Most recent public comments by Frida Ramos https://nowcomment.com/users/80485 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1881245 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1881245 I could be wrong, but, I understood him to be a bit sarcastic. He stated that even though “there are conversations taking place around digital education that is disguised, a number of significant conflicts and intentions need to be addressed; however, these apparent contradictions should not be assumed to be a concern, because there are many that might be advantaged by individualized, market-driven, deemotionalized forms of education and should not be viewed as a bad thing.” In him stating this he is making it clear where he stands with regards to digital education and how it is being addressed currently. He is raising a red flag and stating that we need to pay attention to the conversations that are taking place. Thu, 14 May 2020 16:54:39 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1881192 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1881192 Hi Katie, I agree. Gradual changes are best when implementing new concepts. The example used by Selwyn with regards to smart boards and chalkboards was right on point. These two products were so similar in their functions that their implementations were not shocking to teachers or students. I think it should be the same with future educational technology. Fri, 15 May 2020 19:42:02 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1881177 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1881177 In the video, Selwyn states that there is a lot of dialogue happening about digital technology in the educational setting; however, these conversations are lacking positive concerns for public education, inequality, democracy, and the common good. He states that there are contractions that should be noticed. For example, he states that individualized, market-driven, deemotionalized forms of education do not mesh well with traditional values of public education. He advises that future research should address these concerns, the alternate agendas of profit, and the decrease of state and government involvement. Selwyn stated the “silence” is not a problem, but, we should pay attention to the words and discussions taking place around digital technology. Fri, 15 May 2020 21:34:53 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1880140 https://nowcomment.com/documents/200878?scroll_to=1880140 I agree with Selwyn that the selection of technology in educational settings should not be based on an individual’s preference but a “collective, communal and shared concern”. Paragraph 28, point #6 Selwyn states that “Charismatic Champions” are usually the ones that lead technology projects within educational settings, but the problem is that when they leave so does the enthusiasm for the project. This resonated with me because the same occurs with charismatic principals that take on at-risk high schools. They have the ability to implement effective changes improving the performance of the school, teachers, and students; however, they do not stick around long enough to see the improvements take root. This makes it difficult for the staff, teachers, and students because they have to begin the process again with the next principal or the next “IT enthusiast”. Instead, creating a collective and communal community where there is an exchange of ideas is the best approach because it gets the key players (teachers, students, parents) involved in creating solutions that work best for everyone involved. The implementation of educational digital technology should be addressed by those who will be affected by its use. As stated in paragraph 26, point 4, technology is not a one-size-fits-all and the selection of digital technology should address settings and situations of all parties involved. Fri, 15 May 2020 20:20:47 -0400