<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>(Learning Technology) ² &#187; integration</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jimhagen.com/tag/integration/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jimhagen.com</link>
	<description>James Hagen</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 00:54:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Infuse it!</title>
		<link>http://jimhagen.com/2009/06/02/infuse-it/</link>
		<comments>http://jimhagen.com/2009/06/02/infuse-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 13:23:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jhagen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[21st Century Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[integration]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jimhagen.com/?p=119</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the posting titled &#8220;I don&#8217;t want to integrate it, I want to embed it!&#8220;, Jeff Utecht wrote that the word &#8216;integrate&#8217; gets on his nerves. I&#8217;ve also pondered this for some time because it gets on my nerves too. But I&#8217;ve come to the conclusion that the word &#8216;embed&#8217; is also inappropriate. To embed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the posting titled &#8220;<a title="Jeff Utecht blog" href="http://www.thethinkingstick.com/?p=575" target="_blank">I don&#8217;t want to integrate it, I want to embed it!</a>&#8220;, Jeff Utecht wrote that the word &#8216;integrate&#8217; gets on his nerves. I&#8217;ve also pondered this for some time because it gets on my nerves too. But I&#8217;ve come to the conclusion that the word &#8216;embed&#8217; is also inappropriate. To embed is to fix (an object) firmly and deeply in a surrounding mass. The image that accompanied Jeff&#8217;s posting was perfect it must be said. What I don&#8217;t like about the analogy is that the technology remains a separate (and in the image, an immutable) &#8216;thing&#8217;, an opinion shared by other commenters. I agree with <a title="Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach" href="http://21stcenturylearning.typepad.com/" target="_blank">Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach</a> (and others) that technology ideally should be like heat or air. That&#8217;s why my word of choice is to &#8216;infuse&#8217;, which means &#8216;to fill or pervade&#8217;, whilst &#8216;fusion&#8217; means &#8216;the merging of different elements into a union&#8217;. Isn&#8217;t the fusion of Learning and Technology what we&#8217;re striving for? Which makes me wonder: if mass and energy are equivalent (E = MC<sup>2</sup>), are understanding and learning also (U = LT<sup>2</sup>), where T = Technology?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jimhagen.com/2009/06/02/infuse-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
