Joel+Sackenheim

Yeah...um...totally not my bicycle! [|A digital piano for y'all to use!]

Hello, all! I am Joel Sackenheim, your new classmate! I am currently the music teacher three days a week (MTW) at St. Ann's Catholic School in Hamilton, Ohio. I have 141 amazing Children of God that range all the way from kindergarten to the eighth grade. It's true what they say: if you love what you do, then you'll never work a day in your life. My pay is pitiful, I'm at the mercy of getting Thursday and Friday Catholic School sub jobs, and I couldn't be happier!

My actual content areas are Middle Childhood Math and Social Studies, but Music became a natural fit when it opened up at St. Ann's because I have been playing Masses on the piano/organ since I was 16 years old. In class, we sing, we dance, we listen to music, we play instruments, you name it! As for other activities, I coach basketball, ref soccer, volunteer at the 30-Hour Famine, cover high school football games on WMOH radio, and generally just love being the Child of God that I am!

As far as a gift or talent that I can offer goes, I have a Bachelor's degree in Communications, and I am good at explaining things or helping two people in a disagreement understand what the other person is saying, without getting emotionally involved.

** Reflective Blog 2: One-Computer Classrooms **

Both of these articles are dealing with the age-old question (well, age-old to me, at least; I'm sure there are many teachers out there that even precede computers!) of "what do I do with only one or two computers in the classroom?" We dealt with this last year at my internship at Little Miami, and our grand solution to the problem for the most part was the simply not use them. My mentor had been teaching for 44 years, and so technology was not anywhere in her interests. That being said, we did have a program called "First in Math" that the kids were supposed to use. Because this was mandatory, my mentor had to at least turn the two computers on, and we came up with a schedule, only including those students who did not have access to a computer at home. We then explained to the students that it was an activity that was to be done at home by those that had computer/Internet access, and only those four or five that didn't would be expected to use the computers during homeroom on those couple of scheduled mornings per week.

So, while Chaika's "Post a Schedule" idea served us well in that circumstance, I am racking my brain to figure out how the random-drawing-of-a-Popsicle-stick plan would actually work. I would think that without a student knowing ahead of time that he/she would be using the computer, this would be terribly inefficient and disruptive. How can a student plan on having computer time to maximize that amount of time if he/she has no idea which stick will be drawn next? This is one idea that sounds good in theory, but it might not work quite so well in practice.

One other idea from Chaika's "Additional Strategies" that my mentor last year was able to incorporate was the "large projector" idea. We did have some computerized materials in math and social studies that we were able to put on the big screen up front for the kids to be able to look at and use during class.

Anderson gives an idea of "Beg, Borrow, and Trade," in which teachers can share computers. I have not seen this in practice where the computers themselves are moved, but I have seen this in practice where the students are moved. For example, the 5th and 6th graders at Queen of Peace share each others' classroom computers to take Accelerated Reader quizzes, and so when I sub there, I can expect at least a couple of times during the day to have a 6th grader ask me to go into the 5th grade room to take the quiz or vice versa.

To use Anderson's "Stations" idea, the project has to be well-planned ahead of time. And if it is as Anderson describes, where the computer tools are just one piece of the puzzle, then dividing into groups and conquering seems to be a very viable option. In all of the Catholic schools that I've been in, there is a group computer lab that is "sign-up-able" for different classes at different times of the day. This typically gets used by classes at a time much more often than the "stay-in-the-classroom-and-only-have-certain-groups-working-on-computers-at-once" approach.

** Reflective Blog 3: Fair Use **

Teaching music, the thought has often crossed my mind: how do these artists that produce music nowadays ever make money, and for how much longer will the industry be profitable? Napster pioneered the "file-sharing" philosophy of "anybody-can-pirate-music-from-anybody-else-and-not-feel-guilty-about-it." Then, when they got busted, there were several other websites ready to step in and take their place. Limewire, Playlist, you name it. Now, with Firefox, there are MP3 download options that allow you to pirate all audio tracks off of Youtube. I seriously do not know how a Justin Bieber or a Miley Cyrus can actually make money off of their music, and I have to believe they make a far greater profit off of merchandising than albums. After all, I can go to about a hundred different websites and download any number of their songs without spending a dime. It's awesome as a music teacher, but devastating as an artist.

Both of these articles deal with this strange tension between creator and user of copyrighted material. And the balance of this tension is the doctrine of fair use, for it is not right to have a situation where there is absolutely-no-use without permission, nor is it right to have anybody be able to use any copyrighted material for anything and everything. As Hobbs et. al put it, "It [fair use] is intended to balance the rights of users with the rights of owners, by encouraging the widespread and flexible use of cultural products." (PDF p. 5)

One way that I have utilized fair use in our music classroom was back in September, as the 7th and 8th grade CYO Dance was approaching. (And I hope that I utilized fair use correctly!) With their big dance with all of the other 7th and 8th graders from the CYO schools being held on a Friday night, we used the previous Monday and Wednesday's music classes to work on slow-dance technique. (Yes, there were some squeamish 7th and 8th graders who were not thrilled about this development in music class!) Both classes were able to have seven practice slow-dances, in the safe comfort of our music room with no public pressure, in addition to a couple of commonly-known line dances. In order to accomplish this, I needed to prepare a slow-dance jukebox on my laptop. I loaded up the laptop with 15 popular slow-dance songs, spanning the range from 1939 to 2010 (which allowed us to hit listening appreciation objectives in the Graded Course of Study at the same time), and gave the students the ability to request certain songs for dances. To me, even though I downloaded (for free) all of these selections as MP3's from Youtube, this fit fair use because the intention was to use them along the lines of the Center for Social Media's Principle Two: "Under fair use, educators using the concepts and techniques of media literacy can integrate copyrighted material into curriculum materials, including books, workbooks, podcasts, DVD compilations, videos, Web sites, and other materials designed for learning." This principle says under the limitations section that wherever possible, "educators should provide attribution for quoted material," which I did by listing all 15 slow songs on the whiteboard, complete with artists and years. And as far as personally, morally, how I feel about "pirating" the material for that educational purpose, the D.J. at the dance should have to pay for all songs in his/her library that could be used, as the D.J. is making a profit off of playing that music. And so, if I am able to introduce a 7th or 8th grader to an Alison Krauss slow song, and that 7th/8th grader requests it, and the D.J. needs to buy it, then I've just put a little extra money in Alison Krauss' pocket that she wouldn't have had--so we all win.

This particular lesson aligned with NETS standard 2a for Teachers: "design or adapt relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools and resources to promote student learning and creativity" and also showed respect for copyright in identifying artist and year, which aligns with standard 4a for Teachers: "advocate, model, and teach safe, legal, and ethical use of digital information and technology, including respect for copyright, intellectual property, and the appropriate documentation of sources."

Questions for discussion:

1.) While it seems that most anything is fair game under fair use for educational/classroom purposes, are there any MAJOR no-no's that should be avoided?

2.) Is there a third option out there besides something a teacher creates himself/herself and something that is copyrighted material? Or does everything fit into one of those two categories?

** Reflective Blog 4: Blogs **

This particular topic makes me both really excited and somewhat fearful. As a somewhat-related side-note before we get into the meat of this issue, it has been a little disconcerting as to how the Catholic school community has been dealing with Facebook. Some schools, like Queen of Peace, ban teachers from "friending" students on Facebook. I do understand the rationale, but I think it's a sad state of where the world is. Other schools, like St. Ann's allow teachers to "friend" students but don't encourage it. And then St. Peter's has a Facebook page called "Sps Eighth Grade Homework," which has 24 eighth grade "friends," and I'm assuming is used as an educational tool.

At St. Ann's, I am the youngest teacher on staff, and it's by a pretty wide margin. We have teachers that have no idea how to use an excel spreadsheet or a "shared document" word file. It's fairly excruciating, and half of our time at faculty meetings gets spent (wasted?) with the couple of computer-literate teachers being bored out of our minds while the computer-illiterate learn how to type a URL into a search-bar. But because of this atmosphere, there is much fear about using lots of "new-fangled technology" to engage students. I personally believe that a Facebook connection with the students, when done responsibly, can be used for homework help when needed, can be used by the students as a go-to adult in the same way that a student popping into a classroom before or after school to talk about life is used, and to help a teacher keep a pulse on the social workings of the class (Is there any bullying going on? Are there any social issues brewing that the teacher ought to know about?).

The Archdiocese has a Social Media policy that we all sign as employees, giving us guidelines to be followed. And obviously, given the bureaucratic nature of the Archdiocese and wanted to prevent as much controversy as possible, the Policy is fairly conservative to protect themselves and the teachers. Most of the details outlined in the Social Media Policy are easy enough to follow, but one thing that is very tricky is about posting pictures. The media policy does not want teachers posting pictures of students without parental consent--especially if the students are tagged, identifying themselves to the world. I respect that sentiment and think that the idea is good. But...I coach basketball. Parents take pictures at games. I get tagged. Then the girls swoop in and tag themselves in the photos. I have done nothing, but this then puts me in violation of that Social Media policy. So, I am currently in process of getting written permission of every kid below the age of 18 that I have been tagged with on Facebook. Frustrating!

The reason I thought about that as I was reading the readings for this week was in the using blogs for expanding in-class discussion, as laid out in Wang and Hsua's article. Those two authors map out a great vision of social construction, detailing how students can keep discussing issues from the class, how this can be done on a permanent website, so as to continue to access the information long after the class is over, and how to expand the discussion beyond just that group of students to facilitate discussion with other classes, teachers, etc. This is the wave of the future. This is the language that our children speak. These are the skills that our children need to learn to be able to adjust to a world that is increasingly global and increasingly interactive. And yet, in the wake of so many scandals and so much fear of miscommunication in written form, with things being interpreted the wrong way, I seriously wonder how Wang and Hsua's ideas fit into a below-college classroom setting.

In college, everybody is an adult, and so there is no parental consent needed, and everybody is free to throw out their thoughts. But in high school and grade school, there is still much fear. These blogs, by their very nature, are going to mean minors and teachers interacting in cyberspace--a notion that many parents and administrators are uncomfortable with.

This topic ties into the NETS Standards all throughout the first standard: "Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity." All four sub-standards fit in well to both the blog idea, as well as Ikpeze and Boyd's WebQuest idea, which is also a great way to collaborate and get discussion going but has the same fear factors.

Discussion questions: 1.) Should Facebook/other Social Media be used as an educational tool?

2.) How should WebQuests/blogs be monitored to balance educational value with fears of adults and students mingling online?

** Final Reflective Blog: Virtual Reality in Education **

Last year at my internship at Little Miami, I had a mentor teacher who had taught for 44 years. She was what you might call a "technophobe"--somebody who didn't want to be bothered with new technology. I would get routine questions from her about why the internet kept asking her if she wanted to "Close All Tabs" after she accidentally opened up a second tab and tried to click the big red X at the top of the screen to close it. Her teaching style matched accordingly. She called herself the "Packet Queen" and a threat to the national forest, and she taught as if it were still 1957. But while she was coming from one extreme and I was more towards the other, we both watched with great interest in February as IBM's Watson made its appearance on one of the few things Mrs. W and I had in common--Jeopardy.

I was reminded of that in reading the introduction to Strangman and Hall's article, how many people associate virtual reality and mega-computers with science fiction and not education. IBM proved that it could create an artificial intelligence that could rival the intelligence of Ken Jennings, and it was breathtaking to see. Computers have come a long way, and there's still so much more to come. I, for one, am very interested to see what is forthcoming in the field of education. And that's where Baker's article takes off.

Baker discusses the use of a virtual world--she focuses in on one such company called Second Life--to augment the classroom. This virtual world allows each person to create an "avatar" and interact in countless ways with other avatars. Baker says this works very much like the massive multiplayer video games, such as Halo and World of Warcraft, but without the virtual guns, replacing those with virtual "books."

Baker says that many universities are doing this, with numerous options such as holding class online, sharing music (concerts and such), office hours, you name it, all in a virtual world, done through avatars. I must say, at face value, this sounds excellent! My personal concerns for an approach like this revolve around my personal need for structure. I avoid online courses like the plague because I am not motivated to get onto Blackboard "on my own time." Now, I am very good about faithfully attending class on campus. I show up, I pay attention, I get involved. And the social interaction keeps it interesting to me. The Second Life approach that Baker endorses at least puts the social interaction back into the online course for me--so I believe it is likely that I would be more invested into an online course with a virtual reality component to it than one without. So, half of the problem is solved. But the other half still remains: making time for it. I have a very bad habit (well, maybe not "very bad," it's more of an "it-is-what-it-us" type of habit) of doing my coursework/homework in the middle of the night. It's quiet at home, there's no need to fight with any of my five siblings for use of the computer, and with a definite deadline, I work well under pressure. So, you can bet, with a reflective blog due Thursday by the start of class, I'm checking Blackboard, reading the articles, and doing the reflection at 1 AM on Thursday morning. This approach tends to work for me with courses that give you the assignment and tell you, "See you next week." But with an online social interaction component coming from this virtual reality approach, I don't know that I would be online at the same time as my classmates. Seriously, who else but the most die-hard of procrastinators is up doing homework at 1 AM, when they have to teach music at 8 AM first period?

Another issue that Baker describes is that of having clear directions. The one online medium that I check on a very regular basis is Facebook, and so if a course used that, I'd be set. But with Facebook comes distractions. And Second Life, Baker suggests, can have much of that same dynamic. If the assignment is not explained well and led well, then the virtual world either becomes distracting, as the avatars explore more and more places that do not lead to productive uses of time, or it gets overwhelming, like the "being in a big unfamiliar city without a map" analogy that Baker gives.

Discussion questions: 1.) How might a virtual reality classroom run if it is not possible to get everybody online at the same time? 2.) How easy would it really be to get distracted on Second Life? (I am unfamiliar with the set-up.)