The first article I read on mashable.com was called "4 tips for integrating social media into the classroom". It talks about the rules and regulations that should be enforced, or lightened upon for the usage of social media networks in children's schools. This article is definitely important and relevant to our class because this is basically what our class is. It is an hour and fifteen minute period that is solely dedicated to the use of new types of media. The difference is that we are not between the ages of 5-13, and can look at the information much differently and more scholarly.
Social media networks are rapidly increasing their demographics and are now working their way into elementary school systems. I think there are a few advantages and a couple disadvantages to this. One advantage is that elementary school is the first stepping stone into the real world, and whether teachers and principles like it or not social media networks are what the "real world" is becoming. Even very high end companies are doing business over facebook, and even our president tweets. So where it might seem like they are all for fun and games students could really start to learn the value of these sites and how useful they can be; something I did not have the advantage of learning until this class. A disadvantage is that students may get distracted with the fluff side of these sites as oppose to the serious side. A solution that may help fix that is to give the students maybe a ten minute "recreational use" time at the end of class, after they have done what they were supposed to in class. However, I think the advantages way out the disadvantages because kids at that age will always try and beat the system no matter what subject of school it is, but I think its important for them to retain as much knowledge about these sites as possible while young because social media is our future and so are these kids.
The second article I read from mashable.com was called "Facebook status updates show which countries are happiest". I found this article to be really interesting and an example of how social media networks can be a good thing. It relates to other apps we have seen in class such as what word everyone is tweeting, or the one (I don't remember the name!) where you can put your mouse over a place and a picture that was uploaded from that area shows up. I think its great the way we collect all different kinds of data like this. Although some of it may seem virtually useless right now I think there is a lot that can be done with it in the future. An example of how status's have been positive is though most facebook status's are nonsense or song lyrics, some are for good causes. I have found out about a lot of charity events, or donations of sorts through peoples facebook status and have actually attended. I kind of went off on a tangent about status's, but I think my main idea about this article is that one mans trash is another mans treasure, and social scientists are probably having a field day with all the new kinds of data that is available to them through these social mediums. I think they should be, many people are afraid of technology but I think we should embrace it and use it for every advantage that we can.

The was very intrigued by how diverse, yet all involving new technology the topics on the website mashable.com were. The device I chose to write about it is the ipad. The first article was about how the ipad, among many other things, advances the way in which people can play games. The example they used was a game called "plants vs. zombies". They have created up to 11 contact points for the game. The article even mentions how it could be good for kids who just cant wait their turn to play; the kids can just play together. While I think the advances in gaming on the ipad are virtually harmless, it does raise some questions for me. The first is with new technologies such as this and the wii, how long is it before we are actually just sitting with a helmet on and are actually in the game itself. Professor Greenberg has mentioned they have already created these, but how long will it be before it is on every kids Christmas list? That also brings me to the question of, does that almost make games pointless? If they are designed to be so real, why cant you just go do them outside? An example of this like on the Wii, if people are having such a good time bowling with their friends, why don't they just go bowling? I have some answers for this such as cost, and its easily accessible...so I think where its as right now is okay, but as it progresses it could just be getting ridiculous.
The second article I read was about a man who purchased an ipad and later on was attacked outside of the mall. The thief removed so much of the mans skin from his pinkie finger that it had to be amputated. This I think is an example of things we have spoken about in class about how technology is taking over. I realize that theft has always been an issue because some people are just menaces to society, but with the higher cost and more intrigue in these kinds of products than anything else the rate at which they are being stolen is very high. I can remember back to when I was in high school when I got a new pair of headphones for my birthday to replace the classic white ipod headphones, because at the time a lot of ipod were just getting ripped out of pockets and jackets and the familiar headphones were a huge target to thieves. There is no doubt in my mind that the newer and more advanced products look, the more susceptible they are to being stolen.

A direct comparison between Vannevar Bush's "As we may think" and Kevin Kelly's "The next 5,000 days of the Internet", is the references to the "machine". Bush refers to it as a "piece of furniture" which stores a collection of scattered knowledge within it. Kelly's vision of the machine, while similar to Bush's is a little more specific considering it was discussed in a time when the technology they referred to has already been invented. Kelly's reference to the machine is the most perfect machine to ever be made, constructed through the consumers; the users of technology through cell phones, computers and any other handheld devices.
Regardless of their depth in explanation, both men's ideas about this machine are very similar. The way that I interpreted the idea is that basically even though as humans we are doing exceptionally well keeping up with all the new technologies, it is eventually going to catch up with us unless we have one solid center to bring everything together so we can keep it under control and managable. An example of this, on a very small scale, it is the equivalent of having widgets on our webpages, so that all the sites we constantly visit can all be organized in one little spot.
I honestly did not see any noteable differences between the two ideas. The only point I think is worth mentioning is that Bush's ideas were predictions (which ultimatly had truth) and Kelly's ideas were based on facts from the previous 5,000 days. I think they were both right and it is only a matter of time before we create new forms of technology to put into the machine.

New Media and Education 3/30

New media and technology is changing almost everything about the way we learn, not only in everyday life but in a more structured environments like high schools and colleges. My generation of college students should consider ourselves so lucky to have the opportunities that we do due to the advances in technology. In my opinion, some of these advances are good but at the same time could be making us lazier. An example of this is a college student missing one class is not as much of a big deal as it used to be if the teacher is technologically in tune. Personally, I know almost all my teachers post the day’s work and upcoming assignments on the schools website. This is great for the average student who may have had something important to do, or fell ill. However this is a GREAT advantage for the kind of students who just don’t feel like showing up to class and can just think “whatever it will be up on Angel later”. There are also other factors to be considered for those kinds of students when it comes to their final grade, so maybe that is not the best example but I think it gets my point across.
Regardless of the little cheats the internet and other forms of technology that students are presented with today, if you used in the correct way we are more fortunate than ever. We can be plugged in 24/7, and when it comes to learning you can never learn too much. We have the ability to find out just about anything we want to know, and see just about anything we want to see. Professor Greenberg showed us photos from other parts of the world that he admitted he had only ever heard of until he was able to visit these places, as oppose to us where we can virtually visit them. The question with that is… will students become less motivated to travel and learn firsthand now that they can easily do it via Google images? My answer to that is no. If a person is motivated to travel the world and experience it, they will. The ones who sit back and just pull up pictures on the net obviously are not that ambitious. On the other hand, sometimes it is not within someone’s means to travel the world and in that sense it is a great thing that they can see and learn places they may never get to afford to go to.
The way in which we are learning is changing, but I do not think it is necessarily a bad thing. I personally like that instead of scribbling chicken scratch all over my notebook paper trying to get every word a professor is trying to say in, I can simply go to Angel after class and print out a neat and clean copy of that day’s lesson. With technology there will always be pro’s and con’s, but with education I think even if there’s different ways of learning being created, it can never be bad because never is gaining knowledge a bad thing.