The Internet Breaks School Walls Down
by Will Richardson
No 2008-04-26 12
Magazine Title: The New Face of Learning What happens to time-worn concepts of classrooms and teaching when we can now go online and learn anything, anywhere, anytime? What happens to time-worn concepts of classrooms and teaching when we can now go online and learn anything, anywhere, anytime?
Table of Contents1 What happens to time-worn concepts of classrooms and teaching when we can now go online and learn anything, anywhere, anytime? Magazine Issue: Oct 2006: Technology in Action TOC Section: Features
Will Richardson [1]
Credit: David Julian
At some point last year, the Web welcomed its one billionth user. Demographers who study such things determined that this person was in all likelihood a twenty-four-year-old woman from Shanghai. As far as I know, no prizes were awarded.
The striking thing to me about that milestone is not the enormity of the number, however. More interesting, perhaps, is that the one billionth person to jump onto the Web could just as easily been an eight-year-old kid from Sweden or the South Bronx (or, for that matter, an eighty-year-old from South Africa) who sat down at a computer, opened a browser, and for the first time started connecting to the sum of human knowledge we are collectively building online. Furthermore, that eight-year-old had just as much ability to start contributing what she might know about horses or her hometown or whatever her passions might be, becoming an author in her own right, teaching the rest of us what she knows.
It's amazing in many ways that in just a few short years, we have gone from a Web that was primarily "read only" to one where creating content is almost as easy as consuming it. One where writing and publishing in the forms of blogs and wikis and podcasts and many other such tools is available to everyone. One where we can connect not just to content but to people and ideas and conversations as well.
This Read/Write Web, or Web 2.0, as some call it, is transforming the traditional structures of many of our most important institutions. How does business change when markets become lively conversations between the consumers who buy their products? What happens to politics when potentially every voter can give immediately direct feedback to elected representatives on important issues, or to journalism when anyone with a wireless camera phone can report on events both large and small? What happens to cultures when bloggers in Beirut and Haifa can connect while bombs fall around them?
And what happens to traditional concepts of classrooms and teaching when we can now learn anything, anywhere, anytime?
I find these questions particularly intriguing because my own learning and teaching have been transformed since I stumbled across a blog in spring 2001. I became a blogger that same day, and I've been writing and thinking and learning at Weblogg-ed.com ever since. That is where my passion for these technologies and their effects on teachers and classrooms is chronicled and archived.
Some 2,500 pieces of published writing later (with almost as many comments back from readers), I can say without hesitation that all my traditional educational experiences combined, everything from grade school to grad school, have not taught me as much about learning and being a learner as blogging has. My ability to easily consume other people's ideas, share my own in return, and communicate with other educators around the world has led me to dozens of smart, passionate teachers from whom I learn every day. It's also led me to technologies and techniques that leverage this newfound network in ways that look nothing like what's happening in traditional classrooms.
In this new interactive Web world, I have become a nomadic learner; I graze on knowledge. I find what I need when I need it. There is no linear curriculum to my learning, no formal structure other than the tools I use to connect to the people and sources that point me to what I need to know and learn, the same tools I use to then give back what I have discovered. I have become, at long last, that lifelong learner my teachers always hoped I would become. Unfortunately, it's about thirty years too late for them to see it.
The good news for all of us is that today, anyone can become a lifelong learner. (Yes, even you.) These technologies are user friendly in a way that technologies have not been in the past. You can be up and blogging in minutes, editing wikis in seconds, making podcasts in, well, less time than you'd think. It's not difficult at all to be an active contributor in this society of authorship we are building.
As usual, many of our students already know this. Kids are flocking to the Web by the millions, enthusiastically sharing music, stories, poetry, video, and pictures (some of which we'd rather not see.) They are communicating online, IMing, gaming, participating, producing. It's like using pen and paper and a printing press in digital space, and they are pushing it, stretching their imaginations, looking to us to do the same. Looking to us, as those well-documented (though still relatively rare) problems at MySpace demonstrate, to teach them how to do it well. And we educators can feel the potential.
In an environment where it's easy to publish to the globe, it feels more and more hollow to ask students to "hand in" their homework to an audience of one. When we're faced with a flattening world where collaboration is becoming the norm, forcing students to work alone seems to miss the point. And when many of our students are already building networks far beyond our classroom walls, forming communities around their passions and their talents, it's not hard to understand why rows of desks and time-constrained schedules and standardized tests are feeling more and more limiting and ineffective.
Regardless, we find this era of the maturing of the digital natives, as Marc Prensky calls them, to be a troublesome time. These technologies scare us, challenge us, and the friction between the old, closed-door classrooms and this new, open, transparent world of learning is becoming more and more apparent. Being on the Web changes things. We fear for our kids' safety, and, as educators, we struggle mightily with the way we're losing control over the content we used to own.
It feels as if the ground is shifting beneath us, and it's made us uneasy.
So our response to this new learning landscape has not been universal joy and a rush to blogging and podcasting. In many schools and even states, it's been, rather, a movement to block and bust: no blogs, no cell phones, no IM. We take away the powerful social technologies our kids are already using to learn and, in doing so, tell them their own tools are irrelevant. Or, instead of using the complex and challenging phenomenon of a site such as Wikipedia to teach the realities of navigating information in this new world, we prohibit its use. In fact, at this writing, the U.S. legislature is in the process of deciding whether schools and libraries should have access to any of the potential of the Read/Write Web at all. When you read this, blogs and wikis and podcasts (and much more) may be things that students (and teachers) can access and create only from off-campus.
Credit: David Julian
And so they might never learn to podcast like the third and fourth graders creating the podcasts in Bob Sprankle's [2] class at Wells Elementary School, in Wells, Maine. They might therefore never publish a local museum tour, an interview with a local celebrity, or an oral history about their town that a billion people could listen to. Nor will they ever get the chance to collaborate in a blog with U.S. soldiers [3] in Iraq, like April Chamberlain's students at Paine Intermediate School, in Trussville, Alabama, and learn firsthand what it's like to be a Screaming Eagle. Or share stories about the places they live at Wikiville.org.uk [4], where hundreds of kids from around the world have started writing and connecting. Or teach calculus to thousands of interested readers from around the world, as do the Canadian students in Darren Kuropatwa's [5] math class at Daniel McIntyre Collegiate Institute, in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Nor will they fully understand what it's like to be a ubiquitous, continuous learner in a quickly changing world of information that is challenging many of the traditional structures of education. Like me, they may just have to figure that out for themselves.
Most of us now live in a world where, with access, knowledge is abundant, yet we have yet to reconsider our traditional school model, which is based on the obsolete idea that knowledge is scarce. Take a look at the more than 1,400 courses available at MIT OpenCourseWare (see the Edutopia article, "Crack the Books: Teacher, This Book's For You [6]"), which seeks to "provide free, searchable, access to MIT's course materials for educators, students, and self-learners around the world." It's an amazing array of syllabi, readings, even video lectures from professors that is out there for any of us to tap into, free of charge. It's just one of millions of places where we can learn on the Web, yet most of our students still expect "real" learning to take place only in a classroom.
This is a world where we can easily make connections to ideas and people and build potent learning networks in the process, one where leveraging these networks and tools can yield a powerful online portfolio of ideas and artifacts. Yet we teach in classrooms limited by physical walls, contrived relationships, and mind-numbing assessments. There are a billion primary sources out there -- scientists, journalists, politicians, and the like -- who may know more than we do about whatever it is we are teaching, and, for the first time, we can easily and flexibly bring them to our students to interact and learn. I was a journalism major in college, but when Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Scott Higham, from the Washington Post, mentored one of my students by interacting with her on her blog, she learned more than I alone could have taught her. Even better, we can teach our students how to make these connections themselves, to find the sources and resources they need when they need them, instead of depending on us to provide them.
This is a world where literacy is changing, where readers need to be editors. Now that anyone can publish just about anything in a heartbeat, checking for facts and relevance often occurs after publication. If you don't believe that, go to Martin Luther-King.org, which comes up in the top ten Google search results for King yet is published by a white-supremacist group and is intended solely to discredit his work through duplicity and falsehoods. (See the Edutopia article, "Online, on Alert: Teaching Students How to Interpret the Web." [7]) If our students don't know how to find that out, if we ourselves don't know how to do that, I would argue that we are illiterate. Yet our curricula include little if anything that goes beyond the basic reading, writing, and computational literacies.
This is, indeed, a changed world. From the realities of war to the fears of avian flu and the global-warming crisis, these first few years of the twenty-first century have already tested us in innumerable ways, and the tests show no sign of abating in either intensity or frequency. But I wonder whether, twenty-five or fifty years from now, when four or five billion people are connecting online, the real story of these times won't be the more global tests and transformations these technologies offered. How, as educators and learners, did we respond? Did we embrace the potentials of a connected, collaborative world and put our creative imaginations to work to reenvision our classrooms? Did we use these new tools to develop passionate, fearless, lifelong learners? Did we ourselves become those learners?
Or did we cling to old ideas, old models, and old habits and drift more fully into irrelevance in our students' eyes?
Will Richardson is the author of the weblogg-ed [8]blog, as well as learner in chief at the Connective Learning Group and the author of Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Adolescence: A Critical Evolutionary Adaptation
Adolescence: A Critical Evolutionary Adaptation
Archive » Adolescence; a critical Evolutionary Adaptation
John Abbott 2008
This Paper has been written in response to an increasing concern that formal education, especially at the secondary level, is failing to meet the needs and expectations of young people for an appropriate induction into adult life and responsibilities. This is a problem apparently common to many of the developed countries. This paper will argue that a better appreciation of the biological processes involved in human learning, and the way these interact with cultural practices, could provide the theoretical basis for a complete transformation of formal educational structures.
http://www.21learn.org/site/archive/adolescence-a-critical-evolutionary-adaptation/3/
Archive » Adolescence; a critical Evolutionary Adaptation
John Abbott 2008
This Paper has been written in response to an increasing concern that formal education, especially at the secondary level, is failing to meet the needs and expectations of young people for an appropriate induction into adult life and responsibilities. This is a problem apparently common to many of the developed countries. This paper will argue that a better appreciation of the biological processes involved in human learning, and the way these interact with cultural practices, could provide the theoretical basis for a complete transformation of formal educational structures.
http://www.21learn.org/site/archive/adolescence-a-critical-evolutionary-adaptation/3/
Overschooled but Undereducated
The Initiative published a pre-production of John Abbott and Heather MacTaggart’s new book Overschooled but Undereducated: Society’s Failure to Understand Adolescence in June 2008. In December 2008 Continuum Books agreed to publish the book in November 2009.
With the publication of Overschooled but Undereducated the Initiative now has, in compact form, the most complete, persuasive and concise argument for the overhaul of current systems of education and a catalyst-in-print for the reassessment of outdated thinking that governs educational policy and attitudes towards learning and schooling in the West.
With the publication of Overschooled but Undereducated the Initiative now has, in compact form, the most complete, persuasive and concise argument for the overhaul of current systems of education and a catalyst-in-print for the reassessment of outdated thinking that governs educational policy and attitudes towards learning and schooling in the West.
The Digital Disconnect: The Widening Gap Between Internet Savvy Students and their Schools
Prepared by:
Douglas Levin and Sousan Arafeh
American Institutes for Research
For the Pew Internet & American Life Project
The Digital Disconnect: The Growing Gap Between Internet Savvy Students and Their Schools
Key findings from the study include the following:
Internet-savvy students rely on the Internet to help them do their schoolwork—and
for good reason. Students told us they complete their schoolwork more quickly; they are less
likely to get stymied by material they don’t understand; their papers and projects are more likely
to draw upon up-to-date sources and state-of-the-art knowledge; and, they are better at juggling
their school assignments and extracurricular activities when they use the Internet. In essence,
they told us that the Internet helps them navigate their way through school and spend more time
learning in depth about what is most important to them personally.
Internet-savvy students describe dozens of different education-related uses of the
Internet. Virtually all use the Internet to do research to help them write papers or complete class
work or homework assignments. Most students also correspond with other online classmates
about school projects and upcoming tests and quizzes. Most share tips about favorite Web sites
and pass along information about homework shortcuts and sites that are especially rich in content
that fit their assignments. They also frequent Web sites pointed out to them by teachers—some
of which had even been set up specifically for a particular school or class. They communicate
with online teachers or tutors. They participate in online study groups. They even take online
classes and develop Web sites or online educational experiences for use by others.
The way students think about the Internet in relation to their schooling is closely tied to the
daily tasks and activities that make up their young lives. In that regard, students employ five
different metaphors to explain how they use the Internet for school:
iii Pew Internet & American Life Project
• The Internet as virtual textbook and reference library. Much like a school-issued
textbook or a traditional library, students think of the Internet as the place to find
primary and secondary source material for their reports, presentations, and projects.
This is perhaps the most commonly used metaphor of the Internet for school—held
by both students and many of their teachers alike.
• The Internet as virtual tutor and study shortcut. Students think of the Internet as
one way to receive instruction about material that interests them or about which they
are confused. Others view the Internet as a way to complete their schoolwork as
quickly and painlessly as possible, with minimal effort and minimal engagement. For
some, this includes viewing the Internet as a mechanism to plagiarize material or
otherwise cheat.
• The Internet as virtual study group. Students think of the Internet as an important
way to collaborate on project work with classmates, study for tests and quizzes, and
trade class notes and observations.
• The Internet as virtual guidance counselor. Students look to the Internet for
guidance about life decisions as they relate to school, careers, and postsecondary
education.
• The Internet as virtual locker, backpack, and notebook. Students think of the
Internet as a place to store their important school-related materials and as a way to
transport their books and papers from place to place. Online tools allow them to keep
track of their class schedule, syllabi, assignments, notes, and papers.
Many schools and teachers have not yet recognized—much less responded to—the
new ways students communicate and access information over the Internet. Students report
that there is a substantial disconnect between how they use the Internet for school and how they
use the Internet during the school day and under teacher direction. For the most part, students’
educational use of the Internet occurs outside of the school day, outside of the school building,
outside the direction of their teachers. While there are a variety of pressures, concerns, and
outright challenges in providing Internet access to teachers and students at school, students
perceive this disconnect to be the result of several factors:
• School administrators—and not teachers—set the tone for Internet use at school.
The differences among the schools attended by our students were striking. Policy
choices by those who run school systems and other factors have resulted in different
schools having different levels of access to the Internet, different requirements for
student technology literacy skills (e.g., some schools require students to take a course
about basic computer and Internet skills, many do not have such a requirement), and
different restrictions on student Internet access.
• Even inside the most well connected schools, there is wide variation in teacher
policies about Internet use by students in and for class. In individual schools,
teachers are the ones who choose whether to make assignments that require the use of
iv Pew Internet & American Life Project
the Internet by their students, allow the use of the Internet (often as a supplement to
other sources and tools), or even forbid its use. There are often wide variances in
teacher attitudes about and uses of the Internet from classroom to classroom.
• While students relate examples of both engaging and poor instructional uses of
the Internet assigned by their teachers, students say that the not-so-engaging
uses are the more typical of their assignments. Students repeatedly told us that the
quality of their Internet-based assignments was poor and uninspiring. They want to
be assigned more—and more engaging—Internet activities that are relevant to their
lives. Indeed, many students assert that this would significantly improve their attitude
toward school and learning.
Students say they face several roadblocks when it comes to using the Internet at
schools. In many cases, these roadblocks discourage them from using the Internet as much,
or as creatively, as they would like. They note that:
• The single greatest barrier to Internet use at school is the quality of access to the
Internet. Many schools confine Internet use to certain times of the day or certain
places in the building (especially computer labs). It is also common, these students
say, for schools to place further social and technological restrictions on their use of
the Internet by, for instance, employing surveillance systems or requiring special
teacher or administrator approvals.
• While many students recognize the need to shelter teenagers from inappropriate
material and adult-oriented commercial ads, they complain that blocking and
filtering software often raise barriers to students’ legitimate educational use of
the Internet. Most of our students feel that filtering software blocks important
information, and many feel discouraged from using the Internet by the difficulties
they face in accessing educational material.
• Since not every student has access to the Internet outside of school, the vast
majority of students report that their teachers do not make homework
assignments that require the use of the Internet. Most students noted that teachers
feel it unfair to make assignments involving Internet use because some in the class do
not have access to the Internet at home. We heard of more than one occasion when a
teacher had made such an assignment only to rescind it because they worried that
those without Internet access would have difficulty.
In light of the fact that the Internet is increasingly integrated into the home and school
lives of students, and in the context of larger arguments about the use of the Internet for school,
students’ concerns can inform several policy debates about technology and education. This is
what we heard:
• Students want better coordination of their out-of-school educational use of the
Internet with classroom activities. They argue that this could be the key to
leveraging the power of the Internet for learning.
v Pew Internet & American Life Project
• Students urge schools to increase significantly the quality of access to the
Internet in schools.
• Students believe that professional development and technical assistance for
teachers are crucial for effective integration of the Internet into curricula.
• Students maintain that schools should place priority on developing programs to
teach keyboarding, computer, and Internet literacy skills.
• Students urge that there should be continued effort to ensure that high-quality
online information to complete school assignments be freely available, easily
accessible, and age-appropriate–without undue limitation on students’ freedoms.
• Students insist that policy makers take the “digital divide” seriously and that
they begin to understand the more subtle inequities among teenagers that
manifest themselves in differences in the quality of student Internet access and
use.
Of course, student use of the Internet for school does not occur in a vacuum. Students’
experiences, and those of their states, districts, schools, teachers, and parents, strongly affect how
the Internet is adopted in schools. Nonetheless, large numbers of students say they are changing
because of their out-of-school use of the Internet—and their reliance on it. Internet-savvy
students are coming to school with different expectations, different skills, and access to different
resources.
Students are frustrated and increasingly dissatisfied by the digital disconnect they are
experiencing at school. They cannot conceive of doing schoolwork without Internet access and
yet they are not being given many opportunities in school to take advantage of the Internet.
Many believe they may have to raise their voices to force schools to change to accommodate
them better. In the final analysis, schools would do well to heed the Latin writer Seneca’s words,
which ring as true today as when they were written nearly 2,000 years ago: “The fates guide
those who go willingly; those who do not, they drag.”
vi Pew
Douglas Levin and Sousan Arafeh
American Institutes for Research
For the Pew Internet & American Life Project
The Digital Disconnect: The Growing Gap Between Internet Savvy Students and Their Schools
Key findings from the study include the following:
Internet-savvy students rely on the Internet to help them do their schoolwork—and
for good reason. Students told us they complete their schoolwork more quickly; they are less
likely to get stymied by material they don’t understand; their papers and projects are more likely
to draw upon up-to-date sources and state-of-the-art knowledge; and, they are better at juggling
their school assignments and extracurricular activities when they use the Internet. In essence,
they told us that the Internet helps them navigate their way through school and spend more time
learning in depth about what is most important to them personally.
Internet-savvy students describe dozens of different education-related uses of the
Internet. Virtually all use the Internet to do research to help them write papers or complete class
work or homework assignments. Most students also correspond with other online classmates
about school projects and upcoming tests and quizzes. Most share tips about favorite Web sites
and pass along information about homework shortcuts and sites that are especially rich in content
that fit their assignments. They also frequent Web sites pointed out to them by teachers—some
of which had even been set up specifically for a particular school or class. They communicate
with online teachers or tutors. They participate in online study groups. They even take online
classes and develop Web sites or online educational experiences for use by others.
The way students think about the Internet in relation to their schooling is closely tied to the
daily tasks and activities that make up their young lives. In that regard, students employ five
different metaphors to explain how they use the Internet for school:
iii Pew Internet & American Life Project
• The Internet as virtual textbook and reference library. Much like a school-issued
textbook or a traditional library, students think of the Internet as the place to find
primary and secondary source material for their reports, presentations, and projects.
This is perhaps the most commonly used metaphor of the Internet for school—held
by both students and many of their teachers alike.
• The Internet as virtual tutor and study shortcut. Students think of the Internet as
one way to receive instruction about material that interests them or about which they
are confused. Others view the Internet as a way to complete their schoolwork as
quickly and painlessly as possible, with minimal effort and minimal engagement. For
some, this includes viewing the Internet as a mechanism to plagiarize material or
otherwise cheat.
• The Internet as virtual study group. Students think of the Internet as an important
way to collaborate on project work with classmates, study for tests and quizzes, and
trade class notes and observations.
• The Internet as virtual guidance counselor. Students look to the Internet for
guidance about life decisions as they relate to school, careers, and postsecondary
education.
• The Internet as virtual locker, backpack, and notebook. Students think of the
Internet as a place to store their important school-related materials and as a way to
transport their books and papers from place to place. Online tools allow them to keep
track of their class schedule, syllabi, assignments, notes, and papers.
Many schools and teachers have not yet recognized—much less responded to—the
new ways students communicate and access information over the Internet. Students report
that there is a substantial disconnect between how they use the Internet for school and how they
use the Internet during the school day and under teacher direction. For the most part, students’
educational use of the Internet occurs outside of the school day, outside of the school building,
outside the direction of their teachers. While there are a variety of pressures, concerns, and
outright challenges in providing Internet access to teachers and students at school, students
perceive this disconnect to be the result of several factors:
• School administrators—and not teachers—set the tone for Internet use at school.
The differences among the schools attended by our students were striking. Policy
choices by those who run school systems and other factors have resulted in different
schools having different levels of access to the Internet, different requirements for
student technology literacy skills (e.g., some schools require students to take a course
about basic computer and Internet skills, many do not have such a requirement), and
different restrictions on student Internet access.
• Even inside the most well connected schools, there is wide variation in teacher
policies about Internet use by students in and for class. In individual schools,
teachers are the ones who choose whether to make assignments that require the use of
iv Pew Internet & American Life Project
the Internet by their students, allow the use of the Internet (often as a supplement to
other sources and tools), or even forbid its use. There are often wide variances in
teacher attitudes about and uses of the Internet from classroom to classroom.
• While students relate examples of both engaging and poor instructional uses of
the Internet assigned by their teachers, students say that the not-so-engaging
uses are the more typical of their assignments. Students repeatedly told us that the
quality of their Internet-based assignments was poor and uninspiring. They want to
be assigned more—and more engaging—Internet activities that are relevant to their
lives. Indeed, many students assert that this would significantly improve their attitude
toward school and learning.
Students say they face several roadblocks when it comes to using the Internet at
schools. In many cases, these roadblocks discourage them from using the Internet as much,
or as creatively, as they would like. They note that:
• The single greatest barrier to Internet use at school is the quality of access to the
Internet. Many schools confine Internet use to certain times of the day or certain
places in the building (especially computer labs). It is also common, these students
say, for schools to place further social and technological restrictions on their use of
the Internet by, for instance, employing surveillance systems or requiring special
teacher or administrator approvals.
• While many students recognize the need to shelter teenagers from inappropriate
material and adult-oriented commercial ads, they complain that blocking and
filtering software often raise barriers to students’ legitimate educational use of
the Internet. Most of our students feel that filtering software blocks important
information, and many feel discouraged from using the Internet by the difficulties
they face in accessing educational material.
• Since not every student has access to the Internet outside of school, the vast
majority of students report that their teachers do not make homework
assignments that require the use of the Internet. Most students noted that teachers
feel it unfair to make assignments involving Internet use because some in the class do
not have access to the Internet at home. We heard of more than one occasion when a
teacher had made such an assignment only to rescind it because they worried that
those without Internet access would have difficulty.
In light of the fact that the Internet is increasingly integrated into the home and school
lives of students, and in the context of larger arguments about the use of the Internet for school,
students’ concerns can inform several policy debates about technology and education. This is
what we heard:
• Students want better coordination of their out-of-school educational use of the
Internet with classroom activities. They argue that this could be the key to
leveraging the power of the Internet for learning.
v Pew Internet & American Life Project
• Students urge schools to increase significantly the quality of access to the
Internet in schools.
• Students believe that professional development and technical assistance for
teachers are crucial for effective integration of the Internet into curricula.
• Students maintain that schools should place priority on developing programs to
teach keyboarding, computer, and Internet literacy skills.
• Students urge that there should be continued effort to ensure that high-quality
online information to complete school assignments be freely available, easily
accessible, and age-appropriate–without undue limitation on students’ freedoms.
• Students insist that policy makers take the “digital divide” seriously and that
they begin to understand the more subtle inequities among teenagers that
manifest themselves in differences in the quality of student Internet access and
use.
Of course, student use of the Internet for school does not occur in a vacuum. Students’
experiences, and those of their states, districts, schools, teachers, and parents, strongly affect how
the Internet is adopted in schools. Nonetheless, large numbers of students say they are changing
because of their out-of-school use of the Internet—and their reliance on it. Internet-savvy
students are coming to school with different expectations, different skills, and access to different
resources.
Students are frustrated and increasingly dissatisfied by the digital disconnect they are
experiencing at school. They cannot conceive of doing schoolwork without Internet access and
yet they are not being given many opportunities in school to take advantage of the Internet.
Many believe they may have to raise their voices to force schools to change to accommodate
them better. In the final analysis, schools would do well to heed the Latin writer Seneca’s words,
which ring as true today as when they were written nearly 2,000 years ago: “The fates guide
those who go willingly; those who do not, they drag.”
vi Pew
Young Canadians in a Wired World (2005)
Media Awareness Network.ca
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/research/YCWW/phaseII/key_findings.cfm
Key Findings
Young Canadians in a Wired World – Phase II (YCWW II) is the most comprehensive and wide-ranging study of its kind in Canada. Building on baseline research conducted in 2001, the study looks at the online behaviours, attitudes, and opinions of more than 5,200 children and youth from grades 4 to 11, in French and English language schools, in every province and territory.
Conducted by ERIN Research for the Media Awareness Network and funded by the Government of Canada, the YCWW II research provides a snapshot of the kinds of technologies kids are using, the ways in which those technologies shape their social experiences, the challenges young people encounter online and the impact of parental involvement on kids’ behaviour. It also highlights some key changes that have taken place since the baseline research in 2001.
Overall, the story is very positive. The majority of young Canadians have integrated the Net into mainstream activities which strengthen their connections to their real world communities and enrich their social interactions with peers. At the same time, however, offensive content and risky situations on sites young people favour and their own concerns about privacy invasions and authenticating online information raise serious questions about how to provide them with the tools they need to wisely navigate the Net.
Young Canadians are more connected than ever
Access is almost universal. Ninety-four per cent of young people say they go online from home, compared with 79 per cent in 2001. Sixty-one per cent report having high-speed access.
Many students report that they have their own Internet connection. In total, 37 per cent have their own Internet-connected computer. Twenty per cent of Grade 4 students access the Internet through their own personal computer. That number climbs to 51 per cent by Grade 11.
Points of access include more than computers. Twenty-three per cent of students report having their own cell phone, 44 per cent of which have Internet capability. Fifty-six per cent of students’ cell phones have text messaging and 17 per cent have cameras.
Twenty-two per cent of students have their own Webcam. In Grade 11 that number is 31 per cent.
Kids are active users of the technology
Use of email has increased since 2001. Eighty-six per cent of students report that they have email accounts, compared with 71 per cent in 2001. Seventy-two per cent of these are free Web-based accounts such as Hotmail.
Playing games online is the favourite weekday activity for younger students. Eighty-nine per cent of Grade 4 students report playing games online. Games decrease in popularity by grade while instant messaging increases.
Twenty-eight per cent of Grade 4 students use instant messaging on an average school day, a number that jumps to 43 per cent in Grade 5; by Grade 11 that number is 86 per cent.
Chat rooms rank last out of preferred ways to socialize online. When asked what they would do online if given some free time on the Net, only six per cent of girls choose visiting chat rooms, compared with 62 per cent who choose talking to friends on instant messaging.
Young people use the Internet to access traditional media content. By Grade 8, three-quarters (77 per cent) of young people download and listen to music on their computer and one-third (33 per cent) download TV shows and movies from the Internet.
On an average weekday, 14 per cent of students in Grade 4 engage in writing an online diary or Weblog.
Students who have their own computer with Internet access report spending twice as much time online as those who share a Internet-connected computer with their family.
Parental involvement has increased over the past four years
Young people report having more house rules for Internet use than they had in 2001. The most common rule, which relates to meeting online acquaintances in person, is applied in 74 per cent of households. Fifty-four per cent of families had a rule about this activity in 2001.
Almost double the number of students now say they are supervised by a parent when they go online. In 2001, seven per cent said they were mostly with a parent or adult when using the Net, while in 2005 the number is 13 per cent.
The number of Internet rules drops with age. Kids in Grades 8 and 9 have approximately one-third fewer rules than younger kids do, precisely at a time when they are most likely to make friends online and visit inappropriate sites. In addition boys have fewer rules than girls do, even though boys are more likely to intentionally seek out inappropriate content. Internet rules make a difference
Rules about specific Internet activities make a considerable difference, especially for younger children. In households where there isn’t a rule about “sites you are not supposed to visit,” 43 per cent of students in Grades 6 and 7 have visited offensive and age-inappropriate sites. In households where there is a rule, 14 per cent of kids have visited these kinds of sites.
While rules are less effective with older students, they still have an impact. In homes where there is a rule about not visiting certain sites, one-third (33 per cent) of Grade 10 and 11 students visited the sites, while in homes where there is no rule, nearly one-half (49 per cent) of students in Grades 10 and 11 visited them.
The presence of household rules also correlates with an increase in the amount of time parents spend supervising their kids online. In households with no rules, 74 per cent of kids report that an adult is never present when they use the Net; at the other extreme, where several rules are in force, just 22 per cent report that they are never supervised.
Young people tell us their online experiences are generally positive and socially rewarding
When kids were asked to relate a memorable Internet experience, the majority of the experiences reported were described as good ones. The top attributes, chosen to describe what makes an experience good, include: “It made me feel good about myself” and “My parents would approve of this activity.”
Of the 21 per cent of students in Grades 7 to 11 who report meeting an Internet friend offline, 72 per cent say it was a good experience.
Young people who spend more time online each day report feeling more confident than their peers do in their social abilities – specifically in “making friends” and “telling jokes and making people laugh.”
Kids use the Internet to extend their existing social networks and develop new ones within their community
When kids were asked to describe a memorable Internet experience, the largest category of experiences (15 per cent) involved connecting with friends and making new friends. (Eighty per cent of those experiences were described as good ones.)
Of the young people who report having a good experience when meeting an Internet friend, the majority report meeting a friend of a friend, or a friend of a family member (often living nearby).
A growing number of youth report using the Internet with other people rather than alone. This is not necessarily supervised use but “social use” – with friends or siblings. In 2001 slightly more than half said their home Internet use was mostly solitary, while in 2005 that number dropped to one-third.
The Internet is the main choice for schoolwork, but students say they want better authentication skills
From Grades 6 to 11, three-quarters of kids report doing schoolwork online on a “daily or almost daily” basis.
When students are asked how they like to get their information for school assignments, the Net is the clear winner over books from a library. Sixty-two per cent of Grade 4 students prefer the Internet, while 38 per cent choose the library. Ninety-one per cent of Grade 11 students prefer the Internet, with only nine per cent choosing the library.
Despite their preference for the Net, young people recognize the drawbacks of getting information online. When students are asked what Internet-related subjects they would like to learn about in school, the top choice for 68 per cent is “How to tell if information you find on the Net is true or not.”
While the majority (58 per cent) say they enjoy using the Internet for their schoolwork, almost half (47 per cent) feel it makes no difference to the quality of their work.
Mainstream Web sites expose young people to inappropriate content and risky situations
Almost one-third of the 50 favourite Web sites listed by kids incorporate material that is violent (28 perc ent) or highly sexualized (32 per cent). Kids in Grades 8 and 9 include these sites in their list of favourites most frequently.
Two sites that appear in the top four most popular sites with students in Grades 8 to 11 – Newgrounds and eBaumsworld – contain mature content. These sites also appear on the list of favourites for Grade 6 and 7 students.
In Quebec, the top site for girls in Grades 8 to 11 is Doyoulookgood. On this Montreal-based site, users post photos, videos and information about themselves so others can vote on their looks. Members can search the site for people by age, starting as young as 13.
There is a link between visiting offensive Web sites and having negative experiences in the real world. Young people who report being bullied and sexually harassed in the past school year also report the most visits to offensive Web sites.
For some young people the Net is a vehicle for bullying and sexual harassment
The Internet offers young people a place where they feel anonymous. In this environment, a majority (59 per cent) say they have assumed a different identify. Of those students, 17 per cent say they pretended to be someone else so “I can act mean to people and not get into trouble.”
Thirty-four per cent of students in Grades 7 to 11 report being bullied, while 12 per cent report having being sexually harassed.
Among those who report being bullied, 74 per cent were bullied at school and 27 per cent over the Internet. For those who report sexual harassment, the situation is reversed. 47 per cent say they were harassed at school, while 70 per cent were harassed over the Internet.
Of those young people who report being sexually harassed over the Internet, over half (52 per cent) say it was someone they knew in the real world.
Young people are aware of privacy issues but often give out personal information online
Young people are concerned about their online privacy. Two-thirds of respondents (66 per cent) say they would like to learn “How to protect your privacy on the Net” in school. Half of students say they “sometimes” (44 per cent) or “always” (five per cent) read privacy policies on the Web sites they visit.
Ninety per cent of students’ top 50 Web sites have registration procedures in which visitors are asked to submit personal information. Almost one-third of young people say they would give their real name and address to sign up for a free email account (30 per cent) or to create an online profile on a site like MSN (27 per cent). Nineteen per cent would give this information to enter an online contest.
Kids are more likely to divulge personally identifiable information on a commercial site than in an interactive area such as a chat room. Only seven per cent of students would reveal their name and address in a chat room or in a profile on a dating site. However, one-third (34 per cent) of kids would give their email address in a chat room.
Kids’ favourite online spaces are commercialized environments
Almost all (94 per cent) of students’ top 50 sites include marketing material.
Neopets, the number one site for girls in Grades 4 to 7, contains games featuring brand-name products and marketing surveys. Candystand, a site for games featuring Lifesavers candy, is the seventh ranked site for boys in Grades 4 to 7.
Over three-quarters of kids who play product-centred games think they are “just games,” not “mainly advertisements.” Awareness of the commercial nature of these games rises with age, from 18 per cent of kids in Grade 4, to 31 per cent in Grade 11.
© 2010 Media Awareness Network
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/research/YCWW/phaseII/key_findings.cfm
Key Findings
Young Canadians in a Wired World – Phase II (YCWW II) is the most comprehensive and wide-ranging study of its kind in Canada. Building on baseline research conducted in 2001, the study looks at the online behaviours, attitudes, and opinions of more than 5,200 children and youth from grades 4 to 11, in French and English language schools, in every province and territory.
Conducted by ERIN Research for the Media Awareness Network and funded by the Government of Canada, the YCWW II research provides a snapshot of the kinds of technologies kids are using, the ways in which those technologies shape their social experiences, the challenges young people encounter online and the impact of parental involvement on kids’ behaviour. It also highlights some key changes that have taken place since the baseline research in 2001.
Overall, the story is very positive. The majority of young Canadians have integrated the Net into mainstream activities which strengthen their connections to their real world communities and enrich their social interactions with peers. At the same time, however, offensive content and risky situations on sites young people favour and their own concerns about privacy invasions and authenticating online information raise serious questions about how to provide them with the tools they need to wisely navigate the Net.
Young Canadians are more connected than ever
Access is almost universal. Ninety-four per cent of young people say they go online from home, compared with 79 per cent in 2001. Sixty-one per cent report having high-speed access.
Many students report that they have their own Internet connection. In total, 37 per cent have their own Internet-connected computer. Twenty per cent of Grade 4 students access the Internet through their own personal computer. That number climbs to 51 per cent by Grade 11.
Points of access include more than computers. Twenty-three per cent of students report having their own cell phone, 44 per cent of which have Internet capability. Fifty-six per cent of students’ cell phones have text messaging and 17 per cent have cameras.
Twenty-two per cent of students have their own Webcam. In Grade 11 that number is 31 per cent.
Kids are active users of the technology
Use of email has increased since 2001. Eighty-six per cent of students report that they have email accounts, compared with 71 per cent in 2001. Seventy-two per cent of these are free Web-based accounts such as Hotmail.
Playing games online is the favourite weekday activity for younger students. Eighty-nine per cent of Grade 4 students report playing games online. Games decrease in popularity by grade while instant messaging increases.
Twenty-eight per cent of Grade 4 students use instant messaging on an average school day, a number that jumps to 43 per cent in Grade 5; by Grade 11 that number is 86 per cent.
Chat rooms rank last out of preferred ways to socialize online. When asked what they would do online if given some free time on the Net, only six per cent of girls choose visiting chat rooms, compared with 62 per cent who choose talking to friends on instant messaging.
Young people use the Internet to access traditional media content. By Grade 8, three-quarters (77 per cent) of young people download and listen to music on their computer and one-third (33 per cent) download TV shows and movies from the Internet.
On an average weekday, 14 per cent of students in Grade 4 engage in writing an online diary or Weblog.
Students who have their own computer with Internet access report spending twice as much time online as those who share a Internet-connected computer with their family.
Parental involvement has increased over the past four years
Young people report having more house rules for Internet use than they had in 2001. The most common rule, which relates to meeting online acquaintances in person, is applied in 74 per cent of households. Fifty-four per cent of families had a rule about this activity in 2001.
Almost double the number of students now say they are supervised by a parent when they go online. In 2001, seven per cent said they were mostly with a parent or adult when using the Net, while in 2005 the number is 13 per cent.
The number of Internet rules drops with age. Kids in Grades 8 and 9 have approximately one-third fewer rules than younger kids do, precisely at a time when they are most likely to make friends online and visit inappropriate sites. In addition boys have fewer rules than girls do, even though boys are more likely to intentionally seek out inappropriate content. Internet rules make a difference
Rules about specific Internet activities make a considerable difference, especially for younger children. In households where there isn’t a rule about “sites you are not supposed to visit,” 43 per cent of students in Grades 6 and 7 have visited offensive and age-inappropriate sites. In households where there is a rule, 14 per cent of kids have visited these kinds of sites.
While rules are less effective with older students, they still have an impact. In homes where there is a rule about not visiting certain sites, one-third (33 per cent) of Grade 10 and 11 students visited the sites, while in homes where there is no rule, nearly one-half (49 per cent) of students in Grades 10 and 11 visited them.
The presence of household rules also correlates with an increase in the amount of time parents spend supervising their kids online. In households with no rules, 74 per cent of kids report that an adult is never present when they use the Net; at the other extreme, where several rules are in force, just 22 per cent report that they are never supervised.
Young people tell us their online experiences are generally positive and socially rewarding
When kids were asked to relate a memorable Internet experience, the majority of the experiences reported were described as good ones. The top attributes, chosen to describe what makes an experience good, include: “It made me feel good about myself” and “My parents would approve of this activity.”
Of the 21 per cent of students in Grades 7 to 11 who report meeting an Internet friend offline, 72 per cent say it was a good experience.
Young people who spend more time online each day report feeling more confident than their peers do in their social abilities – specifically in “making friends” and “telling jokes and making people laugh.”
Kids use the Internet to extend their existing social networks and develop new ones within their community
When kids were asked to describe a memorable Internet experience, the largest category of experiences (15 per cent) involved connecting with friends and making new friends. (Eighty per cent of those experiences were described as good ones.)
Of the young people who report having a good experience when meeting an Internet friend, the majority report meeting a friend of a friend, or a friend of a family member (often living nearby).
A growing number of youth report using the Internet with other people rather than alone. This is not necessarily supervised use but “social use” – with friends or siblings. In 2001 slightly more than half said their home Internet use was mostly solitary, while in 2005 that number dropped to one-third.
The Internet is the main choice for schoolwork, but students say they want better authentication skills
From Grades 6 to 11, three-quarters of kids report doing schoolwork online on a “daily or almost daily” basis.
When students are asked how they like to get their information for school assignments, the Net is the clear winner over books from a library. Sixty-two per cent of Grade 4 students prefer the Internet, while 38 per cent choose the library. Ninety-one per cent of Grade 11 students prefer the Internet, with only nine per cent choosing the library.
Despite their preference for the Net, young people recognize the drawbacks of getting information online. When students are asked what Internet-related subjects they would like to learn about in school, the top choice for 68 per cent is “How to tell if information you find on the Net is true or not.”
While the majority (58 per cent) say they enjoy using the Internet for their schoolwork, almost half (47 per cent) feel it makes no difference to the quality of their work.
Mainstream Web sites expose young people to inappropriate content and risky situations
Almost one-third of the 50 favourite Web sites listed by kids incorporate material that is violent (28 perc ent) or highly sexualized (32 per cent). Kids in Grades 8 and 9 include these sites in their list of favourites most frequently.
Two sites that appear in the top four most popular sites with students in Grades 8 to 11 – Newgrounds and eBaumsworld – contain mature content. These sites also appear on the list of favourites for Grade 6 and 7 students.
In Quebec, the top site for girls in Grades 8 to 11 is Doyoulookgood. On this Montreal-based site, users post photos, videos and information about themselves so others can vote on their looks. Members can search the site for people by age, starting as young as 13.
There is a link between visiting offensive Web sites and having negative experiences in the real world. Young people who report being bullied and sexually harassed in the past school year also report the most visits to offensive Web sites.
For some young people the Net is a vehicle for bullying and sexual harassment
The Internet offers young people a place where they feel anonymous. In this environment, a majority (59 per cent) say they have assumed a different identify. Of those students, 17 per cent say they pretended to be someone else so “I can act mean to people and not get into trouble.”
Thirty-four per cent of students in Grades 7 to 11 report being bullied, while 12 per cent report having being sexually harassed.
Among those who report being bullied, 74 per cent were bullied at school and 27 per cent over the Internet. For those who report sexual harassment, the situation is reversed. 47 per cent say they were harassed at school, while 70 per cent were harassed over the Internet.
Of those young people who report being sexually harassed over the Internet, over half (52 per cent) say it was someone they knew in the real world.
Young people are aware of privacy issues but often give out personal information online
Young people are concerned about their online privacy. Two-thirds of respondents (66 per cent) say they would like to learn “How to protect your privacy on the Net” in school. Half of students say they “sometimes” (44 per cent) or “always” (five per cent) read privacy policies on the Web sites they visit.
Ninety per cent of students’ top 50 Web sites have registration procedures in which visitors are asked to submit personal information. Almost one-third of young people say they would give their real name and address to sign up for a free email account (30 per cent) or to create an online profile on a site like MSN (27 per cent). Nineteen per cent would give this information to enter an online contest.
Kids are more likely to divulge personally identifiable information on a commercial site than in an interactive area such as a chat room. Only seven per cent of students would reveal their name and address in a chat room or in a profile on a dating site. However, one-third (34 per cent) of kids would give their email address in a chat room.
Kids’ favourite online spaces are commercialized environments
Almost all (94 per cent) of students’ top 50 sites include marketing material.
Neopets, the number one site for girls in Grades 4 to 7, contains games featuring brand-name products and marketing surveys. Candystand, a site for games featuring Lifesavers candy, is the seventh ranked site for boys in Grades 4 to 7.
Over three-quarters of kids who play product-centred games think they are “just games,” not “mainly advertisements.” Awareness of the commercial nature of these games rises with age, from 18 per cent of kids in Grade 4, to 31 per cent in Grade 11.
© 2010 Media Awareness Network
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Macarthur Foundation
JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF (application/pdf object) Retrieved 3/28/2010, 2010, from http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/{7E45C7E0-A3E0-4B89-AC9C-E807E1B0AE4E}
“If it were possible to define generally the mission of education, it could be said that its fundamental purpose
is to ensure that all students benefit from learning in ways that allow them to participate fully in public,
community, [Creative] and economic life.”
— New London Group (2000, p. 9)
Participatory Culture
For the moment, let’s define participatory culture as one:
1.With relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement
2.With strong support for creating and sharing one’s creations with others
3.With some type of informal mentorship whereby what is known by the most experienced is
passed along to novices
4.Where members believe that their contributions matter
5.Where members feel some degree of social connection with one another (at the least they
care what other people think about what they have created)
Participatory culture shifts the focus of literacy from one of individual expression to
community involvement.
Rather than dealing with each technology in isolation, we would do better to take an ecological approach, thinking about the interrelationship among all of these different communication technologies, the cultural communities that grow up around them, and the activities they support
Forms of participatory culture include:
Affiliations — memberships, formal and informal, in online communities centered
around various forms of media, such as Friendster, Facebook, message boards,
metagaming, game clans, or MySpace).
Expressions — producing new creative forms, such as digital sampling, skinning and
modding, fan videomaking, fan fiction writing, zines, mash-ups).
Collaborative Problem-solving — working together in teams, formal and informal,
to complete tasks and develop new knowledge (such as through Wikipedia, alternative
reality gaming, spoiling).
Circulations — Shaping the flow of media (such as podcasting, blogging).
Access to this participatory culture functions as a new form of the hidden curriculum, shaping which youth will succeed and which will be left behind as they enter school and the workplace
Three concerns, however, suggest the need for policy
and pedagogical interventions:
The Participation Gap — the unequal access to the opportunities, experiences, skills, and
knowledge that will prepare youth for full participation in the world of tomorrow.
The Transparency Problem — The challenges young people face in learning to see
clearly the ways that media shape perceptions of the world.
The Ethics Challenge — The breakdown of traditional forms of professional training and
socialization that might prepare young people for their increasingly public roles as media
makers and community participants.
the new media literacies should be seen as social skills, as ways of interacting within a larger community, and not simply an individualized skill to be used for personal expression
“If it were possible to define generally the mission of education, it could be said that its fundamental purpose
is to ensure that all students benefit from learning in ways that allow them to participate fully in public,
community, [Creative] and economic life.”
— New London Group (2000, p. 9)
Participatory Culture
For the moment, let’s define participatory culture as one:
1.With relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement
2.With strong support for creating and sharing one’s creations with others
3.With some type of informal mentorship whereby what is known by the most experienced is
passed along to novices
4.Where members believe that their contributions matter
5.Where members feel some degree of social connection with one another (at the least they
care what other people think about what they have created)
Participatory culture shifts the focus of literacy from one of individual expression to
community involvement.
Rather than dealing with each technology in isolation, we would do better to take an ecological approach, thinking about the interrelationship among all of these different communication technologies, the cultural communities that grow up around them, and the activities they support
Forms of participatory culture include:
Affiliations — memberships, formal and informal, in online communities centered
around various forms of media, such as Friendster, Facebook, message boards,
metagaming, game clans, or MySpace).
Expressions — producing new creative forms, such as digital sampling, skinning and
modding, fan videomaking, fan fiction writing, zines, mash-ups).
Collaborative Problem-solving — working together in teams, formal and informal,
to complete tasks and develop new knowledge (such as through Wikipedia, alternative
reality gaming, spoiling).
Circulations — Shaping the flow of media (such as podcasting, blogging).
Access to this participatory culture functions as a new form of the hidden curriculum, shaping which youth will succeed and which will be left behind as they enter school and the workplace
Three concerns, however, suggest the need for policy
and pedagogical interventions:
The Participation Gap — the unequal access to the opportunities, experiences, skills, and
knowledge that will prepare youth for full participation in the world of tomorrow.
The Transparency Problem — The challenges young people face in learning to see
clearly the ways that media shape perceptions of the world.
The Ethics Challenge — The breakdown of traditional forms of professional training and
socialization that might prepare young people for their increasingly public roles as media
makers and community participants.
the new media literacies should be seen as social skills, as ways of interacting within a larger community, and not simply an individualized skill to be used for personal expression
Web 2.0 Literacy and Secondary Teacher Education
Herro_Web20_Literacy.pdf (application/pdf object) Retrieved 3/28/2010, 2010, from http://crste.org/images/Herro_Web20_Literacy.pdf
-Although students may learn to decode in the early grades, this often fails to translate into reading for meaning. Without question, schools are concerned with improving literacy practices, yet increased time with texts and writing in schools has not consistently improved literacy rates.
-21st c skills movement literacy had moved beyond reading, writing, speaking, and listening to
expansive “information and communication technology” literacies including researching, evaluating, creating, collaborating, and integrating information “in order to function in a knowledge economy”
-Change increasingly defines the nature of literacy in an information age. Literacy is rapidly and continuously changing as new technologies for information and communication repeatedly
appears and new envisionments for exploiting these technologies are continuously crafted by users. (Leu, 2000, p. 743)
-New literacies can be defined as “the ability to solve genuine problems amidst a deluge of information and its transfer in the Digital Age” (Holum& Gahala, 2001, para. 3)
-Internet—real-time information, virtual environments, and wide-reaching exchanges of knowledge—can intensify communication and comprehensionand ultimately change literacy
-no firm definition of Web 2.0, a capacity for high user engagement, intellectual rigor, frequent updating, and collective knowledge sharing based on an underlying technological infrastructure of blogs, wikis, podcasts, photosharing, RSS feeds, social bookmarks, and the like (O’Reilly, 2005; Anderson, 2007)
-highly participatory culture with broad access to media production tools, meshed with ubiquitous, inexpensive, or free tools. Users capitalize less on consumption and retrieval and more on creating content
-Web 2.0 technologies relocate “expertise” by broadening the range of information sources available and encouraging collective intelligence through distributed practices of winnowing and
sifting rather than single sourcing
-Instead of standardized, individually focused, teacher-mediated curricula, literacy practices surrounding Web 2.0 technologies call for knowledge construction in a collaborative, production-oriented, somewhat nonlinear manner with access to knowledge mediated by its users.
-there is a lack of teacher pre-service that adequately deals with teaching how to integrate social media into learning, and this is also happening in the school system
-In terms of infrastructure, student-to-computer ratios as well as Internet access and
speed are greatly improving in school, yet they lag in their ability to keep pace with new digital affordances
-overall disconnect between readily available technology tools and in-school digital literacy practices remains discouraging
-The expansive influence Internet technologies have had on everyday users has outpaced education’s ability to sustain the Internet’s newly afforded literacies
-the contrast between use of the internet in the classroom and the internet at home is one of a text-privileged, teacher-guided, production as evidence of consumption vs collaborative, participative, production as genuine contribution.
-one-computer classroom controlled by the teacher, often used as a “center” for drill and practice, information retrieval, or finishing work started in a lab setting, continues to be the
prevailing reality in many new-millennium classrooms
-without a solid body of research augmenting instruction to incorporate digital literacy practices inK–12 classrooms, along with supportive teacher education and training programs, a large-scale shift in practice seems unlikely
-How do K–12 districts change practice to incorporate digital literacy skills? The answer may lie in a structure analogous to Web 2.0 itself. Grassroots efforts encapsulating collective intelligence may be teachers’ best bets
-The group decided to rework its technology program to infuse opportunities for Web 2.0 into a scope and sequence of student competencies that were not software or “tool” specific, but instead open ended and research and project oriented. They intended to thread ethics, safety, and responsible computing into the entire K–12 curriculum. When compared to district- and state-level library, media, and technology standards, the student competencies, if satisfied, exceeded standards expectations
-Jenkins et al. outline 11 new media literacies. Defined as “a set of cultural competencies and social skills that young people need in the new media landscape” (p. 4)
•Simulation: the ability to interpret and construct dynamic models
of real-world processes
• Appropriation: the ability to meaningfully sample and remix media content
• Judgment: the ability to evaluate the reliability and credibility of different information
• Transmedia navigation: the ability to follow the flow of stories and information across multiple modalities
•Negotiation: the ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives, and grasping and following alternative norms (p. 4)
-District administrators have used concern over online safety and intellectual property rights/fair use, for example, to justify a surge in Internet filters, Internet safety, responsible-use education, and desktop “locks” on computers, creating apprehension in schools
Danielle Fahser-Herro and Constance Steinkuehler
Literacy skills honed from reading books and writing papers has long been recognized as invaluable to building and sustaining intellect. Educators are charged with strengthening literacy programs, and they typically rely on conventional practices and increased time focusing on text-based media to do so, yet their efforts have not significantly increased test scores (Baer, Baldi, Ayotte, & Green, 2007; U.S. Department of Education, 2005).
At the same time, these traditional classrooms neglect the rich digital literacy opportunities Web 2.0 tools offer to improve literacy programs and meet individual needs. This paper explores issues surrounding definitions of “new literacy” practices as they relate to Web 2.0 tools while drawing on pertinent, emerging research to discuss the value of integrating digital literacy applications in K–12 and higher education classrooms. (Keywords:
digital literacy, Web 2.0, teacher education, new literacy practices)
-authors suggest a need exists to further examine the potential value of incorporating digital media to augment curricula while acknowledging current research offers no clear-cut method to determine best practices.
-Although many examples of Web 2.0 technologies’ use in educational settings are gaining
recognition, few are studied, signifying that its novelty precludes a firm solution providing researched, credible professional development models to emulate.
-Although students may learn to decode in the early grades, this often fails to translate into reading for meaning. Without question, schools are concerned with improving literacy practices, yet increased time with texts and writing in schools has not consistently improved literacy rates.
-21st c skills movement literacy had moved beyond reading, writing, speaking, and listening to
expansive “information and communication technology” literacies including researching, evaluating, creating, collaborating, and integrating information “in order to function in a knowledge economy”
-Change increasingly defines the nature of literacy in an information age. Literacy is rapidly and continuously changing as new technologies for information and communication repeatedly
appears and new envisionments for exploiting these technologies are continuously crafted by users. (Leu, 2000, p. 743)
-New literacies can be defined as “the ability to solve genuine problems amidst a deluge of information and its transfer in the Digital Age” (Holum& Gahala, 2001, para. 3)
-Internet—real-time information, virtual environments, and wide-reaching exchanges of knowledge—can intensify communication and comprehensionand ultimately change literacy
-no firm definition of Web 2.0, a capacity for high user engagement, intellectual rigor, frequent updating, and collective knowledge sharing based on an underlying technological infrastructure of blogs, wikis, podcasts, photosharing, RSS feeds, social bookmarks, and the like (O’Reilly, 2005; Anderson, 2007)
-highly participatory culture with broad access to media production tools, meshed with ubiquitous, inexpensive, or free tools. Users capitalize less on consumption and retrieval and more on creating content
-Web 2.0 technologies relocate “expertise” by broadening the range of information sources available and encouraging collective intelligence through distributed practices of winnowing and
sifting rather than single sourcing
-Instead of standardized, individually focused, teacher-mediated curricula, literacy practices surrounding Web 2.0 technologies call for knowledge construction in a collaborative, production-oriented, somewhat nonlinear manner with access to knowledge mediated by its users.
-there is a lack of teacher pre-service that adequately deals with teaching how to integrate social media into learning, and this is also happening in the school system
-In terms of infrastructure, student-to-computer ratios as well as Internet access and
speed are greatly improving in school, yet they lag in their ability to keep pace with new digital affordances
-overall disconnect between readily available technology tools and in-school digital literacy practices remains discouraging
-The expansive influence Internet technologies have had on everyday users has outpaced education’s ability to sustain the Internet’s newly afforded literacies
-the contrast between use of the internet in the classroom and the internet at home is one of a text-privileged, teacher-guided, production as evidence of consumption vs collaborative, participative, production as genuine contribution.
-one-computer classroom controlled by the teacher, often used as a “center” for drill and practice, information retrieval, or finishing work started in a lab setting, continues to be the
prevailing reality in many new-millennium classrooms
-without a solid body of research augmenting instruction to incorporate digital literacy practices inK–12 classrooms, along with supportive teacher education and training programs, a large-scale shift in practice seems unlikely
-How do K–12 districts change practice to incorporate digital literacy skills? The answer may lie in a structure analogous to Web 2.0 itself. Grassroots efforts encapsulating collective intelligence may be teachers’ best bets
-The group decided to rework its technology program to infuse opportunities for Web 2.0 into a scope and sequence of student competencies that were not software or “tool” specific, but instead open ended and research and project oriented. They intended to thread ethics, safety, and responsible computing into the entire K–12 curriculum. When compared to district- and state-level library, media, and technology standards, the student competencies, if satisfied, exceeded standards expectations
-Jenkins et al. outline 11 new media literacies. Defined as “a set of cultural competencies and social skills that young people need in the new media landscape” (p. 4)
•Simulation: the ability to interpret and construct dynamic models
of real-world processes
• Appropriation: the ability to meaningfully sample and remix media content
• Judgment: the ability to evaluate the reliability and credibility of different information
• Transmedia navigation: the ability to follow the flow of stories and information across multiple modalities
•Negotiation: the ability to travel across diverse communities, discerning and respecting multiple perspectives, and grasping and following alternative norms (p. 4)
-District administrators have used concern over online safety and intellectual property rights/fair use, for example, to justify a surge in Internet filters, Internet safety, responsible-use education, and desktop “locks” on computers, creating apprehension in schools
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
A Shift in Teaching
http://weblogged.wikispaces.com/A+Shifting+Notion+of+What+it+Means+to+Teach
retrieved March 23, 2010.
Will Richardson
Powerful Learning Practice Network (Co-Founder)
http://tinyurl.com/djrjeg
Contact: weblogged@gmail.com
Author: Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms ( Corwin Press, 2nd Ed, July 2008)
Latest Articles:
"Footprints in a Digital Age" (Educational Leadership, November, 2008)
"World Without Walls: Learning Well With Others" (Edutopia, December 2008)
Teaching with these technologies challenges the traditional definition of teaching. Our main role in the midst of these networked learning environments is as a connector for our students, not simply content expert.
As teachers we must teach and model for our students the ability to create, grow and navigate personal learning networks in safe, ethical and effective ways.
What do these teachers have in common?
They are networked learners.
They share their practice.
The connect their students globally.
They give students voice.
They create opportunities for real work for real purposes for their students.
They learn with their students.
This is a period of Fluid Learning.
And we are entering a period of "ubiquitous learning."
What do you think these shifts mean for your own teaching and learning?
Take this teacher's Tweet: "In Gr.8 - using Google Earth, Flickr, YouTube, bbcnews, to learn about the protests in Burma .. world at their fingertips, AS IT HAPPENS!"
Now we have the opportunity to be connectors, to bring our classrooms to the world in a variety of ways. We can find other teachers who may know more than we do. (Secret Life of Bees)
Here's another example of students learning from mentors. (Polar Science)
retrieved March 23, 2010.
Will Richardson
Will Richardson
Weblogg-ed.comPowerful Learning Practice Network (Co-Founder)
http://tinyurl.com/djrjeg
Contact: weblogged@gmail.com
Author: Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms ( Corwin Press, 2nd Ed, July 2008)
Latest Articles:
"Footprints in a Digital Age" (Educational Leadership, November, 2008)
"World Without Walls: Learning Well With Others" (Edutopia, December 2008)
Teaching with these technologies challenges the traditional definition of teaching. Our main role in the midst of these networked learning environments is as a connector for our students, not simply content expert.
As teachers we must teach and model for our students the ability to create, grow and navigate personal learning networks in safe, ethical and effective ways.
What do these teachers have in common?
They are networked learners.
They share their practice.
The connect their students globally.
They give students voice.
They create opportunities for real work for real purposes for their students.
They learn with their students.
This is a period of Fluid Learning.
- Capture Everything
- Share Everything
- Open Everything
- Only Connect
And we are entering a period of "ubiquitous learning."
What do you think these shifts mean for your own teaching and learning?
Take this teacher's Tweet: "In Gr.8 - using Google Earth, Flickr, YouTube, bbcnews, to learn about the protests in Burma .. world at their fingertips, AS IT HAPPENS!"
Now we have the opportunity to be connectors, to bring our classrooms to the world in a variety of ways. We can find other teachers who may know more than we do. (Secret Life of Bees)
Here's another example of students learning from mentors. (Polar Science)
New Media Literacies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEHcGAsnBZE
NMLstaff08
November 11, 2008
Members of the research team at Project New Media Literacies discuss the social skills and cultural competencies needed to fully engage with today's participatory culture. Featuring Henry Jenkins, and produced by Anna Van Someren at Project New Media Literacies. See more NML videos at http://techtv.mit.edu/collections/new
Comments on New Literacies:
An Introduction to New Internet Literacies for Educators: Blogs, Wikis, RSS, Online Bookmarking
A number of new Internet technologies are changing the way we find, manage and distribute information. From Weblogs to Wikis to RSS to online bookmarking services, the possibilities for collaboration and sharing are almost limitless, as are the ways students and teachers can benefit in the classroom. Get an overview of the tools being used to foster this new literacy and a framework for integrating them into teaching practices.
The current educational system creates and nurtures dependent learners. Our students depend on us to:
- create the environment in which learning takes place
- tell them what they should know, when and why
- provide the context for knowing
- provide appropriate materials for learning
- assess what they know
- select appropriate ways to share what they have learned with others
The new world of learning is requires us to teach students to be independent learners, ones that are not dependent on teachers but are:
- Self-directing--we now have the ability to create our own, personal curriculum around the ideas or topics that we are most passionate about. We no longer require curriculum to be delivered to us. We need to help our students find their passions and pursue them in the context of online networks in ethical, effective, organized and safe ways. And finding a balance between the online and offline life is also a "literacy" in this age. There are so many ways to communicate these days (blogs, wikis, IM, text, etc.) that it's easy to get overwhelmed.
- Self-selecting--in this world, learning spaces are created, not provided. And teachers are not assigned, they are selected. The creation and nurturing of these highly collaborative spaces and communities is a new "literacy" that we need to help our students develop. How do we find the best teachers? How do we connect to them? How to we build communities with others that are supportive and effective?
- Self-editing--whereas most of us were educated in a world where the materials we worked with had been edited by someone else along the way, in today's world, less and less of what we read is now "edited" in the traditional sense. So, reading and writing is no longer enough; we need to develop people who are effective editors of information as well.
- Self-organizing--the Dewey Decimal system doesn't serve the online world well, so we have to organize our own stuff. To do that, we use tags and social bookmarking systems, building folksonomies where we organize the Web together.
- Self-reflecting--as we become more and more in charge of our own learning, we need to develop the ability to reflect upon and assess our own work. This "metacognitive" work can involve a number of different genres and tools.
- Self-publishing--our students will need to be literate at sharing out the work they produce because that increases the connections and conversations that can lead to further learning. Blogs, wikis, podcasts and video are among the publishing skills they will need to have.
- Self-connecting--in order to leverage the potentials of personal learning networks, our students must understand how to connect to others in safe, ethical, and effective ways.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
COGNITIVE TOOLS AND MINDTOOLS FOR COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
J. EDUCATIONAL COMPUTING RESEARCH, Vol. 35(2) 199-209, 2006
COGNITIVE TOOLS AND MINDTOOLS FOR COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
PAUL A. KIRSCHNER and GIJSBERT ERKENS
Utrecht University
Highlight
Jonassen (2000) distinguishes five characteristics of mindtools. First, they are
cognitive amplification and reorganization tools, which exceed the limitations of
the human mind by doing things more accurately and at a higher speed, and extend
the use of other (mechanical) tools. Second, mindtools are generalizable tools,
which can be used from setting to setting and domain to domain for engaging and
facilitating cognitive processing. They are not specific to any one purpose nor do
they reduce information processing. They make better use of the user’s mental
efforts in a multitude of domains and situations. They do not make processing
easier, but afford it/allow it to occur. This also means that users have to think
harder since to think more deeply costs more effort.
Mindtools are also critical thinking devices which help learners think for
themselves, make connections between concepts, and create new knowledge. This
is similar to what Crombag et al. (1979) call operations on knowledge. They are
also intellectual partners. As a partner in the learning and working process, each
are responsible for what they can perform best. Computers should calculate and
store and retrieve information, while the user of the tool should be responsible for
recognizing and judging patterns of information and its organization. Finally,
a mindtool is a concept. It is a way of thinking about and using ICT, other
technology, the learning environment, or intentional and incidental learning
activity/opportunity (constructivist in nature) so that the users of these tools can
represent, manipulate, and reflect on what they know instead of reproducing what
others tell them.
Conclusion
The goal of education is not, or at least should not be, to give a new generation of
learners subject matter knowledge and task-specific skills. The primary goal of
education should be, at the least, the transmission of those competencies which
allow learners to become practitioners who are reflective of the decisions that they
make and who are able to interact with their ever changing environments in a
meaningful and responsive way. This means that they need to become competent
life long learners within their field(s) of expertise. They have and need to keep
current their knowledge and skills within their area of expertise. They must keep
abreast of the newest, or recurring, perspectives and techniques with respect to
their fields. They must also move with society with respect to the tools of their
trades. It is not possible for them to do this in traditional teaching and training
situations. Things are moving and changing too quickly, and life is becoming so
much more complex, that the courses cannot be made quick enough and in enough
numbers to meet the need and the teachers do not have the time or possibility to
follow all of these courses.
Beyond Technology for Technology’s Sake: Advancing Multiliteracies in the Twenty-First Century
Beyond Technology for Technology’s Sake: Advancing Multiliteracies in the Twenty-First
Century
CARLIN BORSHEIM, KELLY MERRITT, and DAWN REED
Abstract:
Teachers who apply these technologies in their classrooms do more than motivate students with the latest cool tool; they prepare students with multiliteracies and for the realities of the technological world. Therefore, teachers must go beyond implementing technology for
technology’s sake to consider the evolving nature of texts and the literacy skills associated with consuming and producing those texts. In this article, the authors share specific technologies they have used in English and English education classrooms and offer examples for adapting teaching to the impact of technology, rather than adapting technology to teaching.
multiliteracies, a term that originated with the New London Group (Cope and Kalantzis
2000), is based on the well-established assumption that technologies (including computers, cell phones, PDAs, the Internet, and Web 2.0 applications such as wikis, blogs, and other social networking sites) have impacted the nature of texts, as well as the ways people use and interact with texts.
Anstey and Bull’s definition (2006) of a multiliterate person as one who “is flexible and strategic and can understand and use literacy and literate practices with a range of texts and technologies; in socially responsible ways; in a socially, culturally, and linguistically diverse world; and to fully participate in life as an active and informed citizen” (55).
First, a multiliteracies pedagogy facilitates a constructivist model of learning in which students can make meaning through authentic experiences. Second, a multiliteracies pedagogy can support traditional curriculum objectives, like reading challenging texts or engaging in various aspects of the writing process.
The proliferation of online resources meant that students needed new and explicit strategies for locating, sorting, gathering, evaluating, and reading articles from online databases and Web sites. As students began to identify and gather credible sources, we put away the 3 × 5 note cards and
experimented with using Word documents, wikis, andsocial bookmarking sites to organize information and take notes.
In the next phase, students used traditional wordprocessing applications to compose and revise their formal research papers, and I found the comment feature in Word to be an invaluable tool for commenting on students’ rough drafts, as well as for persuading students to be specific in their feedback on one another’s work. In a final and important step, I asked students to adapt their traditional research paper into a media genre appropriate for reaching an audience outside the classroom.
The multiliteracies approach helps students learn to be savvier users and organizers of online resources, use technologies to facilitate revision and collaboration throughout the writing process, and use technologies to achieve authentic goals and reach real audiences for
their research.
When I keep the objectives in the forefront, my students do as well; therefore, they do not get carried away with the technology we use to compliment the writing.
A Five Dimensional Model for Educating the Net Generation
A Five Dimensional Model for Educating the Net Generation
Ronald Noel Beyers
Young Engineers and Scientists of Africa Programme, Meraka Institute, Pretoria, South Africa // ron@yesa.org.za
Beyers, R. N. (2009). A Five Dimensional Model for Educating the Net Generation. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 218–227.
This paper proposes a multi-dimensional concept model of an ICT enabled classroom to highlight potential similarities and differences between where teachers perceive themselves relative to their learners.
This is a generation that expects to actively participate in and through their media, hence the decrease in time spent by teens in viewing television and the corresponding increase in time spent on computers, gaming, and the Internet. Our children now have at their fingertips a virtual world – with all its promises and pitfalls (Lemke, 2003:5).
One of the problems that many societies are facing especially where there is a transition from an
industrial and manufacturing based economy to a knowledge society, is the rate of change. The world that they were prepared for may no longer exist.
On the other hand ‘wiring the schools and populating them with computers is necessary but insufficient to ensure equal opportunity to share in the digital revolution’ (Tapscott, 1988:262). They need a redesigned education system and teachers who have been retrained and reoriented. Innovative technologies cannot make up for educational professionals who lack innovative methods and merely replicate learning models that don't work (Hooper, 2002).
Individuals raised with the computer deal with information differently compared to
previous cohorts: they develop hypertext minds, they leap around (Prensky, 2001).
Jean Piaget’s constructivism is an epistemological view of knowledge acquisition emphasizing knowledge construction rather than knowledge transmission and the recording of information conveyed by others. The role of the learner is conceived as one of building and transforming knowledge (James, Applefield, & Mahnaz, 2001).
Constructionists believe that knowledge is constructed and learning occurs when children create products or artefacts. They assert that learners are more likely to be engaged in learning when these artefacts are personally relevant and meaningful (Bhattacharya & Han, 2001).
Imagine classrooms that incorporate more videos and video games, classes that meet electronically to fit students' schedules, students who choose to learn from each other rather than a professor, and courseware, search engines, and library databases that are animated, image-based, and interactive (Carlson, 2005).
A Proposed Conceptual Model
It is envisaged that the model could provide educators with the means to comprehend the ‘differentness’ and ‘complexity’ of the net generation. A tool to graphically plot individuals within this 5D model is being developed which will serve to highlight similarities and differences between teachers and pupils especially where ICTs are deployed in the classroom. The intention is sensitize teachers to this information so that they are encouraged to grapple with these issues to better understand them for the benefit of their learners.
- The First Dimension – X Axis (Survival Strategies)
- The Second Dimension –Y Axis ( Knowledge and Comprehension): knowledge is not scarce, but meaning-making is
- The Third Dimension –Z Axis (Spatial Orientation): the ability to fly, not just drive. The principal goal of education is to create men who are capable of doing new things, not simply of repeating what other generations have done (Burkhalter, McLean, & Jones, 2004:50). Attempting to discover what students think in relation to the problems on hand, discussing their misconceptions sensitively, and giving them situations to go on thinking about which will enable them to readjust their ideas (Bell, Diagnosing students' misconceptions, 1982:6-10). Creative thinking, group problem solving and decision making, as well as the capacity to learn more and more efficiently and effectively which is inherent in 21st century skills. This means that a more sophisticated view of knowledge and learning is required than the one held in the previous industrial era because the economy is now based on selecting, processing and applying information and creating new knowledge and applications (Miller, 2000a).
- The Fourth Dimension – Time: Extending the learning process beyond the confines of the core curriculum and the walls of the classroom should be the goal of all educators to overcome the time constraints imposed by traditional classes and restrictive timetables. Emphasis is on communications including both synchronous and asynchronous methods. Students are able to access the wisdom of experts around the world and receive an answer in a relatively short period of time.
- The Fifth Dimension – Global vision: Teachers acting as gatekeepers of knowledge are threatened by the perception that learners may know more than them. Educators on the other hand strive to release these learners to construct their own knowledge so that the educator can focus on those individuals who really need their attention. Adaptability is a key facet of this stage for without it teachers are doomed to remain in a two-dimensional text-book bound world A key characteristic of the fifth dimension also involves group work and a division of labour where learners are challenged to explore lateral thinking, creativity, problem solving and innovative types of challenges. It is essential that learners are provided with real-world tools and real-world scenarios.
It is recommended that policy makers acknowledge that the vast majority of teachers are becoming burdened with administrative matters and are unable to find the necessary quality time for personal professional growth. If they are not exposed to the benefits of new approaches to education, they will continue to practice teaching in the tried and trusted armchair approach and not actively encourage learners to develop essential 21st century skills.
Learning Communities are not simply another educational fad or a modest type of school reform but an attempt to rebuild society's educational system on a post-modern cultural foundation that is democratic and person-centered rather than mechanical, as well as ecological and life-centered rather than driven exclusively by economic forces.
Implications for the Learner
learners can and must take greater responsibility for their own learning. Leaving learners to their own devices is not being advocated. On the contrary. The educator must still be in control of the process, but their role is more a facilitator rather than physically dictating what happens
at the learning interface where there is greater emphasis on self-discovery after the basic skills have been acquired.
21st C. Learning: An Intro to the Disconnect between the organisation of schools and how humans learn
An introductory explanation of the disconnect between the organisation of schools and what the neurobiological, cognitive and behavioural sciences are discovering about how humans learn
In this was the birth of the modern secondary school – a kind of holding ground in which the problems of adolescence could be worked through so that eventually youngsters would be mature enough to deal with adult society. School was the exact opposite of apprenticeship. Schoolchildren were required to sit docilely in classrooms, listening to the received wisdom of the teacher and then reproduce that knowledge when tested. Independent and creative thinking was not encouraged for that threatened the teacher’s control of the rest of the class. Young apprentices, on the other hand, had to be so put through their paces that the older they became the less dependent they were on the craftsman, and the more confident they were in demonstrating their ability to solve problems. Every skill learnt, every experience internalised, increased the apprentice’s sense of autonomy.
Ours is a world of information saturation where the power of computers doubles every eighteen months, and it is estimated that the world produces about five exabytes of new information per year (an exabyte is a billion gigabytes). That’s about 37,000 times the amount of information held in the Library of Congress.
Authentic Learning for the 21st Century: An Overview
Authentic Learning for the 21st Century: An Overview
By Marilyn M. Lombardi
Edited by Diana G. Oblinger
ELI Paper 1: 2007
May 2007
Abstract
Learning-by-doing is generally considered the most effective way to learn. The Internet and a variety of emerging communication, visualization, and simulation technologies now make it possible to offer students authentic learning experiences ranging from experimentation to real-world problem solving. This white paper explores what constitutes authentic learning, how technology supports it, what makes it effective, and why it is important.
Students say they are motivated by solving real-world problems. They often express a preference for doing rather than listening.Thanks to the emergence of a new set of technological tools, we can offer students a more authentic learning experience based on experimentation and action.Connection-building will require new forms of authentic learning—forms that cut across disciplines and bring students into meaningful contact with the future employers, customers, clients, and colleagues who will have the greatest stake in their success.
Authentic learning typically focuses on real-world, complex problems and their solutions, using role-playing exercises, problem-based activities, case studies, and participation in virtual communities of practice.Students immersed in authentic learning activities cultivate the kinds of “portable skills” that newcomers to any discipline have the most difficulty acquiring on their own
Learning researchers have distilled the essence of the authentic learning experience down to 10 design elements:
- Real-world relevance
- Ill-defined problem
- Sustained investigation
- Multiple sources and perspectives
- Collaboration
- Reflection (metacognition)
- Interdisciplinary perspective
- Integrated assessment
- Polished products
- Multiple interpretations and outcomes
Products of Inquiry:
1. Simulations
2. Student-Created Media
3. Inquiry-Based Learning
4. Peer-Based Evaluation
5. Working with Remote Instruments or Research Data
Authentic learning is not new. It was the primary mode of instruction for apprentices who later took their places within established craft guilds. At one time apprenticeship was the most common form of learning. However, as the numbers of students grew in the 19th century, the logistics and economics of transporting large numbers of students to relevant work sites made large-scale apprenticeship programs impractical.
However, access to digital archives, databases, instruments, or even haptic devices may not guarantee an authentic learning experience without the most important factor: community participation. In authentic learning situations, tasks are accomplished collaboratively, whether or not distance is involved. Educators can use Web-based communication tools to help students collaborate with one another, sharing and constructing knowledge.
However, access to digital archives, databases, instruments, or even haptic devices may not guarantee an authentic learning experience without the most important factor: community participation. In authentic learning situations, tasks are accomplished collaboratively, whether or not distance is involved. Educators can use Web-based communication tools to help students collaborate with one another, sharing and constructing knowledge.
Why isn’t authentic learning more common? The reliance on traditional instruction is not simply a choice made by individual faculty—students often prefer it. This resistance to active learning may have more to do with their epistemological development than a true preference for passivity. Entering freshmen are likely to use a right-or-wrong, black-or-white mental model. At this dualistic stage, students believe that the “right answer exists somewhere for every problem, and authorities know them. Right answers are to be memorized by hard work.”26 By confronting students with uncertainty, ambiguity, and conflicting perspectives, instructors help them develop more mature mental models that coincide with the problem-solving approaches used by experts. Authentic learning exercises expose the messiness of real-life decision making.
Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
"The key question for me is whether we need content in order to start learning or whether content is the by-product of an effective learning experience"
"Leaders face a large scale rebalancing of education. They need to find new points of balance: between teacher/learner, planning/emergence, organized/complex, top-down/grassroots. The entities that will shape our future are already in play. It’s about new and novel combinations, finding new states of relatedness."
Behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism are the three broad learning theories most often utilized in the creation of instructional environments. These theories, however, were developed in a time when learning was not impacted through technology. Connectivism emphasizes that learning (defined as actionable knowledge) can reside outside of ourselves (within an organization or a database), is focused on connecting specialized information sets, and the connections that enable us to learn more are more important than our current state of knowing. A central tenet of most learning theories is that learning occurs inside a person. Even social constructivist views, which hold that learning is a socially enacted process, promotes the principality of the individual (and her/his physical presence – i.e. brain-based) in learning. These theories do not address learning that occurs outside of people (i.e. learning that is stored and manipulated by technology).
Some significant trends in learning:
- Many learners will move into a variety of different, possibly unrelated fields over the course of their lifetime.
- Informal learning is a significant aspect of our learning experience. Formal education no longer comprises the majority of our learning. Learning now occurs in a variety of ways – through communities of practice, personal networks, and through completion of work-related tasks.
- Learning is a continual process, lasting for a lifetime. Learning and work related activities are no longer separate. In many situations, they are the same.
- Technology is altering (rewiring) our brains. The tools we use define and shape our thinking.
- The organization and the individual are both learning organisms. Increased attention to knowledge management highlights the need for a theory that attempts to explain the link between individual and organizational learning.
- Many of the processes previously handled by learning theories (especially in cognitive information processing) can now be off-loaded to, or supported by, technology.
- Know-how and know-what is being supplemented with know-where (the understanding of where to find knowledge needed).
Principles of connectivism:
- Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions.
- Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources.
- Learning may reside in non-human appliances.
- Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known
- Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning.
- Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill.
- Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities.
- Decision-making is itself a learning process.
The notion of connectivism has implications in all aspects of life:
- Media, news, information. This trend is well under way. Mainstream media organizations are being challenged by the open, real-time, two-way information flow of blogging.
- Personal knowledge management in relation to organizational knowledge management
- Design of learning environments
Emerging Technologies for Learning
Downes, S. (2007). Emerging Technologies for Learning. Coventry, U.K.: Becta. Retrieved March 15, 2010, fromhttp://partners.becta.org.uk/page_documents/research/emerging_technologies07_chapter2.pdf
Portrait of a Profession: Teaching and Teachers in the 21st Century
Moss, David M.. Portrait of a Profession: Teaching and Teachers in the 21st Century. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Education, 2008.
Chapter Six: Technology and Professional Development
Allen D. Glenn
In Chapter Six, Allen Glenn outlines the need for ongoing, sustained professional development for teachers in the realm of emerging technologies. He explores the necessity for using emerging technologies for professional development and the challenges of facilitating learning using new social media and other online tools. Unprecedented access to the World Wide Web is challenging the teaching profession, but there are enormous opportunities as well.
Professional development opportunities, both formal and informal abound when it comes to technology. In a recent search, there were over 900,000 websites with reference to “teacher professional development.” Examples of informal resources include the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (http://www.ncrel.org) and the George Lucas Educational Foundation (GLEF) (http://ww.glef.org). Quality professional development, according to the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future (NCTAF) states that there are several guidelines for quality professional development, including:
• connected to, and derived from teachers' work with their students
• sustained, ongoing, intensive, and supported by peers and school leaders
• organized around collective problem solving
• responsive to social and educational priorities at every jurisdictional level
Glenn notes that technology belongs to today's youth, and shapes their expectations about learning and how they interact. Students anticipate continual connectivity via social networks. Teachers today know that technology is not “a fad” that will go away. What is clear is that sustained, continual professional development is necessary to keep up with the technological demands, but how can this take place when there is so little time?
After a summation of the history of professional development, Glenn observes that technology is ever-changing, and that keeping up is almost impossible. While he is correct, his focus, in my opinion, narrows to learning how to use the tools, not the pedagogical methodology that facilitates students' connecting, creating, and sharing. My belief is that the students can teach the teacher how to use the tools, but the teacher must become a “cognitive coach” in response.
In his study, Glenn notes that there are four key stages to learning how to incorporate technology:
- Emerging: exploring the potential of technology
- applying: using content based materials and tools for accessing the internet and word processing
- Infusing: teachers use technology as part of the instructional process, and students are more directly engaged
- Transforming: the classroom is learning centered, where students explore a variety of real-world problems in an inquiry-oriented learning environment
Changing a teaching style is difficult, but not insurmountable, Glenn states. Teacher philosophies about education may be challenged with a learner-centered approach that is the potential hallmark of a technology-driven curriculum. Research also shows that teachers resist technology that doesn't match the context in which they work, and do not address the problems related to their classrooms. Grant (1996) suggests the following for effective technology professional development:
- vision of technology as an empowering tool
- stimulate reflective practice and be grounded in the context of teaching
- exemplify our deepest beliefs about learning: inquiry, collaboration, and discourse
- value and cultivate a culture of collegiality
- provide continual opportunities for formal and informal learning
- provide opportunities for meaningful teacher leadership roles to emerge
- enable teachers to shape their own learning
When teachers personalize computer tools, a sense of ownership and a positive attitude is the result.
To use digital technologies a teacher needs a variety of learning and support activities:
- technical learning experiences ought to be problem based and related to actual classroom situations
- teachers need to set goals and reflect on their teaching continually
- one-on-one collaborative support should be available
- collaboration with others engaged in using tech should be available
- opportunities to read professional materials should be available
Most importantly, Glenn observes that there are a plethora of opportunities to connect, at one's own pace, via the World Wide Web, in digital communities of practice. Today's students (and teachers) expect unprecedented access to technology, no matter their comfort level. There are certain expectations that technology should be readily available, and these pressures will continue to force schools and districts in terms of budgetary considerations. Therefore, teachers should be focusing on learning “how to use technology to learn,” rather than “learn to use technology.”
Finally, in his concluding remarks, Glenn states that future professional development will allow teachers to choose from a variety of learning communities characterized by:
• long term vs short term
• continuous vs targeted
• lifelong vs short term goals
• real community vs school
• virtual vs physical
• formal vs informal instructors
• sharing virtual resources vs physical
• unscheduled vs scheduled learning
In my opinion, Glenn accurately observes that technology is fast disrupting how learning is taking place. In addition, he is correct in stating that technology must be used to learn rather than being an end unto itself. However, I did not get a sense that there was a suggestion or solution to the issue of professional development, and how it could be led, for example, by teacher leaders. He did not mention action research, a prime method of problem solving, and using technology as a fulcrum, action research could be a powerful tools for teachers. Still, the issue of time, whether physical or virtual, is in short supply when it comes to professional development.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
