Distractions Are Us, Progress Tells Us So!
A friend posted this article from the Nov. 1, NYT to his Facebook page the other day: "Technology Is Changing How Students Learn, Teachers Say."
I'll note that "a version" of this was published as "For Better and for Worse, Technology Use Alters Learning Styles, Teachers Say" in the print edition. You decide if the web gurus who apply an "SEO" praxis to headlines worked some sticky magic.
Of course, both headlines are full of ambiguities and assumptions. Just look at the assumption that must be made to presume the reader knows what is being "meant" by the word "technology."
I think though that my favorite headline trick is the "tack on" to both: "teachers say."
But, it's not a tack-on really, it's the whole story. This piece purports to describe a "teacher's-eye-view" of how
I'll note that "a version" of this was published as "For Better and for Worse, Technology Use Alters Learning Styles, Teachers Say" in the print edition. You decide if the web gurus who apply an "SEO" praxis to headlines worked some sticky magic.
Of course, both headlines are full of ambiguities and assumptions. Just look at the assumption that must be made to presume the reader knows what is being "meant" by the word "technology."
I think though that my favorite headline trick is the "tack on" to both: "teachers say."
But, it's not a tack-on really, it's the whole story. This piece purports to describe a "teacher's-eye-view" of how
The case against accelerated reader
Sent to the Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, November 14
The case against accelerated reader (AR) is even stronger than the Jan Lacina’s article states (“Accelerated Reader: Teaching kids the 'game' of school testing, Nov. 13).
There is no clear evidence that AR works, even in the short term. AR has four components: It provides access to books, provides time to read, quizzes children on what they read, and awards prizes for performance on the quizzes. As Dean Lacina notes, it is well-established that providing books and time to read are effective, but AR research does not show that the quizzes and prizes add anything. Studies claiming AR is effective compare AR to doing nothing; gains were probably due to the reading, not the tests and prizes.
Also, AR could also have the effect of discouraging reading in the long run: Reading is intrinsically pleasant. Substantial research shows that rewarding an intrinsically pleasant activity sends the message that the activity is not pleasant, and that nobody would do it without a bribe. AR might be convincing children that reading is not pleasant. No studies have been done on the long-term effect of AR.
Stephen Krashen
Sources:
Kohn, A. 1999. Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise, and Other
