Final Gizmoz Post

There were moments in the Veletsianos et al article - such as: "The results of this analysis indicated that humans respond differently to humans than to computers" - where I was thinking: "Ummm, duh!" Think of the way we (and I mean me too) talk to computers, cars, refrigerators, radiators, [enter mechanical thing here], it usually isn't politically correct when we are angry.

I just imagine putting a Gizmoz avatar in front of a class with the computerized voice in front of my 9th graders - I can say positively that my students' assiduity would deplete and their commentary would be less than exemplary (especially if they were not under the guise of punishment).

I feel to some sad extent that our humanitarian empathy has lessened due to media saturation, over exposure and a general numbing of the senses. I do not - for a second - fear that all hope is lost. I have seen my students swell up at beautiful sights and I know that in their hearts they have not become stone. However, compare an old crime drama with a typical episode of CSI and you know exactly what I am talking about. Does that lessen our reaction when our neighbor or peer is injured? I guess I do not know.

I fear (hopefully irrationally) that Asimov's laws will one day reverse on us.



The fear - as this article points to quite clearly - is the seemingly inability for men (boys) to stray from innappropriate comments when they think no one is watching (either that or they don't care). I remember even as far back as 7th grade when we were all playing Oregon Trail "online" in the computer class together and one boy (Pat) was making innappropriate comments to our classmate (Christine) and I just couldn't believe it. The entire class could see it and Pat did not worry for one second about harrassing her. I can't quite remember if he was caught or punished, I really hope so. This incident (and the seeming billions that followed) directly prove the article's stance that the "Internet lowers human inhibition." I think that this is clearly seen in our blogs and chats where we take a more freeflowing approach to our text.

I think some of the ideas (using Google Earth for geography) are great and they should be used in a controlled environment in moderation. It is just so clearly obvious (to me) that you shouldn't simply give students access and license to do whatever they want. High school students (especially boys) are immature and - like the article says - exploring their sexuality. If you give them a free venue to act out - someone is going to act a fool.

I am familiar with the dialogue in the article - I am not sure where I read it before - but it nevertheless is disturbing. I can completely understand trying to joke with a computer - it was hilarious for me the first time I heard the text to speak function on the mac. But the level of vulgarity and the lengths to which the perversity rides is off putting and definitely reinforces my belief that such access needs to be monitored and used only in situations where it will result in progress.