Saturday, January 28, 2012
Today I spent time continue to develop my chapter 2. I rewrote sections that needed to be rewritten based on my new outline. I got to about page 18 of 29. I need to continue arranging and organizing and rewriting the pieces that need to be written. I am looking forward to getting all of my content in the chapter and in the right places in the outline and in the right order. I did not get as far as I would have liked but I did make significant progress. I have much more work to do. But I am progressing. I won't send the new revision to Margaret until I have a complete offering. I also need to respond to Margaret regarding my committee.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Today we:
Came up with the working title for my paper:
Access Denied: The Underrepresentation of African American Males in Information Technology
Started working on chapter 3 up to research design. stopped.
Now I am back on chapter 2 and we will get back to chapter 3 later today
Created a good outline that I can now use as the template to work each section using the new format from Margaret.
I also uploaded a revised semester plan to dropbox and disscircles
Came up with the working title for my paper:
Access Denied: The Underrepresentation of African American Males in Information Technology
Started working on chapter 3 up to research design. stopped.
Now I am back on chapter 2 and we will get back to chapter 3 later today
Created a good outline that I can now use as the template to work each section using the new format from Margaret.
I also uploaded a revised semester plan to dropbox and disscircles
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Can I add: http://broadbandandsocialjustice.org/2011/12/stem-jobs-are-the-future-but-what-role-will-minorities-play/
Today I finished fleshing out historical overview section of my literature review. Although I
think I still want to add a technical education section using Wharton as the source. I will do that on Monday. The work below still needs to be completed:
1. Add new section on racism
2. Rewrite other sections
3. Add CNN special
4. Other sources that I added
5. ggt entire chapter 2 done with all sources, check the ones at home with the new format
read, edit for flow, transitions, etc
30+ pages in write format compare to notes from MR
review edits and incorporate.
Send to Margaret
Talk to Margaret during the week
I want to submit these changes during the week.
Next week. Sit down with Dr. Diop and write chapter 3
does the CNN piece on Silicon Valley fit into chapter 2
find and read the piece from Linda and decide: does it fit, if so where, then claim, evidence, take
need to figure where these go and format as well
video game link: where does this information go.
Betsy DiSalvo is a Human Centered Computing PhD candidate at the Georgia Institute of Technology’s School of Interactive Computing looking at the ways in which culture impacts technology, and how we can leverage cultural practices into designing constructive learning interventions. Her focus is on urban African-American males’ use of video games and why they are not turning their passion for video game play into a larger interest in computer science.
Young African-American men and Latino men actually game the most hours per week of any other group, but they are not well represented in computing or other technology-related fields. The common wisdom at the time, which was if you get people gaming like young Caucasian or Asian men then they will go into technology, wasn’t really proving true.
We decided to form a game-testing group after a number of iterations and co-design processes with young African-American men in Atlanta.
There is a lot I’ve found in my research that will apply specifically to how we work with and teach young African-American men and the kind of things that move beyond what I am looking at, which is their motivation to not learn. They are actively choosing to not learn in schools because it’s not cool...the Glitch Game Testers was a way to get them to move beyond that.
Out of the 16 men who graduated from high school, 15 have gone on to college, and of those 15, 13 are in computing-related majors. These are unheard of results for a computer science program to increase participation in computing, especially with this demographic, which is probably one of the more difficult to reach.
http://dmlcentral.net/blog/whitney-burke/young-black-males-learning-and-video-games
work this in up top somewhere or in the paper. rewrite using the new format:
In July, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic & Statistics Administration (ESA) published an eye-opening report on the status of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workers in the United States. The report revealed that there were 7.6 million people working in STEM industries in 2010, representing about 5 percent of all employees nationwide. It also noted that the number of STEM jobs is growing three times faster than the number of non-STEM jobs, with a projected growth rate of 17 percent between 2008 and 2018.
This is why the White House introduced Educate to Innovate, an initiative dedicated to improving participation in and performance of U.S. students of all ages in STEM subjects. So far, the program has partnered with stakeholders in the public and private sectors, educators, and STEM-focused foundations to ensure that all of America’s youth, regardless of race or socioeconomic status, have the educational opportunities and resources necessary to participate in STEM education and compete for STEM jobs in the future. This type of initiative is especially important for low-income and minority youth, many of whom attend schools that lack the resources to provide significant STEM offerings.
The stakes for getting these policies right are very high, especially within minority communities. Americans with STEM degrees boast incomes that are, on average, 26 percent higher than non-STEM workers, regardless of whether or not they work directly in a STEM occupation. However, a 2010 Bayer report revealed that minority chemists and chemical engineers gave the nation’s K-12 education system a grade of “D” when it comes to encouraging minorities to pursue STEM careers.
ESA’s July report observed that STEM jobs “play a key role in the sustained growth and stability of the U.S. economy, and are a critical component to helping the U.S. win the future.” In order to enhance innovation – and increase the number of STEM workers – in the U.S., policymakers and educators alike must do whatever is necessary to ensure that more women and minorities are pursuing studies and careers in these lucrative fields. These stakeholders must also focus on bolstering broadband adoption within minority communities.
Closing the digital divide will ensure that minority youth grow up well-equipped and well-prepared for STEM-focused higher education opportunities and careers. Without such a comprehensive commitment to broadband adoption and STEM education, our nation will continue to fall behind in economic growth and innovation.
------
david drew, read these links
There were two reports released in September 2010 about how to improve STEM education, one by the National Science Board, which said that the United States does a poor job of identifying potential STEM success students and should cast a wider net earlier on, and another by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, which said we should be focusing on developing master STEM teachers, rewarding them, and opening 1,000 new STEM-focused schools over the next decade. Which of these would you say is more likely to be the answer? Or what are they perhaps missing?
his answer:
I totally agree with the first one. I believe what they’re saying is there are many people who could succeed who get discouraged from STEM or never encouraged, which is the main thrust of my book. I feel that often that happens because teachers and counselors—and sometimes even parents—believe that a girl can’t do math, believe that a student of color can’t master math and science, that a white student from poverty cannot become a scientist. All of these are false beliefs. That’s all garbage. The whole thrust of my book is that in the emerging high-tech global economy, we switch from the manufacturing era to the information era, and pretty much everybody should be learning at least some of this in high school and many people could go into STEM as a career. We have to get away from a model from the industrial age that says: a) we only need a few people in this area and those will be the geeks; and b) only a few people can succeed in this area. Those are false. So my whole book is about broadening participation, and I feel the achievement gap is based on false factors and can easily be eliminated.
claim
evidence
my take
I list four factors in the book and talk about a number of programs that have done this. One, recruiting into STEM, which maybe isn’t the best verb because it sounds like marketing. It’s making young people aware that college is an option for them and STEM is an option for them. Two, mentoring is critical. Three, in high school and in college, finding ways to create study groups and peer support groups that are focused on academic excellence. The main thing is not to discourage kids and to encourage them to study STEM. Some of the key decisions occur in middle school because they’re heading into algebra. I used to work with Carl Sagan and one of the things we struggled with is that kindergarten students and first-grade students have a natural interest in science and they’ll ask questions about it and get involved, but then if you look as they get older, their interest declines. Where it becomes critical is in middle school because there students are making choices about what they will take in high school and that affects whether they will go to college and where they will go to college. A lot of the avoidance of STEM by teachers, counselors, parents—steering students away from STEM, or avoidance by the students themselves—has to do with anxiety about math. What you have to do is get beyond psychological barriers to broaden participation.
Yes, but I don’t think it’s enough. I understand that there are constraints. I also think that there are some myths that everybody buys into when talking about reforming education. There are four. Here’s something you’ll hear high officials in government saying: ‘American high-school students perform dismally in international assessments.’ Which is true. ‘This shows how much American education has declined. We have to take steps to restore American secondary and elementary education to its former glory and here’s how I think we should do it.’ That’s false. There was no period of former glory. We always were at the bottom. Now it’s become much more important, and we’re more aware of it now. Another myth is that the way to fix this is to spend a lot on curriculum. I don’t think so. Curriculum reform is fine, but we’ve spent huge sums—for example, the new math after Sputnik. Given the choice, I’d rather have my child taught by an exciting, creative, involved teacher using a science curriculum from the 1950s, as contrasted with a hostile, critical, boring teacher using the latest curriculum. I think it’s all about the teacher. Another myth is that the key is we’ve got to recruit more young people into teaching. That’s good, but it’s not the key in my opinion. The problem isn’t getting young people into teaching; it’s keeping them in teaching. But it’s all about the teacher.
claim: better teachers
evidence: what he said
my take:
That is the right conversation to be having. There are things that would surprise people. I think the fundamental barrier is that people are worried about erroneous beliefs that some students may not be up to it. And I feel that virtually any student can master these subjects, at least at the high-school level, and many in college. As far as surprises, many students can benefit from technical training—community college technical training. There are many STEM jobs that don’t require a college degree. I am not saying that some students are not smart enough to go to college—my whole bid is that everyone can learn this—but some students don’t want to go to college. Some want to go to work right now. So take STEM courses in high school and some community-college courses, and there are jobs that are in demand now such as underwater welders, all kinds of jobs where you can get excellent training. I also don’t think enough attention is paid when discussing STEM [in relation] to reading. I haven’t ever met an outstanding mathematician that can’t read. I think there are still a lot of uninformed ideas and prejudices that certain people can’t do this. And that’s just wrong. When you have the president of Harvard saying that women maybe don’t have the intellectual fire power to succeed in STEM, that’s pretty serious. It’s a battle that I feel is the central battle, and I think we’re in an era now with respect to women in STEM, with respect to underrepresented minorities in STEM, with respect to white students from poverty in STEM, that’s kind of like a previous era with respect to civil rights where the rhetoric was one thing but the reality was different.
Today I finished fleshing out historical overview section of my literature review. Although I
think I still want to add a technical education section using Wharton as the source. I will do that on Monday. The work below still needs to be completed:
1. Add new section on racism
2. Rewrite other sections
3. Add CNN special
4. Other sources that I added
5. ggt entire chapter 2 done with all sources, check the ones at home with the new format
read, edit for flow, transitions, etc
30+ pages in write format compare to notes from MR
review edits and incorporate.
Send to Margaret
Talk to Margaret during the week
I want to submit these changes during the week.
Next week. Sit down with Dr. Diop and write chapter 3
does the CNN piece on Silicon Valley fit into chapter 2
find and read the piece from Linda and decide: does it fit, if so where, then claim, evidence, take
need to figure where these go and format as well
video game link: where does this information go.
Betsy DiSalvo is a Human Centered Computing PhD candidate at the Georgia Institute of Technology’s School of Interactive Computing looking at the ways in which culture impacts technology, and how we can leverage cultural practices into designing constructive learning interventions. Her focus is on urban African-American males’ use of video games and why they are not turning their passion for video game play into a larger interest in computer science.
Young African-American men and Latino men actually game the most hours per week of any other group, but they are not well represented in computing or other technology-related fields. The common wisdom at the time, which was if you get people gaming like young Caucasian or Asian men then they will go into technology, wasn’t really proving true.
We decided to form a game-testing group after a number of iterations and co-design processes with young African-American men in Atlanta.
There is a lot I’ve found in my research that will apply specifically to how we work with and teach young African-American men and the kind of things that move beyond what I am looking at, which is their motivation to not learn. They are actively choosing to not learn in schools because it’s not cool...the Glitch Game Testers was a way to get them to move beyond that.
Out of the 16 men who graduated from high school, 15 have gone on to college, and of those 15, 13 are in computing-related majors. These are unheard of results for a computer science program to increase participation in computing, especially with this demographic, which is probably one of the more difficult to reach.
http://dmlcentral.net/blog/whitney-burke/young-black-males-learning-and-video-games
work this in up top somewhere or in the paper. rewrite using the new format:
In July, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic & Statistics Administration (ESA) published an eye-opening report on the status of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workers in the United States. The report revealed that there were 7.6 million people working in STEM industries in 2010, representing about 5 percent of all employees nationwide. It also noted that the number of STEM jobs is growing three times faster than the number of non-STEM jobs, with a projected growth rate of 17 percent between 2008 and 2018.
This is why the White House introduced Educate to Innovate, an initiative dedicated to improving participation in and performance of U.S. students of all ages in STEM subjects. So far, the program has partnered with stakeholders in the public and private sectors, educators, and STEM-focused foundations to ensure that all of America’s youth, regardless of race or socioeconomic status, have the educational opportunities and resources necessary to participate in STEM education and compete for STEM jobs in the future. This type of initiative is especially important for low-income and minority youth, many of whom attend schools that lack the resources to provide significant STEM offerings.
The stakes for getting these policies right are very high, especially within minority communities. Americans with STEM degrees boast incomes that are, on average, 26 percent higher than non-STEM workers, regardless of whether or not they work directly in a STEM occupation. However, a 2010 Bayer report revealed that minority chemists and chemical engineers gave the nation’s K-12 education system a grade of “D” when it comes to encouraging minorities to pursue STEM careers.
ESA’s July report observed that STEM jobs “play a key role in the sustained growth and stability of the U.S. economy, and are a critical component to helping the U.S. win the future.” In order to enhance innovation – and increase the number of STEM workers – in the U.S., policymakers and educators alike must do whatever is necessary to ensure that more women and minorities are pursuing studies and careers in these lucrative fields. These stakeholders must also focus on bolstering broadband adoption within minority communities.
Closing the digital divide will ensure that minority youth grow up well-equipped and well-prepared for STEM-focused higher education opportunities and careers. Without such a comprehensive commitment to broadband adoption and STEM education, our nation will continue to fall behind in economic growth and innovation.
------
david drew, read these links
There were two reports released in September 2010 about how to improve STEM education, one by the National Science Board, which said that the United States does a poor job of identifying potential STEM success students and should cast a wider net earlier on, and another by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, which said we should be focusing on developing master STEM teachers, rewarding them, and opening 1,000 new STEM-focused schools over the next decade. Which of these would you say is more likely to be the answer? Or what are they perhaps missing?
his answer:
I totally agree with the first one. I believe what they’re saying is there are many people who could succeed who get discouraged from STEM or never encouraged, which is the main thrust of my book. I feel that often that happens because teachers and counselors—and sometimes even parents—believe that a girl can’t do math, believe that a student of color can’t master math and science, that a white student from poverty cannot become a scientist. All of these are false beliefs. That’s all garbage. The whole thrust of my book is that in the emerging high-tech global economy, we switch from the manufacturing era to the information era, and pretty much everybody should be learning at least some of this in high school and many people could go into STEM as a career. We have to get away from a model from the industrial age that says: a) we only need a few people in this area and those will be the geeks; and b) only a few people can succeed in this area. Those are false. So my whole book is about broadening participation, and I feel the achievement gap is based on false factors and can easily be eliminated.
claim
evidence
my take
I list four factors in the book and talk about a number of programs that have done this. One, recruiting into STEM, which maybe isn’t the best verb because it sounds like marketing. It’s making young people aware that college is an option for them and STEM is an option for them. Two, mentoring is critical. Three, in high school and in college, finding ways to create study groups and peer support groups that are focused on academic excellence. The main thing is not to discourage kids and to encourage them to study STEM. Some of the key decisions occur in middle school because they’re heading into algebra. I used to work with Carl Sagan and one of the things we struggled with is that kindergarten students and first-grade students have a natural interest in science and they’ll ask questions about it and get involved, but then if you look as they get older, their interest declines. Where it becomes critical is in middle school because there students are making choices about what they will take in high school and that affects whether they will go to college and where they will go to college. A lot of the avoidance of STEM by teachers, counselors, parents—steering students away from STEM, or avoidance by the students themselves—has to do with anxiety about math. What you have to do is get beyond psychological barriers to broaden participation.
Yes, but I don’t think it’s enough. I understand that there are constraints. I also think that there are some myths that everybody buys into when talking about reforming education. There are four. Here’s something you’ll hear high officials in government saying: ‘American high-school students perform dismally in international assessments.’ Which is true. ‘This shows how much American education has declined. We have to take steps to restore American secondary and elementary education to its former glory and here’s how I think we should do it.’ That’s false. There was no period of former glory. We always were at the bottom. Now it’s become much more important, and we’re more aware of it now. Another myth is that the way to fix this is to spend a lot on curriculum. I don’t think so. Curriculum reform is fine, but we’ve spent huge sums—for example, the new math after Sputnik. Given the choice, I’d rather have my child taught by an exciting, creative, involved teacher using a science curriculum from the 1950s, as contrasted with a hostile, critical, boring teacher using the latest curriculum. I think it’s all about the teacher. Another myth is that the key is we’ve got to recruit more young people into teaching. That’s good, but it’s not the key in my opinion. The problem isn’t getting young people into teaching; it’s keeping them in teaching. But it’s all about the teacher.
claim: better teachers
evidence: what he said
my take:
That is the right conversation to be having. There are things that would surprise people. I think the fundamental barrier is that people are worried about erroneous beliefs that some students may not be up to it. And I feel that virtually any student can master these subjects, at least at the high-school level, and many in college. As far as surprises, many students can benefit from technical training—community college technical training. There are many STEM jobs that don’t require a college degree. I am not saying that some students are not smart enough to go to college—my whole bid is that everyone can learn this—but some students don’t want to go to college. Some want to go to work right now. So take STEM courses in high school and some community-college courses, and there are jobs that are in demand now such as underwater welders, all kinds of jobs where you can get excellent training. I also don’t think enough attention is paid when discussing STEM [in relation] to reading. I haven’t ever met an outstanding mathematician that can’t read. I think there are still a lot of uninformed ideas and prejudices that certain people can’t do this. And that’s just wrong. When you have the president of Harvard saying that women maybe don’t have the intellectual fire power to succeed in STEM, that’s pretty serious. It’s a battle that I feel is the central battle, and I think we’re in an era now with respect to women in STEM, with respect to underrepresented minorities in STEM, with respect to white students from poverty in STEM, that’s kind of like a previous era with respect to civil rights where the rhetoric was one thing but the reality was different.
Saturday, January 07, 2012
I received feedback from Margaret on my chapter 2. I basically need to rewrite what i have done thus far. My goal is to have this done by Sunday. That is aggressive but that is my goal. The email was full of information and links to resources. It was a lot to absorb so I started today's session with reviewing the materials. It is not hard to understand just much to absorb. It was however very helpful and reduced my confusion. It actually made me look forward to future research. Below is the message I received from Margaret:
Hi Kai,
You are writing and that is good. And I can see you are struggling to find organization.
You have a two section lit review with a paragraph long introduction and no conclusion.
I have two big comments that affect the whole paper.
1) you need structure -- this will help you organize what you have written.
Both sections need structure and each paragraph needs structure.
You are building an argument -- it goes like this...
Section 1: topic
subsection 1 Topic
Paragraph one
Claim
data
what you take from this
Paragraph 2
Claim
evidence or data
What you take from this
Paragraphs x-x (with this structure)
Summary paragraph
what I took from all of these supported claims
Sub section 2 Topic
Paragraph....
So for each paragraph.. find the claim... support it with evidence and start building your arguement.
2) And the next thing is that you are over quoting. Think about quotes as illustrations.
They make your point stronger and provide additional information but they are NOT
instead of writing. The most common mistake a graduate student makes is writing
through the voice of others. You need to find your own voice. You are telling us
what you have learned.
This screencast I made for the MALT students might help...
http://screencast.com/t/SkULeX6yg
Also go to
http://ccar.wikispaces.com
Go to lit review and read what I have written... especially the part about when and how to quote.
Now is the time to go to the website and put up a plan for what you will do this semester. I
gave you credit for your flurry of work at the end, but I need a pattern of regular work.
You need to be making progress... (edits are in the dropbox)
Margaret
After reviewing the material, I started the process of the rewrite. Instead of starting where I left off I started at the beginning using Margaret's comments. This way when I get to the end I have it in the form and using the suggestions before I move on. Also I can go forth with the rest of my sources in the proper fashion. On Sunday I continued to work on the new format. I did the first section which is Historical overview. I still need to finish that and then I will rewrite the rest and work on section titles and order and transitions and rewrite intro. I have also started thinking about interviewing African American IT leadership perhaps at the CIO level. I have 2 in mind thus far:
1. Thomas Sneed
2. Shellye Archambeau
Perhaps I can tap ITSMF (Information Technology Senior Management Forum). I sent an email via the website to gain a contact. Perhaps I can survey them and report the findings.
Hi Kai,
You are writing and that is good. And I can see you are struggling to find organization.
You have a two section lit review with a paragraph long introduction and no conclusion.
I have two big comments that affect the whole paper.
1) you need structure -- this will help you organize what you have written.
Both sections need structure and each paragraph needs structure.
You are building an argument -- it goes like this...
Section 1: topic
subsection 1 Topic
Paragraph one
Claim
data
what you take from this
Paragraph 2
Claim
evidence or data
What you take from this
Paragraphs x-x (with this structure)
Summary paragraph
what I took from all of these supported claims
Sub section 2 Topic
Paragraph....
So for each paragraph.. find the claim... support it with evidence and start building your arguement.
2) And the next thing is that you are over quoting. Think about quotes as illustrations.
They make your point stronger and provide additional information but they are NOT
instead of writing. The most common mistake a graduate student makes is writing
through the voice of others. You need to find your own voice. You are telling us
what you have learned.
This screencast I made for the MALT students might help...
http://screencast.com/t/SkULeX6yg
Also go to
http://ccar.wikispaces.com
Go to lit review and read what I have written... especially the part about when and how to quote.
Now is the time to go to the website and put up a plan for what you will do this semester. I
gave you credit for your flurry of work at the end, but I need a pattern of regular work.
You need to be making progress... (edits are in the dropbox)
Margaret
After reviewing the material, I started the process of the rewrite. Instead of starting where I left off I started at the beginning using Margaret's comments. This way when I get to the end I have it in the form and using the suggestions before I move on. Also I can go forth with the rest of my sources in the proper fashion. On Sunday I continued to work on the new format. I did the first section which is Historical overview. I still need to finish that and then I will rewrite the rest and work on section titles and order and transitions and rewrite intro. I have also started thinking about interviewing African American IT leadership perhaps at the CIO level. I have 2 in mind thus far:
1. Thomas Sneed
2. Shellye Archambeau
Perhaps I can tap ITSMF (Information Technology Senior Management Forum). I sent an email via the website to gain a contact. Perhaps I can survey them and report the findings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)