by Scott McLeod | May 1, 2008 | 21st Century Skills, Blogging, Communication, Higher Education, Law, Policy, and Ethics, Leadership and Vision, Miscellaneous, News and Events, Not So Irrelevant, Quotes, Safety and Security, Tech Integration, Tech Tools |
My latest roundup of links and tools…
I read blocked blogs
Are you up to the challenge?
Why K-12 educators shake their heads at academia
- Rick Hess perfectly captures one of my primary complaints about academia, which is that much of what we do is completely inaccessible (and/or meaningless) to K-12 educators
No hand-held electronics in front of the kids!
I was incredulous to read … the decision by the London Catholic School Board in Ontario banning hand held electronic devices in schools. . . . Even more bizarrely … school board employees are only allowed to use these devices "in areas from which students are excluded." Taken to its logical extent then this includes staff also being unable to use digital cameras to record student work or projects, create and listen to podcasts and so on.
– Gareth Long
Like Alfie Kohn, Dan Meyer forces us to rethink / justify
New tools I’m finding quite useful
The impetus is on us, not them
Help a teacher develop an integrated lesson [that] … focuses on a local issue of real importance, in which they, their families, and/or others in their community have a genuine stake and interest. If their learning is situated in that type of context, I think you’ll find the impact of their learning experiences will be far greater, and many more of them will learn digital literacy skills alongside traditional literacy skills. Teaching in a problem-based learning environment is a lot more work than simply lecturing and delivering content to students, but it is the type of learning environment our students need to remain engaged in school work. Too many kids today are BORED by school. As the adults running our schools, it is our responsibility to remedy this situation.
– Wesley Fryer
A couple of gems from Clay Burell…
And a couple more from Gerald Bracey
We are a little egocentric, aren’t we?
And, finally, a reminder from John Pederson
One year ago: Well, what’s your answer? and Principal blogging not allowed
by Scott McLeod | Mar 6, 2008 | Communication, Law, Policy, and Ethics, Miscellaneous, Safety and Security |
[cross-posted at LeaderTalk]
Take a look at the seven YouTube videos below, all taken by student cell phone cameras in classrooms. Do we want students bringing to public attention these types of classroom incidents? Should students be punished or applauded for filming and posting these?
by Scott McLeod | Jan 14, 2008 | Blogging, Leadership and Vision, Management and Operations, Safety and Security |
I received the e-mail below from yet another
person who can’t access my blog at school. How is CASTLE supposed to help school
administrators kickstart their schools into the 21st century if they can’t even
read one of our primary communication channels?
The idea that all blogs should be categorically blocked – that NOT A SINGLE
ONE of the over 100 million blogs out there might have something important or
relevant to educators – is both ludicrous and shameful. This type of blocking is
not required by CIPA and it’s just plain dumb (see also I don’t
like Internet filters).
Dr. McLeod,
I read your "D.I." (a constant reminder just in those
two words), but I am unable to click through from school (as I tried today). You
must be so dangerous that I really shouldn’t even be reading you to begin with
(tongue in cheek).
The atomic-bomb-to-kill-flea net filter that is used
here blocks anything in the "web log" area. I am dangerous as well, since my own
blogger rants about soccer are blocked.
My other item to vent with you
about is the school’s new wi-fi network – it is completely blocked from student
use (around 15 teachers use it daily). They spent a lot of money on it, and then
locked it up so no one could use it. As you suggest many times in D.I., it is
easy to become irrelevant – I have seen a few Iphone users on campus that don’t
even need wi-fi. And when I even slightly suggest to the tech guys that blocking
access may not be trusting the students enough, they circle the wagons quickly
and become very defensive.
Did I mention that teachers are not allowed
access to any networked drive for fear of student access and destruction of
data?
I’m sure you have heard of much worse, so I will stop.
Anyway,
if you didn’t know, you are a troublemaker according to my school. 😉
Keep up the good work.
I plan to read some of your longer
writings this weekend where my own wi-fi network is completely
UN-blocked.
Teachers that aren’t allowed access to any networked drives. An
expensive Wi-Fi investment that no one can use. Who is steering the ship here?
How can this district’s administrators possibly show their face to their
community and justify how they have used taxpayer money? This is horrible.
by Scott McLeod | Dec 29, 2007 | Law, Policy, and Ethics, Leadership and Vision, Safety and Security, Tech Integration |
I received this e-mail earlier in the week:
My name is [anonymous]. I am a Library Media Director at [high school] in [city, state]. We are a small community, who until recently underwent tremendous growth in the number of students and buildings in our district. I am writing to you because I have been an admirer of your blog and writings on how we, as educators, can shape the educational direction of students using technology. Your posts on Dangerously Irrelevant have inspired me to no longer take a back seat and wait for changes to occur in our district. Now, I’m trying to lead the charge. I have for several years been met with the proverbial "brick wall" when attempting to get the district to allow more access to technology tools on-line. We currently do not permit access to many Web 2.0 sites that actually help with our student’s education. With persistent badergering, our Central Administration is allowing me to rewrite our Acceptable Use Policy so students can supplement class instruction with blogs, access academic content from YouTube and similar video sites, and post information on wikis. I would love to know what you believe should be in an AUP that addresses the concerns of today but is still conscious of the technology access of tomorrow. I’m sure you are very busy, but any help you can provide to me and my students would be greatly appreciated.
Here is my rather lame response:
Hi [anonymous], I haven’t really seen any good model AUPs, but then again I haven’t gone looking. Here are a couple of links:
http://www.doe.state.in.us/olr/aup/aupmod.html
http://tinyurl.com/2s7o8o
I would find some tech-savvy districts in your state and see how they’re handling their AUPs. They may be better resources for you than I am. Maybe the edublogosphere has some suggestions for us both?
So, how about it? Does anyone have, or know of, a good student AUP that can serve as a model for others? One that seems to appropriately address the safety concerns of districts while simultaneously affording students access to the digital tools that are revolutionizing the rest of society?
You know, NSBA, AASA, NASSP, and/or NAESP (and their state affiliates) should be helping districts with this. Maybe some of these leadership organizations are and we just need to bring their efforts to the forefront?
by Scott McLeod | Dec 5, 2007 | Law, Policy, and Ethics, News and Events, Safety and Security, Tech Integration |
[cross-posted
at the TechLearning blog]
A video production teacher at Montville High School in New
Jersey had her students create a public service announcement (PSA) as a class
assignment. The students
decided to make an anti-bullying video and assigned roles for the skit.
B.B., a junior with multiple cognitive and social disabilities, was selected to
be the victim. Other students then emptied garbage cans on his head, slapped
him, and pushed him to the ground. The video concluded with a teacher breaking
up the bullying activity and an anti-bullying message.
Sadly, the
video was then edited by some students and posted on YouTube. The YouTube
version omitted the anti-bullying aspects of the video and only showed B.B.
being bullied. The YouTube version was viewed over 3,700 times before it was
taken down. B.B. became the subject of taunts and teasing in school, severe
enough that he missed school for a month. His mother has now sued the teacher,
principal, superintendent, and school board under the state’s anti-bullying law
for failing to sufficiently protect her son after the teasing began.
This incident raises multiple issues worthy of consideration. In no
particular order, here are a few questions and thoughts…
- Where did the original video file reside? Presumably the editing of the
PSA was done at school since it was a video production class. What precautions,
if any, were taken regarding storage and/or possible dissemination of the PSA?
Did each student involved in creating the video get a copy?
- Who owns the original video? The school? The students who made it? Both?
What rights does each party have to do with the video what it wishes?
- Was the edited YouTube version of the video created at school? If so, the
school’s AUP should cover the offending student’s behavior. Although the
offending student was identified, it is unclear what disciplinary action, if
any, was taken against him/her.
- In addition to the state law, presumably the school has an anti-bullying
policy. Can a minor student with multiple cognitive and social disabilities
legally consent to “fake” bullying? Is there any argument of consent or assumption of risk
for this situation?
- One of the necessary elements of a defamation claim is that the
victim’s reputation was harmed substantially enough to warrant a legal remedy.
Is this harder to prove for a minor student than it would be for an adult,
particularly given the rampant teasing that occurs in schools?
There are lots of issues here, but these are the ones that initially jump out
at me. I think B.B.’s attorney was right when he said that B.B. never should
have been selected in the first place to be the bullying victim. That said, any
of the students conceivably could have been teased if they were in his place.
B.B. just appears to be a particularly sensitive student because of his
disabilities.
As teachers and students in schools continue to create more digital content
as part of coursework, we will see more stories like this. The portability and
modifiability of digital files, combined with the openness of the Internet and
the ready availability of content creation tools, make these types of situations
difficult to prevent. The challenge for schools will be to balance appropriate
safety and supervision concerns with the pedagogical advantages that often
accompany the use of digital technologies. Think about the digital content that
is created in your school: is your organization at risk for similar
inappropriate appropriation of content by a student or staff member?
[thanks to Jim
Gates at Tipline for pointing me to this story]
by Scott McLeod | Nov 30, 2007 | Communication, Law, Policy, and Ethics, Miscellaneous, News and Events, Safety and Security, Tech Integration |
A middle school librarian in New Jersey has gotten some media attention for her anti-Wikipedia campaign:
Linda O’Connor regards Wikipedia the same way former first lady Nancy Reagan campaigned against drugs. . . . She put up a sign saying "Just Say No to Wikipedia" over the computers in the school library. . . . Wikipedia is blocked on all computers in the Warren Hills Regional School District.
I’m highly skeptical.
If the district is going to take a principled stand against Wikipedia because some information is biased or incorrect, is it also taking out all of the encyclopedias (which research has shown, on average, to be as inaccurate as Wikipedia)? Is it removing all of the news magazines and newspapers? The article makes a big deal about how school librarians preview materials before they’re placed on the shelves, but I can guarantee you that librarians and media specialists do not have time to screen every word of every incoming publication. They miss errors and biases just like the Wikipedia community does. Also, it’s ludicrous to pretend that the school library vetting process is free of bias. Oh, and I challenge you to find a school library that doesn’t have old, outdated (and thus inaccurate) non-fiction and/or reference materials on its shelves.
This is all of a bunch of hooey. This shouldn’t have even been a story. When is the Associated Press going to run this story?
Schools teach kids how to wisely and appropriately navigate 21st century information channels
Or this one?
New Jersey school district blocks kids from using one of the most important and powerful information resources in existence because of mistaken beliefs about inaccuracy and bias
Or maybe this one?
Wikipedia is an amazing contribution to the body of human knowledge. New Jersey school district says ‘No thanks.’
Or is it asking too much of the newspaper press to avoid bias by showing the other side of this issue?
by Scott McLeod | Nov 28, 2007 | Blogging, Communication, Law, Policy, and Ethics, News and Events, Research and Evaluation, Safety and Security, Tech Tools |
This arrived in my e-mail inbox yesterday:
CDC REVIEW OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA AND YOUTH VIOLENCE
Research Shows Increase in Electronic Aggression
In September 2006, experts from academic institutions, federal agencies, and nonprofit organizations gathered at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia, to better understand the varied ways new media technology – blogs, instant messaging, chat rooms, email, text messaging and the Internet – influences youth aggression. The two-day meeting, "Electronic Media and Youth Violence," was held to review current research and to discuss the implications for youth, parents, school staff, and educational policymakers. Data from the review show although rates of electronic aggression are lower than rates of physical and verbal aggression, these rates seem to be increasing. In 2000, 6 percent of internet users ages 10 to 17 said they had been subjected to online harassment; by 2005, the percentage had risen to 9 percent – an increase of 50 percent.
The complete review can found in the December 2007 supplement of the Journal of Adolescent Health. To access a complete copy of the Journal and the supporting issue briefs, which summarize the research and discuss the implications of these findings for youth, parents, school staff, and educational policy makers, please visit www.cdc.gov/injury.
A few thoughts…
- Most parents probably don’t do near enough at home to teach and monitor children’s appropriate usage of electronic communication tools. We know that schools and religious institutions don’t when kids are with them. So why should we be surprised that some children and adolescents are using these tools for inappropriate purposes? It’s like Lord of the Flies out there when it comes to adult supervision!
- The JAH research articles on this topic are impressive. It’s going to take me a while to read through them all. My first scan, however, is that while there seems to be a bevy of top notch, peer-review-quality research there, it’s all on the harmful effects of communication technologies and none on the empowering effects of the same. We need good, data-based information on this topic, but I’d like to see academia provide some counterpoint research on the positive aspects too, not just more fear-driven research. I want to also see a two-day meeting on Electronic Media and Youth Empowerment. We’re not going to back to a tech-less society. Why can’t we get info on both sides of the coin so that we can make intelligent decisions about this stuff?
- ‘An increase of 50 percent’ sounds ominous. An actual rise from 6 percent to 9 percent doesn’t. Presentation makes all the difference.
- The policy implications from the expert panel crack me up. Essentially the panel said ‘The federal government should do very little. The states should do more. School districts and schools should do the most.’ In other words, they could have just typed the word ‘federalism’ on a piece of paper, handed it in, and gone out for coffee. Nice job, folks!
![Cause and effect? Or just ironic?]()
by Scott McLeod | Oct 28, 2007 | Blogging, Communication, Safety and Security |
Earlier this week I blogged about fighting fearmongering. PREA Prez notes that the next day his district blocked my blog:
[click on image for larger version]
Ironic timing, isn’t it, Doug?
by Scott McLeod | Oct 23, 2007 | Safety and Security |
One of the biggest things standing in the way of student technology usage in schools is adults’ fear.
Over at the Blue Skunk Blog, Doug Johnson posted a message from our mutual friend and Internet safety guru Nancy Willard that described all of the fearmongering that she’s seeing as she travels the country. In the comments to Doug’s post, John Pederson said that there’s no ‘sticky’ message to counter the fearmongering.
So Doug’s sponsoring a contest. Come up with the best ‘sticky’ message and win a prize from Doug. All submissions are due November 1 so get yours in soon!
by Scott McLeod | Oct 17, 2007 | Communication, Online Learning, Safety and Security, Tech Integration, Tech Tools |
Check out the transcript of Will Richardson’s live online chat about the educational benefits of social networking. Part of the fun at this year’s T+L conference!
FYI, tomorrow is an online discussion with Thomas Hutton, senior staff attorney for the National School Boards Association, on navigating the legal landmines associated with new technologies. You know I’m looking forward to reading that!
