Wednesday, July 25, 2007

And guess what? It's in the Chronicle ! (No! Surely not!) So what have we here? Another incredibly insightful commentary on technology and education. (I can't wait to see Geeky Mom 's take on this, although she may well ignore it, as it's not really worth that much attention.) We have an associate professor who admits he's "doing pretty much the same things in class [he] was doing 20 years ago" (despite the fact that today's students are not the same as those from 20 years ago), who enquires among his colleagues about this new technology thing. And when they tell him about some of the ways in which he might use technology in his classroom, he proceeds to snark about each option and dismiss it without engaging in any serious consideration of the topic. To wit: I can create a course that's more user-friendly and appealing to today's students by incorporating more Web-based elements. That could be as simple as placing my syllabi, lecture notes, and other course materials on my Web site -- which would mean that I first have to get a Web site. Um, yes...which implies that the effort involved in getting a web site today is analogous to what, scaling Mount Everest? Has he never heard of Blackboard or WebCT? Or, even better: To make best cell deal my "Web content" more dynamic and original, I can record my classroom lectures and link the audio to my site in the form of "podcasts," which students can then download into their MP-3 players and listen to while jogging or playing video games.

cherub discover credit cards

An article by Gary Wills (one of my favorite intellectuals) in the current issue of the New York Review of Books asks a great question after making a great point: email hosting services There is a particular danger with a war that God commands. What if God should lose? What is Prof. Wells trying to get at? If you guessed it has something to do with the Iraq War and the God Squad, you're right. Here's the context. That is unthinkable to the evangelicals. They cannot accept the idea of second-guessing God, and He was the one who led them into war. Thus, in 2006, when two thirds of the American people told pollsters that the war in Iraq was a mistake, the third of those still standing behind it were mainly evangelicals (who make up about one third of the population). It was a faith-based certitude. Nothing good ever comes from certitude and absolutes, especially from the evangelical right. How can rational debate and dialog, so necessary to the health of our democracy, take place with people who are absolutely certain God is on their side and He is guiding America's political process? You can't. And that my friends is dangerous.

hesitant writing emails

An article by Gary Wills (one of my favorite intellectuals) in the current issue of the New York Review of Books asks a great question after making a great point: There is a particular danger with a war that God commands. What if God should lose? What is Prof. Wells trying to get at? If you guessed it has something to do with the Iraq War and the God Squad, you're right. Here's the context. That is unthinkable to the evangelicals. They cannot accept the idea of second-guessing God, and He was the one who led them into war. Thus, in 2006, when two thirds of the American people told pollsters that the war in Iraq was a mistake, the third of those still standing behind it were mainly evangelicals (who make up about one third of the population). It was a faith-based certitude. Nothing good ever comes from certitude and absolutes, especially from the evangelical right. How can rational debate and dialog, so necessary to the health of our democracy, take place with people who are ronnie milsap greatest hits absolutely certain God is on their side and He is guiding America's political process? You can't. And that my friends is dangerous.

And guess what? It's in the Chronicle ! (No! Surely not!) So what have we here? life insurance leads Another incredibly insightful commentary on technology and education. (I can't wait to see Geeky Mom 's take on this, although she may well ignore it, as it's not really worth that much attention.) We have an associate professor who admits he's "doing pretty much the same things in class [he] was doing 20 years ago" (despite the fact that today's students are not the same as those from 20 years ago), who enquires among his colleagues about this new technology thing. And when they tell him about some of the ways in which he might use technology in his classroom, he proceeds to snark about each option and dismiss it without engaging in any serious consideration of the topic. To wit: I can create a course that's more user-friendly and appealing to today's students by incorporating more Web-based elements. That could be as simple as placing my syllabi, lecture notes, and other course materials on my Web site -- which would mean that I first have to get a Web site. Um, yes...which implies that the effort involved in getting a web site today is analogous to what, scaling Mount Everest? Has he never heard of Blackboard or WebCT? Or, even better: To make my "Web content" more dynamic and original, I can record my classroom lectures and link the audio to my site in the form of "podcasts," which students can then download into their MP-3 players and listen to while jogging or playing video games.

An article by Gary Wills (one of my monopoly online favorite intellectuals) in the current issue of the New York Review of Books asks a great question after making a great point: There is a particular danger with a war that God commands. What if God should lose? What is Prof. Wells trying to get at? If you guessed it has something to do with the Iraq War and the God Squad, you're right. Here's the context. That is unthinkable to the evangelicals. They cannot accept the idea of second-guessing God, and He was the one who led them into war. Thus, in 2006, when two thirds of the American people told pollsters that the war in Iraq was a mistake, the third of those still standing behind it were mainly evangelicals (who make up about one third of the population). It was a faith-based certitude. Nothing good ever comes from certitude and absolutes, especially from the evangelical right. How can rational debate and dialog, so necessary to the health of our democracy, take place with people who are absolutely certain God is on their side and He is guiding America's political process? You can't. And that my friends is dangerous.

I might have banged my head or something... queen anne but I am coming round to Richard. Out of all of them, his... erm... Richard-ness suddenly seems winner-worthy, admirable, not as annoying or grating as it has been. What's happened to me? Why do I care? I shall now adjourn to a darkened room.

Click Here

Click Here

And guess what? It's in the Chronicle ! (No! Surely not!) So what have we here? Another incredibly insightful commentary on technology and education. (I can't wait to see Geeky Mom 's take on this, although she may well ignore it, as it's not really worth that much attention.) We have an associate professor who admits he's "doing pretty much the same things in class [he] was doing 20 years ago" (despite the fact that today's students are not the same as those from 20 years ago), who enquires among his colleagues about this new technology thing. And when they tell him about some of the ways in which he might use technology in his classroom, he proceeds to snark about each option and dismiss it without engaging in any serious consideration of the topic. To wit: stamina pro I can create a course that's more user-friendly and appealing to today's students by incorporating more Web-based elements. That could be as simple as placing my syllabi, lecture notes, and other course materials on my Web site -- which would mean that I first have to get a Web site. Um, yes...which implies that the effort involved in getting a web site today is analogous to what, scaling Mount Everest? Has he never heard of Blackboard or WebCT? Or, even better: To make my "Web content" more dynamic and original, I can record my classroom lectures and link the audio to my site in the form of "podcasts," which students can then download into their MP-3 players and listen to while jogging or playing video games.

Well recently with all the media attention on secondlife.com , I started my second life. Yes I currently have another life on top of my hectic Real Life! You may wonder what I am talking about but this is all about living in the virtual world. No it is not a game. It is more than a game. A virtual world where you can look pretty much as anything and you can create pretty much anything that you can imagine. Second Life is the 3 dimentional virtual world that received a lot of media attention lately. Hence I decided to give it a try about 2 weeks ago. Initially I thought it would be a game just like any other SIM games. However, when I joined I ran into to real people in a virtual world. Amazing! I've heard about people making money with their second life as well. So the first day I've spent about $40 for my account at Second Life. Note, it is free to join second life and it is free to do many things in second life. However, if you want to own any land and build houses or businesses then you need to upgrade your account to Premium. That is what I did the first day. Upgrade my account and then edit pdf file converted my US dollars into Linden dollars to purchase some land. Yes Second Life has their own currency! Hence within the last 2 weeks, I have engaged in about $250 worth of transaction in world. I've bought few parcels of lands and then sold them until I found a large waterfront property to make it my home base.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home