Al Capone Does My Shirts

Al Capone Does My Shirts is a mixed bag for me; I struggle with books that don’t have a strong plot line, and I felt that Al Capone Does My Shirts was definitely one of those. I’m not quite done yet, but I’m well into it and still not sure where the plot is actually going. I’m not very attached to any of the characters so far (and violently dislike a few of them… like Piper.) The main character Moose is likeable, but definitely easier for most boys to identify with than girls. He also seems to be sort of one-dimensional through most of the book. He’s almost too… well behaved. He’s a straight-laced, responsible adolescent boy. I’m not sure I believe it.

I’m not sure what I would use Al Capone Does My Shirts for in a classroom. Perhaps for a language arts class doing a study on diversity, to incorporate autism-spectrum disorders into the unit. The topic of Alcatraz, though interesting, doesn’t really show up in most social studies curriculums and the novel doesn’t focus on the historical aspects of Al Capone’s reign enough to tie it in to a study on mobsters or Chicago.

If I used Al Capone Does My Shirts I think I would include it as a literary circle option. Its historical setting and references paired with its fictional characters and plot make it an easy book to read (and it’s not too long!) while still getting students into a historical mindset. The book could also be used as an entry to a discussion on learning disabilities or autism, focusing on Natalie.

I'm Prensky-d Out...

Once again, Marc Prensky’s defensive, rebellious attitude towards educators and the education system alike stand in the way of conveying his point. The boiled down point- students learn how to think from video games- is hidden behind layers of defensive, angry ranting that instantly turns off a reader, most especially a reader associated in any way with the educational community that Prensky so disparages of.

Once you’ve dug through the layers of angsty adolescent defensiveness, however, you arrive on some interesting content. The levels in which Prensky dissects game-based learning are unique; separating learning into the “question” words is an approach to education that I haven’t seen before, and was surprised to realize that I hadn’t. It seems so simple. When approaching content, the questions that students will (hopefully) ask are “how?” “what?” “why?” “where?” and when/whether?” If, as educators, we could find a way to both lead students to ask and then also answer these questions, it would provide a thorough horizontal understanding of content.

Though Prensky’s article was enlightening and interesting (if a bit offensive, with all the sweeping slights to the educational community at large), The article by James Paul Gee really caught my attention. Gee went beyond just trying to sell the world on game-based learning and delved into the possible pros of game-based learning. The concept of task-based learning or allowing students to pursue answers or attempt to complete tasks at their own pace using predetermined tools given to them is a fascinating one, and one that is central to the idea of game-based learning. This task-based learning gives students what James Paul Gee calls “agency” in their learning, or what I would refer to as “ownership.” Gee’s concept of “distributed knowledge” participates well in this framework of task-based learning in group work- teaching students valuable lessons about delegation, learning from peers, and cooperation.

The final question that Gee leaves us with best characterized the game-based learning debate: “How can we make learning in and out of school, with or without using games, more game-line in the sense of using the sorts of learning principles that young people see in good games every day?” This is an intriguing question. Despite Prensky’s ravings to the contrary, I believe most educators (especially those of my generation) understand and appreciate the capabilities of games as learning tools. But the idea of relying entirely on game-based learning in the classroom (or revolutionizing the education system with Marc Prensky’s expensive learning games) is not practical. Gee leaves us with an intriguing and practical question- how can we learn from these games and adapt our teaching and learning styles to best fit the students we’re trying to serve?

Losing ourselves online

The videos from class today were sobering and frightening, especially Growing up Online. Many of the issues that students had that were explored in the video seemed to be evidence of deeper issues at home. The students all used the internet as a means to explore actions or ideas that they wouldn't be allowed to explore otherwise; unfortunately, in these cases there was a very good reason that they weren't allowed to explore them. Teens always reach the age where they want to shut out their parents- that is natural and has been going on forever, I'd imagine. The problem with this generation of teens is that they're growing up with an entire online world where their parents are intrinsically prohibited- through their "digital immigrant" status- from understanding or controlling. As a future parent, this video was pretty scary to me. Adolescents make bad choices. That's why they have parents to keep them from making the sort of bad choices that could mess up their lives permanently, and keep them afloat until the haze of adolescence wears off. Having a whole realm of their lives that parents don't know about and can't regulate can result in some very bad decisions and possibly bad consequences.

The second video was interesting, but I wish that there was more research into the effects of the "internet culture" on the brain. That section of the video was particularly fascinating and under-emphasized. This video- with the focus on the positive effects of things like Second Life and World of Warcraft- seemed to be more open to both positive and negative effects of online life. It was interesting, but I would be more interested if there was more scientific background for some of the claims (like the multitasking part or the Korean addiction to gaming.)