<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Comments by Sharon Murchie</title>
    <description>Most recent public comments by Sharon Murchie</description>
    <link>https://nowcomment.com/users/13943</link>
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://nowcomment.com/users/13943/comments"/>
    <item>
      <title>The online disinhibition effect is legit. You are spot on here: there is a huge risk to putting work online in this type of environment...not only for the obvious theft-of-ideas reason, but also because of the real and legit danger of trolling.</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644873</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644873</guid>
      <description>I've been trolled for my work online, and it is shocking when it happens. Are we prepared to set ourselves up for that kind of personal and professional risk? The meritocracy that is supposed to exist in academia online is, perhaps, more of an ideal than a reality.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 06:03:32 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Definitely a huge gap. And even within these groups there are so many subgroups. I have huge reservations about technology in ed, while also recognizing that, since it is and will be there, we have to make sure that it is meaningful and best practice.</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644872</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644872</guid>
      <description>Others may glowingly embrace the cool aspects without recognizing what the detrimental features are. I guess I'm thinking about the affordances versus the drawbacks. There are so many different philosophies within each group and subgroup (and then there's corporate greed as the cherry on top or as the foundation of the entire pyramid, depending on your philosophy...) As educators, we are attempting to connect with &quot;the people who use technology everyday to play games, watch tv or do entertainment on them&quot; who may not WANT their favorite platform to be overtaken by learning targets and performance tasks...</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 06:03:32 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>This seems to respond to Tiffany Ellison's comments, several paragraphs up. :)</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644870</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644870</guid>
      <description></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 06:03:32 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>&quot;this vision may overly rely on idealized perceptions.&quot; YES, THIS. There is this idyllic view of what technology offers and how we all should behave...and then there is reality. </title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644869</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644869</guid>
      <description>Slightly off-topic but in terms of my own classroom, I run into this constantly. An assignment I created online that had them defining SAT terminology and rhetorical devices in an attempt to get them to interact with the resources and search for reliable answers turned into a copy/paste assignment. The students never even read what they were pasting. My idealized idea of their behavior in seeking information in order to create meaningful and usable personalized definitions of terms they would have to know and use on the SAT was actually a meaningless and useless activity.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 06:03:32 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Ugh, right? It seems like this is sometimes viewed as the case (see recent political disasters) but just because everyone likes it or believes it does not mean that it is actually valid. </title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644868</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644868</guid>
      <description>Example: how many people continue to believe that vaccines cause autism or that GMO foods cause various other illnesses? These ideas have been proven invalid and yet I see them in my feed every day.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 06:03:32 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>&quot;...engaged citizens who possess competencies for collaborative, creative work&quot; -- So much of what virtual learning (and competency-based ed) is doing for our K-12 right now is simply student and computer; collaboration and creativity don't exist.</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644867</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/67217?scroll_to=644867</guid>
      <description>I'm not sure what do about this. We know what our students need to be experiencing and we know the type citizen and community member and employee and critical thinker that we need to engender, and yet we are (more and more) asking them to sit staring at a screen with headphones on, completely devoid of human contact and interaction, let alone collaboration and creativity.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 06:03:32 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
