In preparation for a Critical Media masters course that I will be completing the beginning of July, we had to read "What Would Google Do?" and blog with fellow classmates about our reasons for recommending the book or not recommending it.
First, I’ll just give a brief summary of what the book was about, for those who have not read it.
Jarvis uses "Google" in the title to lure people into thinking the book is going to be about the ever popular search engine "Google". But it is not really about Google at all. It's more of an analysis of how the internet has changed our lives and our culture. He focuses on how Web 2.0 has influenced business, and makes suggestions about what the future may look like using several industries as examples in the second half of the book. Jarvis describes principles and rules for businesses to abide by if they are to succeed in this new 2.0 world.
Overall his principles could be applied to many facets of life, including education. Several major themes found throughout the book were: collaboration, trust, choice, quality, access, honesty, open minded, helpful. Who wouldn't want all these things in our relationships with others? I don't think it matters if you are a teacher or a business person.
The first half of the book was quite thought provoking and I found myself underlining many inspirational ideas as I read. I was able to make connections with how we could change our education system to incorporate some of Jarvis' rules and principles to enhance learning for both students and teachers.
The second half of the book was quite boring. Jarvis' attempted to relate the rules and principles of his business model to various industries. He includes a small section on reforming education, but I was a little disappointed with his ideas. This could have partly been because this topic was not covered specifically until the end of the book, and by that time my eyes were starting to glaze over. I had to force myself to finish the book, and I did so only because I had to- in case I was questioned on it in my upcoming course. I found his ideas to be very repetitive and I kept asking myself if there was something new in what I just read, or if it was more of the same. I concluded that it was more of the same.
As far as recommending this book to educators, I would not. I think there are far better books out there to emphasise how education should be more student directed and teacher facilitated- a student-inquiry approach to learning. Not all teachers will be able, or willing, to make connections to education based on Jarvis' business model. If we want to make a change in education, I think we should be encouraging teachers to read literature that is more specific to our field, with practical examples of what change looks like in our classrooms. As a teacher, I would rate this book a 5 out of 10. If I had read this book prior to completing my first year of a master’s course I would have rated it lower.
However, I would recommend the book to business minded people (as I have done already- I am passing the book on to a friend when I have the course completed). I think the information in the book warrants something to think about with regards to future transactions and business opportunities (I still think the reading the second section of the book would be boring for even people in this field). Overall, I would rate this book 7 out of 10 for business people.
Although this book offers a great insight into how we, everyday people, can make a difference in the world using platforms such as Facebook and Blogger, I don't think many people would read beyond the first few chapters. If they even got that far, if might not even be necessary to read the rest, as it is more of the same (missing except for a few name droppings along the way). Reading from the perspective of this group of people, I would rate the book 4 out of 10. I think they could go to his blog page and read just what interested them, instead of reading all that didn't.
Agree or disagree?? I would love to hear from other people about their opinions on this book.
I offer my web site, The Media Literacy Clearinghouse: http://www.frankwbaker.com as a good starting point for you and any teacher out there who wants to become more comfortable teaching the "language of media", "non print texts", and "media literacy."
ReplyDeleteThanks, Frank! I am a fan of your work and I had the link for your website already posted under "My Favorite Websites". Your resources are practical and user friendly even for teachers who are new to teaching the "language of media". I am looking forward to trying out more of your ideas come September.
ReplyDeleteHi Valerie, I agree that WWGD? is really geared towards people in the business sector but there are
ReplyDeleteideas that can be utilized by educators in the classroom. What about ceding control of the classroom to
the students? To most teachers that would sound like anarchy and disorganization. But is the traditional
teaching methods and strategies that are being used in the classroom effective? If you ask kids do they
enjoy time spent in school what do you think the answer would be? For educators and students’ sake I
believe the time is soon coming when top administrators will have no other choice but to implement new
programs in the school. As Jarvis recommends to businesses that customers should be in control and be
able to have input on the product features and design, students will have more responsibility for their
own learning and will have more opportunities to be free in thinking and creative. I think that giving a
kid or group of kids a project to work on for a period of time, as Google employees do, will be a
chance to work cooperatively with classmates and develop important social and team skills that are
needed in today’s workplace. The teacher’s role will be more of a facilitator guiding, helping and
directing the students’ learning. Google is the most successful business in the world and the education
theorist should be able to develop theories based on Google to be used in the classroom to provide
better learning opportunities to the children. I wish that Jarvis would have dealt more with how thinking
like Google could impact the education field but I guess we will have to figure that out ourselves or wait
until someone else does. I enjoyed the book even though there was only a brief mention of education
because it gives the reader some inkling of what may happen in the future with regards to different
economic sectors. What do you think Valerie? I’m thirsty and need a tall icy glass of GoogleJuice.
Hi Valerie,
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your comments about "What Would Google Do?', I would like to respond to the platforms that citizens of today can use to inform the rest of the world of the most recent happenings or what we call the "News."
I was listening to the Sunday's edition of the CBC news on my drive in town yesterday and there was a commentary about the new 2.0 world that we live in. A few quotes remain with me, one being a statement made by Jeff Jarvis. He wanted to remind the public that the information that is placed on these platforms such as facebook, twitter, etc. may be the first eye witnesses of the most recent news, but he stated that it is 'half-baked' news. This means that the most recent pictures of the news is given, but the facts that go with the story most certainly will be lacking detail. Therefore, he believes that the general public may use these platforms initially, but they will also being looking for the story in our most established newspapers. Therefore, there is a major need for professional journalism, but the platforms cannot be ignored. What will eventually evolve is the 3.0 world, where the platforms and the established newpapers will collaborate and respect each others roles in the news world.
A second cocern with these platforms is that it is news given to the world free of charge by its citizens. Jarvis classified this as the 'gift economy.' This certainly supports the fact that people work for more than the money. Other motivators is one's reputation, pride, a feel of contributing for the good, etc.
The only concern is the journalism cost. It is very expensive and dangerous when a journalist is covering a war in other parts of the world. Therefore, our 1.0 world of journalism is still needed to inform the people of what is happening globally. Once again we can see the evolution of the 3.0 world, where the two worlds meet.
Thanks for your comments Chris and Selena. You both raised some very important points in your postings.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Chris that the time will come when policy makers will have no other choice only to bring in programs that put students at the center of their learning, using an inquiry based approach. Many businesses have become very profitable because of the value that is placed on collaboration, creativity, trust, and quality to name a few. If we are preparing children for the 'real world' and expect them to become productive members of society then we must ensure that they have had an opportunity to approach learning in these ways. There must be flexibility within our prescribed programs for students to have an opportunity to explore their own interests. Does it really matter if they can recall facts for a test? Or would time be better spent on engaging students in real life situations requiring them to work collaboratively with others and providing them an opportunity to see things from other perspectives?
Selena, your commentary on Web 3.0 was quite intriguing. I had never thought about it quite that way, but can certainly appreciate the value in adopting such an approach. I wonder what implications this could have for us as educators. Could it mean that students, teachers and policy makers might be able to work together to produce a curriculum that fits everyone’s needs? Are students voices really heard when producing a curriculum document? Are they even valued?