blog post #2

Throughout my years of schooling, I've had a lot of experience using Microsoft Office in general, but rely mostly on its word processor MS Word. Since middle school, I began to need it for my classwork assignments, especially since my middle school offered a technology course in which we were instructed on how to use various computer applications. In high school, I was accepted into the IB program, so I began to use Word much more frequently, as I had an absolutely incredible amount of papers that were required to be completed during the four years if I were to receive my IB diploma. The "IB Gods" (this is what my History of the Americas teacher referred to the headmasters as) were very particular in regards to the formatting in which our assignments were to be submitted, so I had to become familiar and comfortable with Word in order to do things such as properly apply APA/Chicago/MLA formatting to my papers when required. Many of the assignments I did were done solely by me in high school but upon enrolling here, I began to do a lot more collaborative work, which is when I first began to utilize Google Docs. I prefer to do my collaborative assignments with Google Docs, simply because not everyone has OneDrive, and not many people are familiar with navigating that aspect of MS Office. Google Docs is much more user friendly, and is also much more easily accessible, as many people have Gmail accounts and can easily select and use Google Docs since it is essentially just another word processor with a simple interface.

The International Society for Technology in Education created a set of standards for educators in order to help educators better understand and connect with their students in a multitude of meaningful ways. While some of the standards relate specifically towards students and their relationship with technology, others are much more general yet all incorporate the use and emphasize the importance of technology. The standard that resonates the strongest personally would be the Designer standard. It is no secret that there are different types of learners; oftentimes you might hear some say that they are "visual" or "hands-on" learners, or they might use some other descriptor to try to encapsulate the way in which they feel they learn best. The Designer standard explains that as educators, it is our job to ensure that the curriculum is distributed in a variety of ways so that each type of learner is accommodated. I am a very creative person by nature, but I am also very structured and organized; because of this, I feel that information appeals to me most when it is taught using a variety of different colors and mediums, yet I need to have structure (such as specified learning objectives, section headers, etc.) so that I can efficiently relate the information to its respective (sub)category within the subject material. I think that this standard is one of the most important standards for K-12 as well as university-level educators because it is critical to understand that since not every person learns the same, that there needs to be variety throughout both distribution and application of the curriculum. 

The ISTE educator standards all utilize technology in one way or another, and this is because of the influence that technology has on our daily lives. And while it is true that those born during the technological age (referred to as digital natives) on average have an easier time navigating through various modes of technology, this is not to say that every student will have the same access to these modes of technology or have the means to properly utilize them. This is why it is so important to integrate aspects of technology within the curriculum so that students can have a space in which they are able to adapt incredibly useful (and becoming more and moreso necessary) skills and use resources that they otherwise may not be able to. This is also part of the reason why I do not particularly care for the terms "digital native" and "digital immigrant"; I completely understand the sentiment, but it is completely ignorant of the fact that there are plenty of children born today in impoverished areas that have extremely limited access to any technology at all. To make assumptions about one's proficiency in a specific area as well as their ability to learn simply on the basis of whether they were born before or after a cutoff date seems a bit crude and exclusionary. I've had a plethora of professors who proved to have been much more technologically-savvy than I was, and I think that attempting to categorize people into a sort of technology dichotomy only enforces the already far too prevalent stereotypes about older people and their (in)ability to use technology. I understand that technology is rapidly developing and that there very well may be a gap between myself and my future students, but it is not insurmountable, and my being born in what may be referred to as an "outdated" period should not hinder my ability to learn and connect with my students.