Are we preparing students for a world of mass collaboration?
If the discussions on the Wikinomics blog of mass collaboration going on in the work place, e.g. Best Buy, and the (somewhat cheesy) video entitled Microsoft's Vision of 2010
are any indication of what mass collaboration will look like, I'd say we're still behind in preparing students for this kind of a world.
How and how often do we ask students to collaborate? Is it collaboration to accomplish a common goal or is it online sharing and commenting? Yes, that's a bit of a rhetorical question, and I'm suggesting it's more often the latter.
But to be fair, when I was in school, the criticism was that school didn't teach any collaboration. I'd say we collaborated naturally to get some homework done, although the collaboration was often asymmetric and involved one student carrying the others. Nowadays, group-work with defined roles seems to be a standard part of Elementary and Middle School classrooms. (I haven't seen enough HS classrooms to comment about them.)
However, I'd say the collaboration in schools nowadays is still not as virtual as it should be if we are preparing students for future mass collaboration. That may still be related to technology limitations, but I'd say there is another limiting factor: teachers.
And that brings me to the next question: How do we prepare students for a world of mass collaboration.
I'll venture an alternative answer to this question: Start mass collaborating ourselves. I think teaching mass collaboration will be artificial if we aren't doing it ourselves, not as models for the students, but to meet our own needs. I'm guilty of and have seen other teachers sticking to old paper-and-pencil or Web 1.o habits when working together. How often do we say: Everybody send me your thoughts in an email and I'll compile them. Wouldn't this be a perfect opportunity for a Wiki? Yes, but at what cost? Time, of course. So we remain in our old ways.
I may not be answering the question about how to prepare students, but I'm not addressing it specifically to make the point that we can't understand how to prepare students if we are not preparing ourselves for mass collaboration.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
The Power of the Web
What makes the web so powerful?
As the Skype video from a 5th grade classroom shows, the web allows communication to take place where it wouldn't if the web were not available. Our own Ed Tech classes have been a textbook (or should I say wikibook) example of the power of the web. I, among many, "attended" one of our classes from my home by watching a live streaming video (Ustream) and joining a web-based chat room (tinychat.com) that was visible to all course participants. Thanks, Web! We also benefited from guest speaker experts who lectured via Skype. Thanks again, Web! On our blogs, remote experts on certain topics were able to comment on our ideas and give us feedback that others in our immediate class would not have been able to give. And thanks yet again, Web!
All of this communication is available mostly free and is almost instantaneous.
Is free instant communication with theoretically anyone not evidence that the web is powerful?
As the Skype video from a 5th grade classroom shows, the web allows communication to take place where it wouldn't if the web were not available. Our own Ed Tech classes have been a textbook (or should I say wikibook) example of the power of the web. I, among many, "attended" one of our classes from my home by watching a live streaming video (Ustream) and joining a web-based chat room (tinychat.com) that was visible to all course participants. Thanks, Web! We also benefited from guest speaker experts who lectured via Skype. Thanks again, Web! On our blogs, remote experts on certain topics were able to comment on our ideas and give us feedback that others in our immediate class would not have been able to give. And thanks yet again, Web!
All of this communication is available mostly free and is almost instantaneous.
Is free instant communication with theoretically anyone not evidence that the web is powerful?
Student Online Safety Responsibility
Whose responsibility is it to teach students to be safe online?
Is that question really any different from the question: Whose responsibility is it to teach students to be safe? Some will probably say the answer is the healthy, happy family. Others will say it takes a village to educate a child. Families will differ in how able they are to teach their children about online safety. So will teachers for that matter, unless they are specialists or at least frequent users of the internet. Technology teachers should by definition be internet specialists, but safety should be the responsibility of the user or teacher who asks students to use the internet. Victims and former, repentant online bullies/criminals could serve as traveling lecturers, much the same way that former addicts or convicts are used to teach students about drugs and crime. Perhaps consultants will pop up to meet this need in schools. To some extent, the media teaches about online safety when it publishes or reports a story. Ultimately, many parties do or could take responsibility, but by no means should the opportunity be missedto teach about it in school.
Does ISBs AUP take this issue into account?
Online safety is covered directly in a section on social networking. Interestingly, the AUP states that social networking online safety is a personal responsibility. The AUP makes references to university applications, job searches, and overall reputation. All of these are valid, but perhaps still a bit abstract for 6-8th graders.
Online safety is also covered throughout the AUP in sections on internet use, school computer use, school network use, etc. The most basic reference to safety is regarding the privacy of passwords. There are discussions of viruses and improper web pages. In short, online safety is covered through numerous channels in ISBs AUP.
Is that question really any different from the question: Whose responsibility is it to teach students to be safe? Some will probably say the answer is the healthy, happy family. Others will say it takes a village to educate a child. Families will differ in how able they are to teach their children about online safety. So will teachers for that matter, unless they are specialists or at least frequent users of the internet. Technology teachers should by definition be internet specialists, but safety should be the responsibility of the user or teacher who asks students to use the internet. Victims and former, repentant online bullies/criminals could serve as traveling lecturers, much the same way that former addicts or convicts are used to teach students about drugs and crime. Perhaps consultants will pop up to meet this need in schools. To some extent, the media teaches about online safety when it publishes or reports a story. Ultimately, many parties do or could take responsibility, but by no means should the opportunity be missedto teach about it in school.
Does ISBs AUP take this issue into account?
Online safety is covered directly in a section on social networking. Interestingly, the AUP states that social networking online safety is a personal responsibility. The AUP makes references to university applications, job searches, and overall reputation. All of these are valid, but perhaps still a bit abstract for 6-8th graders.
Online safety is also covered throughout the AUP in sections on internet use, school computer use, school network use, etc. The most basic reference to safety is regarding the privacy of passwords. There are discussions of viruses and improper web pages. In short, online safety is covered through numerous channels in ISBs AUP.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Copyright Usage and Plagiarism
Do we as a global society need to rethink copyright laws?
Given the traffic on the internet and amount of copying and borrowing, policing copyright infringement might be so unmanageable that we will need to rethink copyright. If not, we will have to come up with a tracking mechanism or monitoring body to alert us to infringements.
According to our course instructors, Youtube is pulling videos that are even questionable in their use of copyrighted material, and playing it safe even though fair use may be applicable. There must be some way to track material and verify if the original source is copyrighted or not.
Unfortunately, the fair use clause appears to be grey enough to make the use of some algorithm for monitoring materials impractical.
If society continues to develop toward instant publication, viewing, and borrowing of digital text, photos and videos via the web, will the issue of copyright essentially become moot even before society has a chance to rethink it? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this did in fact happen.
What's our role as educators in copyright usage in schools?
Model and teach appropriate use of copyrighted materials for sure. Try to give could scenarios that students can appreciate rather than just the rules. Since students these days have grown up with the ability to copy practically anything from the web, merely knowing the rules won't likely change behaviors.
I envision using case studies where students discuss appropriate use and consequences for inappropriate use. Some good examples seem to be very popular these days, such as the photonapping cases of Allison Stokke or Alison Chang that we read about in the article Understanding and Respecting Copyright a Problem for Many.
Does ISBs AUP take this issue into account?
Sure enough, under internet policy there is a comment about following copyright law for anything graphics or text that are taken from the internet. Does the AUP, however, need to address copyright in technology projects that do not involve graphics or text from the internet? I'm imagining non-internet acquired things, such as music, digitized graphics, photos, etc.
Or is this covered under our schools standard, non-technology academic dishonesty policy. From what I can tell this general policy covers ideas, words, or statement, but not music, photos, etc. Perhaps this belongs in both the technology AUP as well as the Academic Dishonesty Policy.
Given the traffic on the internet and amount of copying and borrowing, policing copyright infringement might be so unmanageable that we will need to rethink copyright. If not, we will have to come up with a tracking mechanism or monitoring body to alert us to infringements.
According to our course instructors, Youtube is pulling videos that are even questionable in their use of copyrighted material, and playing it safe even though fair use may be applicable. There must be some way to track material and verify if the original source is copyrighted or not.
Unfortunately, the fair use clause appears to be grey enough to make the use of some algorithm for monitoring materials impractical.
If society continues to develop toward instant publication, viewing, and borrowing of digital text, photos and videos via the web, will the issue of copyright essentially become moot even before society has a chance to rethink it? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this did in fact happen.
What's our role as educators in copyright usage in schools?
Model and teach appropriate use of copyrighted materials for sure. Try to give could scenarios that students can appreciate rather than just the rules. Since students these days have grown up with the ability to copy practically anything from the web, merely knowing the rules won't likely change behaviors.
I envision using case studies where students discuss appropriate use and consequences for inappropriate use. Some good examples seem to be very popular these days, such as the photonapping cases of Allison Stokke or Alison Chang that we read about in the article Understanding and Respecting Copyright a Problem for Many.
Does ISBs AUP take this issue into account?
Sure enough, under internet policy there is a comment about following copyright law for anything graphics or text that are taken from the internet. Does the AUP, however, need to address copyright in technology projects that do not involve graphics or text from the internet? I'm imagining non-internet acquired things, such as music, digitized graphics, photos, etc.
Or is this covered under our schools standard, non-technology academic dishonesty policy. From what I can tell this general policy covers ideas, words, or statement, but not music, photos, etc. Perhaps this belongs in both the technology AUP as well as the Academic Dishonesty Policy.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
EARCOS Conference 2009 Reflection
It was my first time to attend an EARCOS conference for teachers, and wow, was it overwhelming. Four days of presentations on every topic you can imagine related to education. If it hadn't been for the pre-conference workshop, my head would be spinning. Because the preconference workshop I attended was focused on one theme, it gave me a focus for the entire conference.
I finally had a chance to attend a workshop by Virginia Rojas, who I had heard was an ESL guru. I don't actually know much about her, but at least here in SE Asia, she is credited with bringing the "Inclusion Model" of ESL pedagogy to international schools.
The workshop was called "Scaffolding Success for English Language Learners: A Toolkit for Teachers" and focused mainly on vocabulary development. As an ESL teacher, I was familiar with most of the jargon and many of the strategies, but one thing I liked that I hadn't heard before was a framework which Gini described with the catchy phrase: Input, Intake, Output. She went on to reword this as Exposure, Practice, Mastery (among other rewordings specific to different content areas). I found it appealing, because in ESL pedagogy I seem to hear the phrase Comprehensible Input more commonly than any other. I enjoyed being reminded that language learning is not just about Input, Input, and more Input. Interestingly, Gini gave percentages about how much time should be devoted to the three parts of her framework: 20-60-20. That too gave me something to think about, as I planned my own lessons.
I also learned that the IB started addressing the ESL phenomenon. I had searched the website before, but I couldn't find much. Gini says that the IB has consulted with her about a section for the website. Apparently, there will soon be information online, as far as I understand, regarding some classic ESL strategies, among other things.
As I write the phrase "ESL strategies," it makes me think about the fact that the most common title for an ESL workshop seems to be just that, ESL strategies, especially when the workshop is for mainstream teachers. As an ESL teacher, I've seen the textbooks that list vocabulary strategies, reading comprehension strategies, listening strategies, etc, etc, etc. It starts to make me wonder if ESL is giving the world the impression that ESL is just a bunch of strategies. That makes it sound like ESL is a methodology rather than a discipline. Is that really the case? Or is that missing the point? I'm worried ESL might get misinterpreted, because I think it's more about language acquisition. And language acquisition is not just accessible through ESL strategies.
Anyway, for the rest of the conference, I attended as many presentations of Gini's as possible, and although there was some overlap with the preconference workshop, I enjoyed them all. Gini is a spunky presenter who models what she presents, and that lets you experience what you're learning about.
Her handouts are all online at the EARCOS conference website, but I'll link to them here as well since between EARCOS's conference website and EARCOS conference wiki, I had some trouble finding just where handouts were posted.
They aren't 100% stand-alone documents, but they give a good overview of the presentations. She did say she would respond to emails, so ask her any questions these handouts generate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)