CNN Tech

Without the constant stimulation of grad school and academic discussions, it has been easy for me to let this blog and its semi strict topic standards be neglected. Now my ideas are more like fleeting bursts that come and go with each article that I read and less like the hashed out opinions that came from discussing these ideas with other students and coworkers. It is my hope that my next job will give me that stimulation again and I will once again be offering my opinion on all sorts of things. In the meantime, I've been more about my personal life at a different location. I don't keep it out of this blog because I think it is less important or worthy of readership; it is just targeted for a different audience.

That said, last night was nothing if not stimulating. There are a lot of things worthy of discussion, and there are plenty of pundits, analysts, and professional bloggers to tell you about them. I want to talk about the technology CNN used in the coverage of this election. There were two extremely different uses of technology that really struck me.

First, the technology that they wanted to strike me. Early in the evening they spoke with a corespondent who was in Chicago by "beaming" her in and creating a hologram of her in the election center. Here is a video of that.

They want me to be struck by how exciting and new this is. A scifi staple is now reality for reporters on location. Instead, I was struck by how inappropriate the technology was for this use. They said it was great to have because they could now hear the reporter with out the crowds, and that was partially confirmed by the fact that the reporter in the crowd was inaudible. What they really needed was just a quite space to shoot from. This was technology to the point of distraction. When you ask everyone using the technology how it feels (to be "beamed" in) than the technology is the story. It was novel and exciting (to the point of cheesy) so it deserved to be the story. On principle though, I am disappointed in this poor use of technology and the pretenses that they were covering the election. I can't fault CNN too much though. It was early in the evening, the polls hadn't closed. Projections couldn't be made and there was nothing for the analysts to discuss. They needed a distraction.

What I did find remarkable was Mr. King and his SmartBoard. I didn't find any video of him, but here is some of the information that he was using it to share. The SmartBoard wasn't what excited me, it was Mr. King's flawless use of it and the incredible planning for the information they had available to him. There were constant updates of the votes coming in which he used to compare states and counties to both the primaries and previous elections. He outlined geographic regions that the candidates were specifically interested in. He zoomed in and out and drew on it, and did all the cool stuff that SmartBoards can do, yet there was never a nod to the technology. It was as natural as pulling out a road map to give directions. It was seamless, and that is why it was perfect. Technology is at its peak when it seems the obvious and only option. It is because he never said anything like "and look at what else I can do with this" that I was so impressed with it. As an educator, I was giddy to see those capabilities being shown off so effortlessly by someone who is not trying to sell me the product.

Curriki

While doing my Black Friday shopping online, I decided to buy myself a couple books about Sesame Street. One of them was out of print, but I managed to get myself a like new copy for only $12. Even though the other one is still in print, I didn't get it. To buy it new, I would have to $50, and used copies start above $30. I went interlibrary loan instead. Both the books were hard cover, neither were published with a dust jacket. Generally, I expect my out of print book purchases to be more expensive, so what happened here? The second book was published by a faculty member at Morgan State University and is recommended for "upper-level sociology, education, and mass media." It is a textbook.

Instead of releasing the rant on book costs that is inside me, I'm going to share something optimistic. I would like to introduce you to Curriki. Curriki is the "Wikipedia of Curriculum." It is a global non-profit thought up by Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems. In the article's interview, McNealy says, "why are we open-sourcing browsers and spreadsheets and operating systems, when we ought to be open-sourcing third-grade math textbooks?" So this wiki doesn't seem to be focusing on higher ed, but we have Google Reader and the entire Open Courseware movement working for us. Not only is this a fantastic idea, but it is also a global endeavor.

Curriki has a bit more oversight to contributions than Wikipedia, but don't let that intimidate you. Check it out, sign up, and collaborate with educators internationally to influence education.

The Generation X Work Ethic

This article has become a flaming debate on an issue that I've been thinking about for a long time. This is the first time that I have ever looked at it in the light of a generational difference, and not just a difference between me and others. Let me start with the article, I think that Jennifer Epstein got one major thing wrong. She shouldn't have equated the use of technology with the differences in work habits. We can discuss work ethic as a generational difference, and we can discuss technology use as a generational difference, but we can't link the two of them.

Now for the things that I've been mulling over for a while now. I don't brag on myself often, but I have found it to be continually true that I have a uniquely strong and dedicated work ethic. I find it very difficult to claim because it is my work ethic. It is part of me, and it seems normal. I don't try to have a good work ethic, it is my mindset and it is difficult for me to understand people thinking about these things in a way other than I do. Before I build myself up too much, let me say that I am not all work and no play. But I do separate work and play. They each have their own time and necessity, but work does fund and fuel play.

The reason I've decide that this is a unique view, is because of how easy it is for me to be successful. I have always immensely impressed my supervisors by showing up on time, dressing appropriately, and doing my job efficiently. I couldn't figure out why they they were so impressed with me. Then one day, I listened as a co-worker explained to me how to balance out the tasks she was given with MySpace, Facebook, and text messaging so that they are not too tedious or boring. The task she was referring to took her three days to accomplish, and I could have done it with the better part of the afternoon. In my opinion, it would be much more tedious to do a mundane task sporadically for three days than nonstop for an afternoon. I also know the definition of time theft, and it would bother me to spend that much time not working when there was work to be done.

This is the situation that lead me to think about my work ethic as unusual. I started trying to pay more attention to my peers and how they are doing their work. I remembered the student in my thesis class that were up in arms about the need to turn in progress reports on their projects, the co-workers who avoided projects and tasks, and my fellow graduate students who demanded an extra day off of class. I decided that I was different.

Now, with my example, I've gone and brought technology into the conversation by mentioning MySpace, Facebook, and cellphones. I have and check my Facebook, MySpace, and Freindster accounts, I (poorly) manage two blogs, and I'm an active lurker on three online forums. I listen to podcasts, audiobooks, and music on my iPod. I have a cell phone that I carry around with me constantly, and a PDA that I use to carry around all the time until I started using Google Calendar. I don't think that technologically savvy necessitates nor leads to the difference that I'm seeing. Studies have been done on the positive effects of music in the workplace. It is not bad to have music at work, the iPod is an issue because it blocks people out. It closes the user off from the people they may have to interact with. I'll admit that it is bad customer service, and probably bad coworker relations, but it is not bad work ethic.

So If I don't think technology has anything to do with it, who do I plan on blaming? I agree with the comment posted by Dan Close that it is a maturity issue and not a generational difference. However, I am starting to think that my generation is not held to the same standard and isn't forced to maturity as soon. For that there are probably an uncountable number of causes. As far as education is concerned, I think that grade inflation plays a huge role, and the fact that being a student is no longer a full time job promotes this. I just got back from three weeks in Europe. I spent some of that time touring universities to learn about student services overseas. One of the most remarkable differences I saw happened when we would ask our hosts what kind of student services they offered and how the supported different student needs. Their response was almost always a more appropriate form of We don't do that at the university; if you baby them forever, they will never grow up.

High Tech vs High Touch

Academic Errands as a Freshman

I skipped lunch and my afternoon class in order to make time for an afternoon of errands. I left straight from class to work so I could wait in line and get my paycheck as they were being signed. I took it right to the bank and waited in line to cash it and pull out the majority of my savings because on Academic Errands Day I'm always a big spender. Cash in hand I was ready to head back to campus. For my convince my campus sets up almost everyone that I need to pay in a big room so I can take care of it all at once. I stood in line to pick up my ID. I stood in line to pay my fees. I stood in line to buy my parking permit. I know you can see the pattern already but it doesn't end there. I headed to the bookstore. I stood in line to get help finding my books, and then I got to stand in a longer line while I held all of my books and supplies so I could pay for them. I finished up earlier then I expected so I headed over to the advising center to declare my major. Fortunately I didn't have to stand in line there; they had a place for me to sit and wait my turn. Afterward I was understandably famished so I headed to the cafeteria where they have a fantastic assortment of lines.

My intent isn't to complain. Everyone I encountered was pleasant and helpful. Everyone politely asked, “May I help whoever’s next?” instead of just yelling out, “NEXT!” but a cattle call is still a cattle call even if your cowboy is smiling. Since then, I’ve set my paycheck to direct deposit, I can transfer funds online, and I can withdrawal money from the student center, but few of those types of convinces have been sprouting up on campus. As I start seeing behind the scenes of higher education, I’m hearing more and more about the high-tech vs. high-touch debate. As a student I’m troubled that there is a debate at all. I want my university to be accessible to me when I need it. It is not a matter of high-touch at all. Rather, it is a matter of convince, and I'm not concerned with the number of pleasant faces in the process. I want to get it done efficiently, and more often than not I want to get it done in the middle of the night while I'm up doing homework and thinking about it. I'm speaking only for myself of course, but I believe I would make more appointments with faculty and advisors if I could hop online and make the appointment instead of working into my schedule a time between 9 and 4 to reach them just to make the appointment. Student's value ease, efficiency, and a quick turn around. We would rather not play phone tag when we know we can get something accomplished asynchronously via e-mail. We are not shunning human interaction; we are streamlining busy work.