I just finished reading an article written by my professor and some of her students. You can find it here. I find that the article really reiterates much of what we are learning in our information literacy course. The article speaks of digital immigrants (teachers) teaching literacy skills to digital natives (students). I love how the article continually reinforces the difference between fluency and literacy. Children become fluent speaking a language, but that fluency does not mean that students have the skills to read, write, and, otherwise, use the language effectively. The same is true of the digital fluency that most of our students possess. As part of their effort to help teachers find ways to encourage digital literacy, the authors developed a method by which students can work with information. To this end, they offer the acronym D.I.S.C.O.V.E.R. Each letter signifies a different step to help students work effectively with information. I like this acronym because it is easy to remember and because much of the focus is on the process. My only concern with it is the lack of emphasis on the product. I know that students are, ultimately concerned with the final grade. This, I hesitate to call it a shortcoming, might be overcome with the use of a scoring rubric placing more emphasis on the product. Perhaps a 50/50 grade between the process and the product would make a method this focused on the process more practical in a culture where the end result matters most. Regardless, this article is worth a read. It is sure to get some wheels turning.

Chapter 5 in Web 2.0 got me to thinking a bit about irony and human nature.  You know how, as often as not, it is the accountant who has trouble managing his own money or the professional cleaner whose house is a mess.  Why, when we learn about the best ways to teach students, do we not feel the need to apply those lessons to ourselves?  I have heard it said that, in order to lead, you must first learn how to follow.  Well, in order to teach, one must first know how to learn.  In this day and age, the “chalk and talk” approach to teaching kids is typically frowned upon, but this is precisely what most professional development comes down to.  Incorporating constructivist concepts and teaching with the technology that you intend for teachers to use might make them more comfortable with the tools and actually result in their usage.

I still haven’t decided if I like twitter or not just yet. Perhaps I am simply not used to it. I feel like it is not much different from email except that you can read everyone’s short post very quickly. Maybe tools like this will become what email used to be and make email akin to formal letter writing. Who can say? I have found that, while somewhat annoying, the 140 character limit forces me to choose my words wisely. I have heard it said that a writer can say it in a novel, a good writer can say it in a short story, and a great writer can say it in a poem. Used correctly, Twitter could create a generation of “e-poets”.