Hey, Arthus! Lighten up, man. It was a joke. Irony. You know, "a
modest proposal". (Have you read Swift?) Like, I was kidding, man. . . .
A little comic relief now and then won't kill this list, will it? Of
course, it isn't comic if you didn't find it funny. So what can I say?
Sorry. Forgot my emoticon, didn't I? :-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: School Information Technology Discussion
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Arthus Erea
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:04 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Social Networking
> So now the Internet is a drug?
> There is no useful or safe level of drug use, but there are
> plenty of good reasons students will have to use Internet and
> social networking in the real world and within their own lives.
> To compare the two is simply disingenuous and clouds the debate.
> On Sep 21, 2009, at 9:15 PM, Vincent Rossano wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: School Information Technology Discussion
> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lauren Parren
> >> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:25 PM
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Re: Social Networking
> >> They'll be heading off to the real world soon enough and need to
> >> practice these skills.
> > I'm sorry, but the "real world" argument is way overrated as far as
> > I'm concerned. I think I've made the point "ad nauseum" on
> this list
> > that schools were designed specifically to NOT be the real world.
> > But, okay, if you insist on "real world" education, here's a modest
> > proposal (speaking of nausea):
> > Drugs are something people are exposed to out there in the
> real world.
> > How will kids be able to make good choices if they haven't actually
> > experienced the drug itself, the real thing. Why don't we
> bring drugs
> > into the schools so we can help kids make intelligent
> decisions about
> > them? I know what you're going to say: the drugs are there
> > And that's the point. These kids are using drugs all the time -
> > without the sort of guidance committed educators can offer.
> > Take Adderall, for instance. (I do.) Kids just love it. Studies
> > have shown it to be a wonderful aid for focusing the
> attention, which
> > is definitely important in education. So why isn't Adderall in the
> > classroom officially so ALL the kids can benefit, not just the ones
> > from "better families" who have the bucks to buy it. Let's end the
> > "druggy divide".
> > Then we can help kids learn the proper use of these
> substances, like
> > how to regulate their usage throughout the day so they get the big
> > jolt right before the soccer game. It's really all about
> > use.
> > If we don't show these kids how to use drugs responsibly,
> who will?
> > For
> > instance, I know there are kids who are wasting excessive
> amounts of
> > marijuana because no one has taught them how to make a decent roach
> > clip.
> > Here's a chance for shop class to become relevant, you know what I
> > mean?
> > The problem is that the educators are not keeping up to date. How
> > many, for instance, have done Extacy? (Well, okay, there are some
> > "with-it"
> > teachers, mostly younger ones, who are savvy about this stuff, but
> > they may not want to embarrass their older colleagues by admitting
> > their depth
> > - or height - of experience.) Oh sure, you get some of these old
> > timers who go home and get polluted on a bottle of Southern
> Comfort or
> > two.
> > But
> > that's nothing; kids today are way beyond that by the time
> they're in
> > 6th grade. What's needed is a good professional
> development program
> > in this area.
> > Now that's where I come in. Give me a call and I'll meet you later
> > tonight in the parking lot behind the Chinese restaurant. . .
> > -Vince