Comments on: Don’t read this article

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

I haven’t looked through the current issue (I know it’s in a pile around here somewhere), but I’m not surprised that an article in L&L is recommending out-of-date technology. (Well, maybe a little surprised that it’s that far out.) The articles in most issues are pretty far behind the curve.

Part of that, of course, is due to the lead time required to put together a glossy, dead-tree periodical. But should an organization that’s supposed to be “leading” in the area of instructional technology still be printing and mailing their journal? Our state affiliated group took ours electronic two years ago, not to mention making membership free.

By: Jarrod Martin

Jarrod Martin — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

Thanks for being brave enough to review this article with honesty. I feel like too many education issues, especially technology-related, get the high-gloss varnish when it’s just a piece of MDF underneath.

By: Scott McLeod

Scott McLeod — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

I can only imagine the damage the author is doing to her reputation and credibility as tech-savvy educator after tech-savvy educator reads through her article and says WTF?!

By: Sarah

Sarah — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

One of my projects for this summer is to create a class website/blog (leaning toward using edublogs). Thanks for the heads-up on where not to turn to for advice.

By: Janice Robertson

Janice Robertson — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

Perhaps the editors feel that the intended audience knows nothing about Teaching and Leading with Technology, and that’s why cutting edge, current sites don’t matter. Maybe they think all the people who would know better are not reading the articles anyway because they already know how to Create Valuable Class Websites! Just a possibility. I have the same reaction as you did whenever I find books reviewed and then discover that the books were published 4-5 years ago or longer! What good are they to me now?
I hope you sent a copy of your post to the editor. It is important feedback. Everybody drops the ball now and then, and needs a friendly and honest reminder.

By: Darin King

Darin King — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

THANK YOU for your review on this article. To be honest, I started skimming it last week after the condescending “don’t panic” intro. I just went back and read it again and you are right on target with your criticism. Looks like an article from 4-5 years ago with a section added in the middle about the collaborative web.

Is print media, with it’s slow editorial process, still relevant? As an ISTE member, I am a bit embarrassed that an article like this was published. Let’s hope they recognize the issue and tighten up their editorial process.

By: M. Walker

M. Walker — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

Scott,
I agree with your post, though I may have a reason for why people would write articles that apply to 5-10 year old technology: Those are the tools they have to work with. In my former job in Lakeville, MN, we did a study last year of the inventory:
75% of the equipment was 5 years old or older, and 28% was over 8 years old.
Despite this fact, last fall they still failed to pass a levy for technology-by the widest margin of any of the levy questions.

Given the outdated technology, some are forced to use outdated software and hardware tools.

By: Scott Elias

Scott Elias — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

Hey! I created my first ever class website in 1996 on Geocities using Netscape Composer!! My hunch is that this was actually written 10 years ago and fell behind someone’s desk. Years later, they decided to move offices and found it back there.

Had this come out on April 1, I would have laughed at the joke and moved on.

By: Warrick Wynne

Warrick Wynne — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

Yes, those tools bring back happy nostalgic memories. I build a family web site using Tripod and remember the pages getting smaller as the ads got bigger, and more animated.

And maybe the whole thing about trying to get teachers to build web pages using html is way over. Think: wikis!

It sounds like one of those PD sessions you arrive at where you know instantly that this is going to tell you anything remotely relevant and where you start thinking of ways to get online and get some real work done in the back row.

By: john hendron

john hendron — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000

Yes–

> It sounds like one of those PD sessions you arrive at where you know instantly that this is going to tell you anything remotely relevant and where you start thinking of ways to get online and get some real work done in the back row.

I wrote on my own blog about my experience reading this post, and subsequently, coming to some similar conclusions. (click the URL above.)

My main points: to be fair, I don’t think the recentness of the tools really matter. What does is the author’s avoidance to discuss what the title promised: value in class (teacher, student) web sites.

It seems most here are in agreement that the article doesn’t merit a lot of value. But for me, it got me to think, and evaluate. And for others, it might lay-out more clearly some of the tools available for web publishing, and what makes them different.