YouTube Conversations
My Video
Nicole: Advocate (Blending Technology and Classroom Learning)
Jill Hochuli: Interrogator (Can Technology Change Education? Yes!)
Alicia Papa: Antagonist (How to Escape Education's Death Valley)
Nicole: Advocate (Blending Technology and Classroom Learning)
Jill Hochuli: Interrogator (Can Technology Change Education? Yes!)
Alicia Papa: Antagonist (How to Escape Education's Death Valley)
Comments |
Argumentative StrategiesIn my comment, I was agreeing with Jessie Woolley. I used examples from the video in order to support my statement of agreement. To show that I feel that same way as her, I supplied reasons why education should be based off of quality and that every child should be treated the same way and given the same opportunities as any other zip code. I took evidence from her statements and explained why her main idea of using blended learning was important.
|
Jill's argumentative strategy is evaluation and rebuttal. She is evaluating the way that Jessie Woolley is proposing her view on adding blended learning with the use of technology. Jill is uncertain about the quality of teaching technology correct and if there is a correct way to teach it. She is also rebutting because she asks what if students learning styles are not with using technology. Students learn different ways so she thinks Woolley fails to acknowledge the different learning styles students have in classrooms.
|
Alicia is using rebuttal and disagreement. She does not think technology in education is a good thing. She supports her view with evidence. She provides reasoning behind her view and includes hands-on evidence from when she is in the classroom. She thinks that this video fails to acknowledge the fact that children may take advantage of the technology and they do not know how to use it.
|
I am using the causal effect. Based off of Alicia's comment, I said that children could be taught how to use technology and if they are taught it, then they will learn how to correctly use it. I also used rebuttal because I don't think that just because one student doesn't know how to use technology, it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be in the classroom.
|
Alicia is using rebuttal argument here. She agrees with that technology should be taught in the classroom, but then she goes against what I said. She disagrees with what I have to say. She provides reasoning behind her thinking. She also uses a proposal argument. She says that technology can be used with discretion and that teachers have to watch what they do on the computer or iPads.
|
I used a definition argument. I am answering Jill's questions and Alicia's concerns. There is a question whether teachers are abusing their rights with technology or not. I am simply stating my position. I am using the disagreement strategy because I don't think that all teachers will replace teaching with technology. It all depends on the teacher so I state how I disagree with Alicia and explain my reasoning behind my thoughts.
|
Alicia is using the disagreement strategy because she does not agree with my comment. She does not think that technology should be incorporated. She states that she also does agree with my statement that students should be taught how to use technology and what it could do for students, but mainly disagrees with using it. She gives examples to support her disagreement.
|