’m disappointed that you would suggest such a thing about professionalism based on someone not agreeing with you. I don’t illegal do drugs but I discuss and will continue to discuss the harmful effects of their use on the body, even my use of legal drugs like caffeine and painkillers. I don’t understand NASCAR watching but I have a very good friend who has been to Indy twice. I can, however, appreciate the skill of the drivers and the wonder of the cars and have, in past garage discussions, been able to partake in discussions about NASCAR because of my own experience with cars. I’m not a historian nor have I been to Rome but I do a pretty good job of teaching the fall of the Roman Empire, the aftermath. Oh, I do game - the fall of Rome and my students will hopefully be doing that next year.

I could continue but the point is I don’t buy your comment that

• As teachers, whether we read blogs or read books or watch t.v. or listen to music or not, we can help students sort through a given medium’s good & bad.  (Reading and watching and listening tends to help, though.)
• But we cannot do that — truly we cannot engage our students in a discussion of why a particular show is worth our time or whether we are spending too much time engaged by a particular medium — if, in the backs of our heads, we’re muttering to ourselves, “T.V. is just wrecking these kids,” if we don’t share their curiosity or their tuning to the potential of things. Really we can’t. That kind of disgenuousness is blatant and hypocrisy reeks.

You comment that

my input on the matter has devolved frustratingly into a series of “that isn’t what I said,” comments.

Well, you did say the above. I don’t agree. I will stand that the ill effects of television are causing problems in our society that go beyond just the psychological. I do not believe that I have to “do” in order to be able to comment or actually have an informed opinion. To question my professionalism and suggest that a single action defines my personality is, well, shallow. As with other discussions,  I know that to continue will do no good, listening has stopped.

I usually temper my comments and posts but am offended at your suggestions, especially when you make yourself out to be standard of professionalism at my expense. As a next-gen administrator and superintendent, I’m looking for people who can appreciate other’s views without demeaning them as being less than.  You fippantly toss free-speech into the mix yet suggest that those who don’t agree with you are less than professional, of which you are the epitome.

Dean, it’s okay that you suggest the snob thing. I’ve read your posts and I think that a compromise can be reach on the grounds that this is not personal. You don’t really think I’m a snob - really.  I guess that, because I am involved in so many things and my children partake in a number of activities, tv is not a priority and, instead of watching tv, we do other things as a family. Also, I would suggest that my use of other media and web2.0 tools gives me a bit different of a perspective. I don’t think that the moderate use of television is bad. In fact, as you state :

but it’s been proven that tv makes you smarter

Okay. So does gaming but you’ve stated

I don’t do video games. 

 You don’t wear it as a badge but you comment on their use in education. Neither do I wear a “We don’t have tv badge.” but I don’t shrink when challenged much the same way as I don’t when challenged about my faith, my wife’s and my decision to have more than 2 children or a number of things that people have raised their eyebrows at. After a while, you begin to see that people’s prejudices are coming through their comments. I usually shrug and not bother.

This time, however, my professionalism and integrity as a teacher is being questioned. So, let’s turn the tables - what makes you or anyone else who watches television an expert in human relations and the ability to discuss the effects of television on students. What does watching television have to do with intelligence or professional integrity or personality? Please verify you have some data or proof that makes television watchers more professional and personably more capable to conduct their jobs in the educational field. Please also verify that in order to comment on any subject you actually have to have first hand knowledge of the subject. (Note - we can throw out most of what happens in schools because I would bet most teachers do not have actual experience.)  I have 5 plus subjects that I discuss this with regularly and who question my decision making at almost every turn. They push me to support myself and look for any weakness in my arguement. This not only goes for television but for music, the inernet and its use, movies, books and other forms of media. As an English teacher, I’ve discussed at length the reading of various magazines and their impact on the young women in society. I’ve even had papers written on them. And on tv watching. As you can tell, this has hit a sore spot with me. The absolute absurdness of what has been said because I think that there are more negatives with television than positives is in fact the exact closed mindedness that is being denounced.

“Sigh” - it is not easy to disagree with the popular societal thought. I guess that’s one reason being an educator is so tough. It is our duty to help students question popular societal beliefs. As an administrator, I’ve had to stand by my decisions despite them not being popular. I’ve had to call students assumptions despite my own personal beliefs. That’s what lifelong learning is all about and that’s being a teacher.

Well, I’ve gone on long enough. I hope that I’ve clarified this whole question of personal lifestyle vs professionalism and having to do in order to have informed discussions. If not, guess I’d better get around to smokin’ a doobie, doing a line and buying a 24 so I can discuss the ill affects of drugs and alcohol. Wonder if I can get a flight to Rome and find some German immigrants?

My name is Kelly. I’ve been free of commercial television for 13 years now. Well, that’s not true. Every Christmas while staying at the hotel with my wife’s family, I can’t help but watch a few Star Trek and CSI.

There is a great discussion going on at Crucial Thought  about television - with Dan Meyers and Dean Shareski commenting for television and Mrs Durff commenting against. Well, as you can tell, I’m a non-tv person and better for it I think.

My wife and I first emptied our house of a television 13 years ago when my oldest daughter, then 2 years old, wouldn’t go to bed because a video she liked wasn’t finished. Now after a temper tantrum of 7.5 on the Richter scale, we were able to get her to her room and in bed. Hey, we were young parents then! We went upstairs. A while later I could hear the tv and wondered “Didn’t I shut that off?” Off I went to check it out.

There she sat. Tv on, video in and watching. She had turned it on, with the remote because the power button was broken, set the channel and loaded the video and hit play. 2. Maybe I should have been happy or impressed with what she was able to accomplish at that age. Instead I was horrified that she could already do that to get what she wanted. I got rid of the tv the next day.

Well, 13 years later,  we do have a tv but no commercial channels. We haven’t had any commercial tv in all that time except for a few months here or there when we moved and it was still connected. Now, I’ve heard everything about how it will rob my children of a normal life (how will they know what the other kids are talking about?) to we’ll be out of touch with the world and world events (surprisingly, my children are as well as, if not more, informed because they have to actively pursue the information.) I’ve heard that it is hypocritical as a teacher who should be open to using all media to teach (I do use specific programs and segments. What I’ve found, however, is that most teachers break all kinds of copyright laws and, if they needed to follow the laws more closely, they wouldn’t use as much television.)

My observations as a teacher and a parent are isolated to my own children - all 7 of them - and their interactions with their friends. Through the years they have had a different level of exposure to television and it has had an effect on their learning, I believe. Also, my wife and I, both teachers, have a very unique family dynamic in that we have 4 girls and 3 boys with a 4 year separation between the youngest girls and oldest boy. We have monitored the effect of television on both groups and seen that, yes, it does have an effect depending on what they watch.

As I have stated, I have heard so many arguements for having tv.  I don’t try to impose our decision on others. However, I don’t buy that by not having television my children or I are somehow missing out on the world and we are  not normal or whatever. We choose to use our time differently, that’s all. So, instead of watching tv or a movie, we play games with our children. On Friday and Saturdays, especially during the winter, we play games both nights. During the summer, only one night. What’s interesting is that we usually have a number of kids over at our house on one of those two nights to play games because they don’t at home. I’ve learned more about my kids friends from those nights than you can imagine. We laugh, joke, eat popcorn and have all kinds of fun. My wife and I have worked hard to keep this time for our children. Much harder than if we had just watched tv.

My children are also very involved in many different activities, as am I and, really, none of us have time to spend sitting on a couch watching shows with all that we have to do.  So how do we relax and unwind? Well, we all read. We have access to the internet where, recently, we have accessed a few shows and viewed them. However, they have been viewed in 35 minutes and not an hour and there are no commercials. Very different and we pick and choose. We listen to music and the radio. I have made use of my nano and listened to podcasts from a variety of different educators and thinkers who post on a regular basis. (Doing it now as I write this - Coming of age.) We do a variety of sports and family activities.

Now, Dan has stated:

But in the classroom, I worry about any teacher who just casts off t.v. as blithely as both Chris and Mrs. Durff do in their personal lives. When Mrs. Durff drops the double exclamation point after “I don’t even own a tv,” I read it exactly the same as:

“I don’t even own a DVD player!!”
“I don’t even own an iPod!!”
“I don’t even own a computer!!”

Each of those spews out horrendous immoral crap.

But one of our most basic charges as teachers is to help kids make sense of the world around them, which includes the media that engages them. The same discerning, wheat-and-chaff-separating stance we take towards blogs in the classroom must be identical to the one we take towards t.v. Anything less is hypocritical, I’m afraid.

Sorry Dan. I’m not hypocritical because I know what good programming is and what isn’t just as I haven’t visited every website, I can still tell the difference between good information and garbage. I can separate the wheat from the chaff by discussing various television programs and, through having children describe them, explain them, defend them and question them, chaff and wheat are separated. I don’t have to have a particular item in my house to do a good job of helping students learn to discern what is and isn’t good information.
Personal aside: Question, Dan, do you have a truck? If not, does that mean you don’t have a car? Bike? Scooter? Motorbike? All are modes of transportation just as tv is a method of communication. Not having one doesn’t preclude not having another and doing so is like concluding that because you don’t wear glasses you can see well.

Dean then adds that

Broadcast TV is changing and I think considering Television to be bad is akin to saying the internet is bad just because there’s bad stuff on it.

The biggest difference I see is that I choose where I am going on the internet, I’m not constantly bombarded by advertising (although this is changing) and it is at my time not a prescheduled time. So, you are right, there are good programs on but, alas, most are not on when my family and I want to watch them so we find other things to do.

In the past 13 years, we’ve had numerous people wonder about us not having tv “What do you do?” (With 7 children one of my uncles has suggested he get us cable so we’ll find something else to do )  I’ve heard so many arguements in relation to tv yet none have proved to be true for myself or any of my children. Are we different? You bet but it’s a good different. My children read, are involved in a multitude of sports, can play for hours with a cardboard box and have friends who come over to play games. In time, my wife and I will have to bow out but I’m hoping they’ll keep coming back. Dean and Dan, sorry, but I’m with the others who don’t have tv and you will really have to work to convince me that the decision my wife and I made 13 years ago was not a good decision. With the many different options for youth today, eliminating one has made it a bit easier for my children - they don’t have to try and fit in “their favourite show” or “I can’t, my show is on at that time” or all the other things I’ve heard. Best of all, no fights for the remote and what we’ll watch next. That has been worth it all 

I usually don’t wander too far from the topic of school. However, today, I feel that maybe there is something to be learned from my experience at the ball game.

I coach girls softball and have three of my own daughters on the team. Now, we aren’t stellar but they like to have fun and, if they win, it’s that much better. We don’t have a star pitcher and we miss some pop flies and grounders but the team is playing better and we’ve actually won three games. WooHoo!

Today, we played a very strong team. Good pitcher - throws hard windmills between 50 and 70 miles an hour and  lots of strikes. We hit a few off her and had some players on base. Now, by the end of the third inning, our girls were getting beat 18 to 1 and not having any fun. They wanted to just go home. Then it happened. One of the girls was batting and hit a ball. The umpire didn’t call it fair or foul, no one knew what to do. I was telling the batter to run, she was confused, the backcatcher was confused and finally threw the ball to first. We all waited for a call. Finally the ball was called foul. I’m not sure what the ump said to my player but it obviously offended her and then the next pitch was called a strike. My player turned a flung her bat - not a good move. This is when it got ugly - some parents from the opposing team started yelling “Poor Sport” at the player - she’s 14 years old!!! So, I told them that they should be quiet and I’ll deal with my player, Thank you! The rest of the inning went on - one of the fans became very vocal about yelling for the pitcher to mow them down, throw it down the pipe and so on. Finally, it ended.

Now, I could have just walked over to the bench. I didn’t. As a principal, I’ve learned that sometimes we need to show kids that although they made a mistake, we’ll stand there to protect them from some of the nasties that people will doll out. So, into the stands I go. I explained that it was really unnecessary for them to say anything - that I have 10 year old girls facing a really good pitcher and they’re trying to stay in there. That we were here to have fun and, really, we weren’t having any fun and the comments from them weren’t helping. One mother told me “We know. We’ve been there.” So I asked that, if that was the case, why would they do that to other kids? What was the point? Heckling from the adults wasn’t making this any better - especially when the score was so lopsided. What was their reason for doing such a thing to a kid?

Over to the dugout I go. I talked to my player, who was mad at whatever the ump had said to her - she wouldn’t tell me. A little while later I find out someone has phoned the police because fans were getting a bit “ugly” with their comments. But everyone quit talking and heckling. Then it happened. The other team finally replaced their “ace” - score 24 - 3 and put in a rookie. We scored 6 runs. My girls started having fun. They wanted to bat. They wanted to play. They had a 3 up 3 down inning. They scored 6 more in the top of the last inning. They were having fun. They were singing and just playing really well. They knew that they could be in the game.

At the end of the game something else happened. Members of the other team refused to shake some of my players hands and my hand.

We went over to our dugout and I pointed out that, no matter what happened during a game, they were to shake hands of everyone - that not shaking someone’s hand was not an option. Now,  on the way home, we were talking and one of the girls asked me why I didn’t give it to the fans. They were rude and poor sports. So, before I could say anything, my own daughter replied that it would have just caused more problems and it would only show that you meet aggression with aggression. Instead, by voicing my disappointment in what they had done calmly, they couldn’t really do anything. She then pointed out that the girls had learned well from their parents  when they didn’t shake hands.

I just smiled and nodded. That’s what makes or breaks things in the world outside school - and it took me a lot longer to realize that than it did my 15 year old daughter. We might not have won the game but the life lesson that took place on that diamond was worth the price of admission in my books!

As I was driving home today, I was listening to CBC radio. Now, my drive home is, oh, about 5 minutes and I really should walk more but I was running behind today and it looked like it might rain. I just happened to tune in when a guest columnist from the Globe and Mail was talking about the world obsession with sports, particularly North America. As he highlighted several new trends in sports, it became apparent that, for most people, we would rather sit on something and watch someone else be active than actually do all that sweating for ourselves.

Now this whole phenomena has been well documented in our media as we fight an ever increasing growth at the mid-section in all age groups. Now the one thing that was apparent in the program was that if you could make the sport professional or part of the Olympics or some other international sporting event, then people would get active. So, after reading Dave Sherman’s post at LeaderTalk, I began thinking that maybe we could combine what we are doing with technology and help our kids get in shape at the same time.

That’s were Kick the Can comes in. You see, any child can play kick the can. What we need to do is convince someone that this is a plausible idea, that it would be good for the health of our students, would be of little cost for equipment (of course it would depend on the type of can we chose as the official KTC can.) Now, in order to make this a worthwhile endeavour, we would use technology to make contacts throughout the world with schools who would compete in the international KTC league. Schools in local areas could compete against one another, moving on to the international event. Just think, a fun game that would get our kids back in shape and introduce a bit of technology along the way. Can’t you see it? Schools sponsored by Nike or other companies to train and get in shape. Students would be motivated to eat healthy and keep in shape as there would be international recognition on the line. Parents would be pumped to have their children getting healthy. To add some excitement, parents from the school would have to compete and there would be a special category for those schools whose parents and students advanced. We could even widen it to include teachers.

If you’re wondering if I’ve lost my mind, well, that is questionable. But, as I was listening to the blurb, I really wondered why we have to have more studies from yet more experts who continue to tell us we’re getting obese. My belt is telling me that! However, no matter how much we are told, it seems we cannot change what we have been doing because it is hard. Not impossible, but hard. Not insurmountable but very, very difficult. Really, getting off the couch to actually play ball is a lot tougher than watching the Blue Jays or whatever team play their games. And, well, their much better at it and I could never play at that level so I’ll just watch continuing with my lifestyle even though the watching and eating is leading me to certain health problems. I know. I’m intelligent. I’m a teacher.

Does this sound familiar?

It does not sound much different from the conversations people are having about what is going on in schools. Yeah, we know that they should change but we’re really too comfortable with how they are even though they aren’t really good for the students and may cause them certain problems down the road. Yeah, we know that the students have changed, just as we know that the food we eat has changed but, in both cases, we just can’t accept that we really have to change our habits. Maybe they’ll find a chemical way to shed the pounds or settle the kids. It’s not that teachers and the rest of society doesn’t work hard but there is an unwillingness to accept that life is changing in all facets and if we don’t make changes in how our society functions, we’re going to be in such serious trouble that KTC leagues may not seem that outlandish.

So what do we do as we watch so many around us continue to do what they have done even though it is really unhealthy? Well, what methods are being used to get the message out that we’re eating unhealthy, too inactive and we need to stop? Maybe we have to take a look at what other areas of society are doing to see how they are trying to inform the public regarding something that is serious for many but not enough people directly influencing the children are doing something to curb the problem. How many of us see whole families that need to change their habits? Is it up to us to say something? While we debate that issue, we should really look at what is happening under our roofs and decide “Is there a problem? If so, what do we need to do about it? As I’ve been thinking about the PD for teachers next year, some of it I have to plan, I’ve been twirling around this idea of combining technology to get the message out about Healthy Living and Healthy Lifestyles. Using this as a theme with our Reading Goals to have students more aware of healthy lifestyles and living. I’ll keep building with my wiki and let you see how things are a bit later in the summer!

W e do need to collaborate, both locally and internationally, in order the build a critical mass of teachers that will bring this to the forefront and move it into the mainstream discussions. As it is, I hear to many people comment about how it is not. One of the Horizon Project teachers, Julie Lindsay, was telling me about her new assignment:

 My challenge next year (August) is walking into a new school as Head of IT where it seems the IT skills are low and Web 2.0 skills are almost non-existent. What do I do? What approach should we be taking as a school? Can we fast track somehow?

I’ve heard this from a number of people. Maybe, by combining our efforts, internationally, we can bring a focus on a few different topics: poverty, child suffering, obesity and other such disorders ….. I guess the trick would be to have a focus that, with students working together, we could impact society in a real manner, bringing light to some of the problems that we are facing. Now, I’m not suggesting we provide definitive answers but, much like the work of Vicki Davis, Julie Lindsay, Clarence Fisher and other teachers involved in international learning projects, we can present information that will be viewed by the public - bring it more mainstream. Try to get various other partners involved who could support the learning of the students. Technology use would just be the vehicle and the means and not the focus. What do you think?  Or, we could start to organize the KTC teams!