What is a global village?

My first impression of the article, "Do we really want a global village?", is wow what a pessimistic and doomsday view of technology.  The author's interpretation of the term global village was more global domination.  I have heard the term "global village" before and this is my understanding of it.  It implies the ability to communicate with all areas of the globe. As far as the concept of village, the author makes a valid point in that most of us don't know what a true village is.  Is it a community?  Is it a city?  My idea of a village is everyone working together to promote the health, success and goodness of the people that live there.  It is sort of an extended family idea.  However, families are different than villages.  Families imply a closer relationship.  This also brings up the concept of a community.  I think village and community are similar terms.  So maybe a more accurate term would be global community. 

Is a global village a good or bad occurrence?  I think it relates to what are you intentions to be part of the global village.    If I want to have a conversation with someone on the other side of the world to learn about that culture and make a connection that's good.  If a corporation advertises something harmful and makes it seem like the thing to have (i.e., tobacco companies, fast food chains, etc.) that would not be a good use of global connectedness.  I don't think that the internet in itself is bad it's how it is used and promoted.  In general I think the idea of communication with other cultures is a good thing and will only strengthen our society.  The internet makes this more possible for common people today than it was even 10 years ago.  The incredibly fast growth of electronic technology has peopled concerned because it is change and any kind of change is uncomfortable.  We do need to think of new and different ways to learn, grow, and be, but I think that having a global village will help our society with that.

How does the global village affect the K-12 classroom?

It effects the classroom in opening up many opportunities to "go"  and  "see" places and events that wouldn't be possible before internet.  It makes the world more accessible.  However, we need to learn and teach how to manage all of this information about cultures, places, and ideas.  It just opens up so many possibilities.  I can show my class a youtube video about a student in England that was bullied because he preferred to sing opera.  He decided that he would ignore anyone who made fun of him and continue to do what he loved and his video is broadcast for whoever chooses to see it.  When I showed this to my students they commented , "you mean kids in England are bullied too?".  It helps them to see similarities among people. 

The concept of "global village" effects the classroom in what skills are taught to my students.  Critical reading, interpreting, and creating are essential to understanding all of the media that they are exposed to though the interconnectedness that we are experiencing.  I also think that an attitude of tolerance is as important now as it ever was.  It also gives the teacher many resources to teach about different cultures, not just what is printed in the textbooks.  

Moral Philosophy and Critical Theory

Morality as defined by Pojman is, "certain customs, precepts, and practices of people and cultures."  This implies that morality is universal.  Morality brings some order to our society.  There should be a generally understood way of behavior.  I agree that as a society we need these principles that guide us.  The general purposes of morality are to create a society that promote humanity, resolve conflicts in just and orderly ways, keep order within society, and to be the conscience of society.  As an educator I believe I have a responsiblity  to be an example of what a moral person is.  I believe the days of learning a moral code at home, for many of my students, may be non-existent.  I may be the only adult in their lives that doesn't yell at them, doesn't ignore them, doesn't abuse them either mentally, physically, or emotionally.  I want and should treat all of my students as well as my colleagues with respect and dignity.  I should also be aware that what I do in my private life could be judged, so I need to think about how my actions would effect my students.  I am an educator and should stand for what is right and good in our society.  I don't mean to imply that as an educator I need to be perfect-- I am human, but I do think there is a responsibility to think more critically about my actions.  Are my actions benefitting others or harming them?

Critical theory is a set of principles that looks at an issue from the perspective of not accepting the generally understood reality or historical reality of an idea or phenomena.  Critical theorists would look at new ways of solving social problems.  The idea is to generate conversations about generally accepted phenomena.  In looking at the issue of educational technology, a critical theorist would not accept the idea that just because you use a computer in instruction you are a better teacher.  Or ask a school district why it should spend all that money on a computer lab?  I think it is a helpful theory in looking at educational technology because if we are to be moral people we should be looking for ways to help society better understand the human condition.  Not develop into a society of that has an even greater divide between the haves and have nots.  Technology has the potential to encourage this elitism.    The article makes a convincing argument in warning us about this possibility.  Critical theory supports the idea of questioning the uses of educational technology for the advancement of understanding among humans.