I’ve got a mental stack of blog posts piling up on a bunch of seemingly random though thinly connected topics on NECC, the environment, note taking with Evernote, my kids’ schooling, the death of RSS and other stuff which I’ll hopefully get to at some point here, but this morning I read a couple of things that seem more interesting, to me at least.
我满脑子都是博客日志，这些都与NECC(美国国家教育计算会议)、环境、用Evernote整理笔记、我孩子的学校教育、RSS之死以及我希望在此多少能有所涉及的一些内容有着随机但却勉强关联，不过今早我读了几篇更有趣的东西，至少我认为如此。
Dean’s reflection post on NECCdrew a whole bunch of great comments, but the one that made me really think hard was by Ira Socol who wrote:
Dean就NECC反思的文章吸引了一批精彩评论，不过真正让我严肃思考的评论来自Ira Socol，他写道：
So, it is not a question of whether these technologies add value somehow to education, but the reverse, can education add value to the communications and information technologies of our present day world, and its future?
所以，问题不是这些技术能否为教育增添价值，而恰好相反，教育能否增加我们当今世界及未来世界的通信信息技术的价值？
That’s one of those really concise shift statements that makes me bend my own frame a bit. I think too often I fall into looking at these tools and wonder what they can add to our classrooms and our teaching when the real question is how can our classrooms and teaching add capacity to the tools. As he points out, we reframed education with the advent of the book; we need to reframe it once again with the advent of a networked, inter-connected medium that creates incredible new affordances for learning. He writes:
那是真正让我略微改变自己观点的精辟变化宣言之一。我觉得我经常流于看着这些工具，就想它们可以为教室和教学增添什么，而真正的问题是我们的教室和教学如何为这些工具增加能力。如他所说，我们用书的出现为教育重新搭框架，我们需要利用创造了难以置信的学习机会的网络化、互联媒体的到来再次重新界定教育。他写道：
It is the job of education to alter itself to prove itself of value to the world which now exists.
教育的职责是改变自己，向现存世界证明自己的价值。
Amen. Arguably, there is a great deal about the current system which has lost its value as compared to what is possible for those who are passionate learners with a connection. (More about that connection piece in a bit.) I mean grouping by geography and age are becoming less and less relevant, and while I’m not suggesting there isn’t a body of core knowledge all students should learn, the emphasis on what we know rather than how we learn it is becoming more and more frustrating to those who are already networked learners. As Ira Tweeted later:
阿门。诚然，与有连接的学习爱好者可能拥有的体系相比，当前体系已经失去了价值，已有大量内容证明此问题。（关于连接还有更多内容。）我想说，根据地域和年龄来分组越来越不相关了，虽然我并非提议并不存在所有学生都应该学习的核心知识体，但强调我们了解什么而非如何学习，让那些已经成了网络化学习者的人越来越沮丧。如Ira后来在Tweet上所说：
Educators often think that school is the point, when it needs to be the path.
教育者总以为学校是点，其实学校应该是道路。
Part of being that path, however, is providing the access to our students that’s necessary for them to participate. Along those lines, I came across an interesting post from Renee Blodgett (via a Tweet from Howard Rheingold) who is writing about “Redefining Digital Inclusion.” The seminal question was “do those that enjoy the benefits of technology have a moral right over those who do not?” As Renee suggests, this isn’t a new thread, but the shift here is that the attitude of parents and teachers around this are just as important as the financial and logistical issues. Inclusion can no longer just be seen as having a device and a connection.
成为道路的一部分即为学生提供参与所需要的路径。在此方面，我读到Renee Blodgett的一篇日志（来自Howard Rheigold的Tweet），“重新界定数字融入”（中译文）。主要问题是“享受技术优势的人是否比不享受的人更具道德权利？”如Renee所说，这不是新问题，但此处的变化是家长和老师围绕此问题的态度与财务及后勤问题同样重要。不能再将融入看做是有个设备，可以连接。
We need to redefine Digital Inclusion. The definition of digital inclusion today is basic access. It doesn’t include basic skills such as understanding some of the technology and social media schools to network and make friends not just locally for globally. It increases their job and life opportunities significantly. It’s time to move that definition beyond simple access. We need a new definition that policy makers, technology creators, parents, and educators can rally around. There will be a revolution when more and more students get their hands on some of these devices and start using them in the classroom.
我们需要重新定义数字融入。如今，数字融入的定义是基本接入，不包括基本技能，比如理解技术或社会媒体学校或网络化或“海内存知己，天涯若比邻”。这显著增加他们的就职和生活机会。扩展该定义，超越简单接入，正是时机。我们需要政策制定人、技术创造者、家长.者能团结在其周围的新定义。当越来越多的学生接触这些设备，开始在教室使用时，就会产生革命。
While this is not a post on where the lever is, I’ve been arguing for a while now that not much of this is going to change until the stakeholders, in this case parents, take it upon themselves to demand something new. Something more relevant. But the only way that parents are going to DEMAND access is if they see that not simply as a way for kids to get a computer but to see connections online as a way to a better future, a way to help their kids become more educated, better learners than by books and paper alone. Unfortunately, we’re losing the media war on this one right now. Feeling like a broken record, but we need to do a better job of making this case beyond our own still small, nascent network.
本文并非想说杠杆应该在何处，我一直如此呼吁，除非股东也即家长主动要求新东西，更相关的东西，否则不会有太多改变。但是，家长要求接入的唯一方法是他们不简单地把这看成给孩子一台电脑，而把在线连接看成连接到更好未来、帮助孩子们得到更好教育的途径，看成比依靠书本和纸张更好的学习者。可惜，我们正在输掉了这场媒体之战，感觉像一张破碎的唱片，但我们需要做得更好，超越我们幼小的新生网络。
