Rant Anyone?

So, as a preface to my commentary here, I’d just like to say that I am looking forward to the presentations on Thursday, because in all honesty, this week’s reading was challenging for me. I’m not too sure why, but I have had a difficult time getting to a point where I feel as though I truly comprehend the discussion taking place across these three readings, especially with regards to Kress’s “Multimodality” article. As for the bits that I did fully grasp, I feel as though a “ditto” to Erika’s post would probably encompass the better part of my thoughts this week.

However, there are a few things that came out of the Seiter article, in particular, that I want to address from my perspective as a teacher. After reading her work, and despite her overt (and self-acknowledged) negativity, I still want to say to her, “Thank you! At last someone has said it!”

Now, don’t get me wrong, I love technology, and I think that its use can truly revolutionize the educational process, when instituted in a manner that facilitates students’ overall learning and growth. However, I am with Seiter when she says that oftentimes technology is viewed as this “silver bullet” which will somehow manage to kill all educational woes. As she so forcefully states, IT DOESN’T WORK THAT WAY. And I honestly believe that if it did work that way, there would be no need for a program such as ours. I feel that learning about media literacy education is a means for educating educators about how to effectively teach media so that it can be a positive force within the educational realm. As it stand now, though, with so many holding the views so forcefully challenged by Seiter’s article, it can even, at times, cause more harm than good.

I just keep thinking back to her discussion of High Tech High, and I just get so irritated. As a public school teacher, I am constantly being told that “I’m not doing enough” or that “I need to be doing better.” Well, as a teacher who easily works 50-60 hours in a typical week, I really am doing all that I can, to the best of my abilities. My resources are often limited, and yet my students still score relatively well on standardized tests. And as Seiter points out in her article, students in traditional schools often score better when tested for actual content knowledge. I get really tired of being constantly compared to other schools and teachers, especially when, as Seiter states, schools like High Tech High can afford public relations reps and billions of dollars worth of PR and equipment to make themselves look good. Honestly, how is a normal teacher supposed to compete with that? (I can feel myself slipping into my “lack of regulation for charter schools” tirade right about now, so I’m going to move on…)

And as a final note, because I’m into my 500th word, I also really appreciated her assertion in the beginning that “computers cannot teacher-proof the classroom.” Do I feel as though computers and all that they bring with them have a place within the educational system? OF COURSE I do. However, I do not think that they should be an excuse for shoving 45-50 students in one class. If there is anything that has been emphasized over the three readings that I did fully understand, it’s that technology, like any other text, must learn to “read.” You need teachers to teach that.