Blog Post #6
The Florida standard SS.912.HC.9.7 asks students to examine how modern technology has influenced communist ideology and methodology in the 21st century. This means students are not just learning about historical communism. They are moving beyond Cold War examples and focusing on how present-day communist governments use digital tools to promote ideology and maintain control. Countries like China, Vietnam, North Korea, and Cuba, utilize technology such as state-controlled social media, online censorship systems, digital surveillance, and in some cases, coordinated misinformation campaign’s. The standard’s clarification also highlights tactics such as bot networks, fake social media accounts, and spyware embedded in products. While Russia is not officially communist by name, its use of digital propaganda and online influence operations provide an important comparison point when analyzing how authoritarian governments leverage modern technology. Distinguishing between formally communist states and other authoritarian regimes is essential so that students analyze ideology accurately rather than relying on oversimplified labels. I feel moderately prepared to implement this standard because of my background in earning a 98% on the AICE International History exam, which has a less than 30% pass rate as well as my background in digital rhetoric; however, I would need to further strengthen my understanding of cybersecurity infrastructure and global digital policy to ensure I teach the topic with accuracy and nuance.
In exploring the CPALMS Educator Toolkit, I reviewed high school Social Studies resources connected to standards that emphasize primary source analysis. Many of the lesson plans include structured document-based questions, formative assessments, and guided inquiry activities that encourage students to evaluate bias, reliability and perspective. I think these resources could be effectively adapted to this standard by having students compare 20th-century communist propaganda (such as perhaps posters or speeches) with modern digital examples like social media campaigns or state-sponsored messaging. The toolkit’s emphasis on evidence-based reasoning would help students navigate politically sensitive material. These resources could support debates or multimedia presentations that examine how ideology evolves alongside technology.
One lingering question I have relates to artificial intelligence and copyright, especially as someone studying and planning to teach the creative arts (writing). As AI systems generate text by drawing from massive datasets that often include copyrighted material, the boundaries of genuine authorship becomes increasingly blurred. If AI can produce writing that mimics a human voice or style, what happens to originality as a protected value? A discussion question I would raise for our class is: “If AI-generated writing is built on existing copyrighted creative work, should it quality for copyright protection at all, and if not, does that undermine the economic sustainability of human writers? I worry that without clear regulation, AI may devalue individual authorship and complicate intellectual property in ways that disproportionately affect creative fields.
Comments
Post a Comment