Blog Post #2

 Blog Post #2: Technology, Microsoft Word, and ISTE Standards

"student iPad 006" by flickingerbrad is
available under CC BY 2.0

Microsoft Word

I've had extensive experience with Microsoft Word, starting in 2nd grade in Brazil writing letters for Mother's Day, all the way until now in college writing five page research papers for my classes. In middle school we had a program to promote computer literacy where we were able to get certified within different Microsoft programs, and I became certified in both Word and Word expert, allowing me to have very in-depth knowledge of the program. I do believe that Microsoft Word is extremely useful, but I also believe that there are other softwares that work better for different situations. For example, if I am writing a short paper for a class, I would rather use Google Docs because of its ease of use and because it automatically saves my work for me. It is also laid out in a very easy-to-master manner. However, when it comes to more long-term projects, I tend to use Word because it has more features and allows for more complex designs. 

ISTE Standards

The ISTE Standards for the most part seem incredibly common-sense based, but they are extremely important to keep in mind, which is why, in my opinion, these standards are very valuable. The standard I found most important is standard 2.4, but more specifically 2.4a. This standard is about learning alongside students, and it's a standard that sets great teachers apart from the rest. A great teacher should be able to recognize areas where they are not as knowledgeable, and allow themselves to learn, even if the learning is coming from the very people they are meant to be teaching. A massive part of learning is being able to teach others concepts, and this would not only allow for the student to learn more, but for the teacher to grow, compounding and creating a better classroom environment for all.

Digital Natives

While I do agree that the concept of "digital natives" versus "digital immigrants", I believe that the way this theory was presented, and the over-generalization of the terms, produces an incredible disconnect. Being digitally native means to be "fluent in technology", or to be so skilled with it that it's almost as if it were your first language. I believe there are digitally native people, but I do not believe that it can be generalized into generations. For example, someone born in generation z might not have had access to the technologies of the time through childhood, and might consider themselves to be a digital immigrant as they have to teach themselves all of these concepts to catch up to their peers. There are always outliers within these over-generalized populations, which is why I don't particularly agree with the definition of these terms. However, I do agree that the shift from having only digital immigrants as educators to now having the first few digital native teachers start teaching is an interesting one to navigate. Technology is starting to play a bigger role in education than it ever has before, leading to challenges we have never faced within the field of education before. Having digitally native teachers would allow for, in a sense, better control over these technologies in the classroom, and better classroom management.