It Takes a Village

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13112172@N03/2650906412/

In trying to respond to the question“Whose responsibility is it to teach students to be safe online?” (course two of the ISB Certificate of Educational Technology and Information Literacy), I have surfed and read heart-rendering accounts of cruelty, pain, and death related to cyberbullying.

It would be hard to refute that cyberbullying is a significant social problem. Some of my colleagues assert that it is silly to think cyberbullying is something new—bullying has been around forever. However, if the statistics are to be believed, cyberbullying is different in that it is having a much greater impact on lives and society because the power of the communication tools accessible to our students is exponentially greater than anything we could have imagined when growing up.

As Wikipedia states, “Cyber-bullying involves the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others.” Yes, bullying has always existed, but cyberbullying has magnified impact due to the perceived anonymity of the bully and its almost instantaneous spread like a killer virus.

We, as a society, need to put our collaborative hearts and minds together to tackle cyberbullying around the world. When researching how various groups are dealing with cyberbullying, I was a disappointed to see that much of what is out there deals with punishment. I agree that there need to be consequences for inflicting harm, but researchers have found that the threat of punishment rarely works well as a deterrent for individuals. Secondly, many of such proposed punishments clearly cross constitutional rights in regards to freedom of speech. Take a look at the proposed Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act:

Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Even though we can sympathize with the mother who proposed the Act (her daughter committed suicide directly linked to cyberbullying), most people can quickly see the risk such an act has for our freedom of speech. (See Eugene Volokh’s reaction, professor of law at UCLA School of Law). As throughout the history of communities trying to create a just society, there is the ongoing tension and challenge of balancing individual rights and the common good. (Click here for a more in depth discussion about cyberbullying and the tension of rights and responsibilities in schools.)

So what to do? My proposal in addressing cyberbullying is threefold:

1. We all take responsibility: that means, parents, friends, colleagues, students, adults, citizens—everyone. I was shocked at all the finger pointing and blaming that happens with these cases. Yes, schools have a role, but it isn’t solitary. Yes, parents have a role, but they can’t do it alone. In order for us to make the world a safer and more equitable place, we all need to step up to the plate. Here are a couple of examples where communities are taking a "village" approach:

• In the UK, BeatBullying, a nonprofit organization, believes in a community approach to this issue. They have trained 700 teens to mentor bullying victims in both face-to-face meetings and through a new Web service called CyberMentors.
• Look here to see how one Kentucky community has established a partnership between the police department and students at the high school to tackle the problem of cyberbullying.
• This episode of Adina's deck of teens tackling cyberbullying looks promising as a way of teens taking action.
  

2. Embed the teaching of online safety in the discussion and study of the bigger questions with which society struggles in order for the understanding of the students to be more enduring and more widely applicable. Unless we teach kids to wrestle with the enduring questions of humanity, they will not know how to address them in this ever-changing landscape.

• I haven’t found anything at the primary or secondary level yet. I guess that is an area that needs tackling. If you know if any, please send them my way.
  

3. Look at the root cause of cyberbullying rather than only trying to address the symptoms? At the heart of the issue come the questions: What need is being met for the bully? How can we help kids get those needs met in a healthier, more constructive manner? What are the interpersonal relationships at play and how do we work with improving those? Here are a couple of promising options in this vein:

• CAPSULE, Creating a Peaceful School Learning Environment, a “school-wide intervention focusing on empathy and power dynamics.”
• Childnet International video: This could serve as a good discussion starter analyzing what is happening and why--relating to what students see in their own lives.
  

Does our ES AUP address this problem? Only minimally, in the beginning part about “Respect others”. I think for it to be effective, the AUP needs to be put into kid language and have some very concrete, age appropriate ideas for kids. More importantly, I feel all of this needs to be embedded and woven throughout students’ learning opportunities. Simply signing a sheet won’t solve the problem. It will take each one of us in our global village taking a role to enjoy the power of today's communication tools while simultaneously keeping users safe.

"You must be the change you want to see in the world."

Copyright and Fair Use: Web 2.0 Rights and Responsibilties

It is obvious from the many videos, articles, papers, lawsuits, and debates currently happening around the world that copyright laws need to be revised in order to balance the rights of educators to use digital content (Fair Use) and the responsibility to honor creators' intellectual rights (Copyright) in the Web 2.0 world of creation and collaboration.

Problems

I found the white paper, The Digital Learning Challenge: Obstacles to Educational uses of Copyrighted Material in the Digital Age, published by the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, that explored "whether innovative educational uses of digital technology were hampered by the restrictions of copyright.” extremely informative. Their research identified four key obstacles current copyright law creates for educators:

1 Unclear or inadequate copyright law relating to crucial provisions such as fair use and educational use; This is why rulings are so unpredictable and sometimes swayed by the judge's moral stance. "Fair use involves subjective judgments and are often affected by factors such as a judge or jury 's personal sense of right or wrong." (From Standford University's website on Copyright & Fair Use.)

2. Extensive adoption of “digital rights management” technology to lock up content;

3. Practical difficulties obtaining the right to use content when licenses are necessary;

4. Undue caution by gatekeepers such as publishers or educational administrators.


Solutions

As with the privacy issue faced by educators and students tapping into the digital power of Web 2.0, there are legal, technological and self-regulatory steps we need in order to tackle the current problems.

Legal: These steps would include amendments to the Copyright law, rewriting the TEACH Act, reducing statutory damages for educational infringement, and reforming licensing much like Creative Commons has done.

Technological: These steps would include using tools ("automated interactive licensing) that facilitate getting copyright clearance. “Digital tools could automate and lubricate much of the clearance process, from analyzing whether a license is necessary to securing a license if required.”

Self-regulatory: These steps, which educators can and should tackle immediately are

1. Defining and developing educator best-practices in the use of digital content. Some examples are . . . I would add that as groups of educators define and develop common agreements, they need to first and foremost build common understanding using such excellent sources as the following:

• Lesson plans on teaching about Copyright and Fair Use from Temple University's Media Lab
• Copyright, What's Copyright Video
• User's Rights, Section 107 Video
• MIT's introduction course to Copyright
• Creative Commons videos to build understanding
  

2. Making educationally useful content easily accessible to educators

• Open access journals
• Open Courses (such as MIT)

Conclusion
Digital content offers incredible, unprecedented opportunities for teaching and learning around the world. If we are to truly tap into this rich resource, we need to confront the obstacles mentioned in the Berkman paper. As educators we can no longer sit back and wait for others to take action, we need to be involved in the legal, technological, and personal steps necessary to turn this powerful potential into a shared creative and collaborative culture.

Online privacy: possible, probable, or prohibitive?

As we enjoy the increased advantages of the web 2.0 social world, share ware and “cloud” storage, I concur with the Center for Democracy & Technology that online data privacy is becoming the primary concern of internet users. If not dealt with appropriately, the huge potential the internet holds for the world will be greatly limited.



Even the Net Gen cheerleader, Don Topscott, sees this “dark cloud . . that few Net Geners have yet seen. . . I don’t think the Net Geners fully understand the long-term consequences of sharing intimate information about themselves with the world.” In his book Grown Up Digital, he is alerting us all to the perils hidden on the other side of all these great new tools we've started to take for granted:

1. Miniature audio and video recorders:
Positive = convenience,
Negative = anyone can get a picture of you almost anytime (with or without you being aware) and upload it and share as they choose (not you!)

2. Cell phones with GPS:
Positive = help for when you’re lost or in an emergency situation;
Negative = you can be tracked 24/7/365

3. Social networking software:
Positive = quick, easy connection and access to friends;
Negative = not always having the ability to control what information you’re sharing with whom.

4. Online shopping/banking:
Positive = convenience and time saver;
Negative = sending private data out to the cloud (hoping that it is well encrypted), risk of stolen identities

5. Google (and other powerful search engines):
Positive = powerful search engine
Negative = gathering and selling information about you without your knowledge

Luckily, as the Center for Democracy and Technology states, “a unique combination of tools -- legal, technical, and self-regulatory -- is being designed to address the privacy concerns of Internet users.” Therefore, as educators and internet users, we need to educate ourselves and our students to take the self-regulatory and technical steps possible to safe guard our online data privacy. And as citizens we need to fight for adequate legal regulations that will address these privacy risks.

Self-Regulatory and Technical Steps

Here are a few good resources to increase our own understanding of how to improve privacy and help our students understand

1. 5 steps to better online privacy (includes list for several technical privacy tools including firewalls, cookie removers, anonymous web browsers, and anti-spyware tools) from the Australian government.

2. Extensive guide to Online Privacy from the Center for Democracy & Technology

3. On Guard Online (a Web site sponsored by the federal government and the technology industry to help users stay on guard against Internet fraud, secure their computers, and protect their personal information.) which includes tips, interactive “Cyber smarts” quizzes, and videos about online safety.

Mobile Platform and Cloud Computing

As more and more users online time is shifting to the mobile platform functioning "in the cloud", it is key to learn about and talk with kids about guarding their privacy there as well. The Center for Digital Democracy came up with Ten Questions To Ask Your Cell Phone Provider—and the Online Marketers They Work With—to Protect Your Mobile Privacy.

Legal and Technical Steps

The above issues were some of the more obvious ones. Luckily there are legislative organizations tackling the more complex and "invisible" online privacy issues. Check out this YouTube 7-minute video interview with Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, about the state of online privacy and the challenges citizens face today.


You may also want to check out their extensive Online Guide to Practical Privacy Tools (i.e. snoop proof email, anonymous surfing, and encryption tools.)

It is evident that we need to have regulations in order for companies to be responsible in safeguarding and educating consumers about privacy issues. Here are some specific recent legal actions being taken in this arena:

1. FTC's Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)
2. European Union takes legal action against a British online advertising technology
3. EPIC Files FTC complain concerning GOOGLE Data breach, calls for federal investigation into cloud computing security

Still wondering . . .

We obviously have a long road ahead in our journey of trying to secure online privacy. I remain curious to see to what extent we will ever be able to safeguard our online privacy and to what extent companies will help or hinder the average user in reaching this goal. I remain cautiously hopeful that human ingenuity will overcome all obstacles at the technical and self-regulatory levels. However, don't we need international level of legal steps since functioning in the cloud does not correspond to geopolitcal borders? If we can't get unanimous agreement on nuclear disarmament or a ban on landmines, how can we hope that all nations will agree to the same level of online privacy legislation?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/room929/428260081/

Foot loose, fancy free or crippling foot binding?

What is a digital footprint? (Or finger print, as Rob Rubis proposes as a more appropriate name.)

I have to confess that I had no idea what was meant by a digital footprint a week ago. Therefore, before I can have an opinion of this issue within education, I need to build my own understanding.

There are many available definitions out there including Wikipedia (which in December 2007 had no entry): "Digital Footprints are traces left by someone's activity in a digital environment." The ikeepsafe, an organization that helps families create safe online experiences, puts it in kid-friendly terms: Simply put, a digital footprint is the amount of content, whether it be words, photographs, audio, or video, that is traceable to a given individual. The PEW report then distinguishes between a passive and active digital footprint:

PASSIVE: Personal data made accessible online with no deliberate intervention from an individual.
ACTIVE: Personal data made accessible online through deliberate posting or sharing of information by the user.

So, in launching a discussion about digital footprints with kids, it may be beneficial to show a real basic video such as this one, From before birth to after death, or What's your digital footprint by Debbie Wiel to build some common understanding:

What's Your Digital Footprint?

View more presentations from Debbie Weil.

So what is my imprint?

According to the Pew Report, 47% of online users (published in Dec, 2007) have searched for information about themselves online, up from just 22% five years ago. More than just googling yourself or RSS feeding a tag, it might be an interesting reflection for kids to think about how their digital habits correlate to how much of a footprint they'll have. Similar to the carbon footprint calculators, there are now possibilities for you to reflect on your daily life and the resulting digital imprint. Here are two:
1. From EMC
2. From Discovery


So who cares?

As the PEW report states, "most internet users are not concerned about the amount of information available about them online, and most do not take steps to limit that information. Fully 60% of internet users say they are not worried about how much information is available about them online. Similarly, the majority of online adults (61%) do not feel compelled to limit the amount of information that can be found about them online."

However, there are now enough stories out there justifying all of us caring about monitoring and maintaining a positive digital footprint. As professionals, we need to realize that a growing percentage of employers are checking:

A recent CareerBuilder study found that 26% of all hiring managers use search engines to research the digital footprint of potential applicants and a staggering 50% of recruiters for college graduate jobs exhibited the same behavior. 63% of hiring managers admitted that what they found about applicants on social networks, to use one media type, caused them to not make an offer to applicants.

For those working with HS students, " A recent study by the University of Massachusetts' Center for Market Research found that 26% of college admission offices use search engines to research applicants and 21% search for information about applicants on social networks."

So, what can we do?

I agree with Susi that this all feels a bit “big brotherish” but it also offers opportunities and is the future of our own “professional marketing”

"Put Your Best Digital Footprint Forward: Career Expert Offers Seven Tips for Managing" is a straightforward guide to being proactive for us adults.

For some, you may want to try and "erase" some of your footprint, but this is no easy feat. The BBC in an article entitled "Spread of our digital footprint" asserts that “Wiping your digital footprint completely off the web may be an extreme and expensive measure. It is certainly much better to be careful of what info you let out in the first place”

For kids, awareness is the first step--what is my digital footprint and why do I need to be thinking about this. From there, we need to give students age-appropriate skills to be proactive in monitoring their footprint.

Still wondering

1. Developmentally, adolescents need to play with and try out new identities, take risks, and be able to "grow up" without having to pay a debt later. What implications are there with their current social networking explorations and the permanent prints left?

2. Does anyone really know to what extent our information is being used and/or abused? What is the line between being part of a wonderfully connected world and avoiding the "Hoover" types who want to take advantage? (Imagine what J. Edgar would do in today's world--scary!)

3. How do we learn from the marketing departments who are positively tapping into digital foot printing to help us all become savvier in this area?

Final Reflection on Course #1- Information Literacy and Ourselves as Learners

Project: ES Curriculum Wiki Resource Page

This resource is something I have been thinking about doing for a long time as there is a need for a centrally located, web-based resource center for subject area curriculum. It will be an on-going effort just to get up and running, but the real success will only happen once it becomes a collaborative endeavor and useful resource for teachers. I’ll be most fascinated to see how it evolves over time.

Life-long Learning

This is the best part of this course, of life—the fact that we continue to learn. We live such privileged lives with the world being so accessible at our fingertips. With all that I’ve read (or heard) from my colleagues and others along the way during this course, I have so much more to learn and explore such as:

• Glogster: Chrissy Hellyer referred to this and I’m intrigued—want to check out the possibilities.
• Google calendar: Because of the collaborative capabilities, I’d like to create a curriculum and professional development calendar that is continually updated so that we can always see what people are involved in. I’ll see where this leads. Also, wouldn’t teams or each of the divisions find a google calendar helpful? To be explored.
• Shelfari: Rob referred to this in one of his blogs. Given my love of books, I look forward to exploring this one further.
• Classroom 2.0 Ning: “the social network for those interested in Web 2.0 and collaborative technologies in education.” I hope this can be an entry point for myself into a network of educators since they say, “We especially hope that those who are "beginners" will find this a supportive community and a comfortable place to start being part of the digital dialog.”
• Flatclassroom Conference: Julie Lindsay has definitely whetted my appetite to explore this project and other ones they're involved in.
• Zen Presentations: Kim and Jeff have mentioned this before and I understood the general gist, but want to pursue this further and read the book!
• Many blogs—great thinking, provocative questions, links to more ideas, resources . . . Look forward to having the time to respond to many more now.

Remaining Questions:

Once again, I’m reminded that life and learning are much more about the journey than the destination. With the networked world and ever-evolving tools, this is even more evident. I continue to have some fundamental questions that I’ll consider to ponder along the way:

1. Will we come together to continually search for ways to deepen understanding, not only technological tool skills?
2. Will we find ways to increase and improve the f2f community, not just the networked social community?
3. Will we find a way to balance between our virtual and f2f lives, relationships, and commitments?
4. Will we find a way to tap into this amazing social revolution to improve the world for everyone, not just those who happened to be born in the right place?

Thank you, Jeff, Kim, and colleagues for the learning opportunities you helped facilitate, your reflections, and your passion for improving learning for students. I look forward to the on-going journey!

What is the relationship between our use of technology and critical thinking?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/wallyg/1384170855/

It was refreshing to hear during our discussion yesterday that other educators are as concerned as I am about our role in developing students’ critical thinking skills and how current technology may be impacting that effort.

In "Is Technology Producing A Decline in Critical Thinking And Analysis?" Published by Science Daily out of UCLA, there is reference to research from Patricia Greenfield about how visual literacy has increased, but depth of thought is declining. Her view of technology integration was refreshing, as it seemed balanced and based on actual data.





“No one medium is good for everything,” Greenfield sad. “If we want to develop a variety of skills, we need a balanced media diet. Each medium has costs and benefits in terms of what skills each develops.” She then goes on to talk about advantages and disadvantages of various media. Prensky should perhaps focus his ranting towards laparoscopic surgeons rather than educators as there is data that say gaming skills are a good predictor of these surgeons’ success.

Greenfield also refers to studies of classes where students are listening to speakers: Those who did NOT have access to Internet learned more than those who did. I think this speaks to the issue brought up during our open forum yesterday about focused listening and our need to work with students about when and where use of certain tools is appropriate and helpful and when they’re not. Perhaps if the US Congressmen had had such guidance, they wouldn’t have produced such embarrassingly juvenile twitter statements yesterday when listening to Obama’s speech. (click here to see Washington Post article.)

Are we becoming "Googlized?"


Greenfield also cites research about how “multi-tasking prevents people from getting a deeper understanding of information.” This speaks directly to the article from the Atlantic, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" As Nicholas Carr, the author, writes, “The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.” He attributes this to the extensive time he spends on time surfing and searching, as well as interacting with his multiple other communication tools. I was disturbed to what extent I have felt the exact same thing happening to me.

Greenfield refers to studies that show that reading develops “imagination, induction, reflection and critical thinking, as well as vocabulary . . . reading for pleasure is the key to developing these skills.” Carr similarly refers to Maryanne Wolf, a developmental psychologist from Tufts University who says, “We are not only what we read. We are how we read.” Wolf hypothesizes that the current approach of online reading for efficiency may be turning us into information decoders rather than deeply engaged readers who interpret, make connections, and grow original ideas. And she argues (and I believe many of us would concur) “deep reading is indistinguishable from deep thinking.”

Like we were all talking about yesterday, the current media seem to make us all a bit ADHD (not to mention OCD). Carr’s analysis is that since most online content is injected with “hyperlinks, blinking ads, and gewgaws” that we are distracted and unable to fully concentrate. Carr goes on to assert that Google and other such companies do not want to encourage “leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.” How true—the more links I click on the more revenue in their account.

I appreciate what Google does in terms of efficiently giving me access to information and more effectively organizing the “tsunami of information” available. However, I now, more than ever, believe that we educators need to focus our energies and talents on finding ways to keep the deep and critical thinking central to what we have kids spend their time and energy on, regardless of the tools involved.

Adopt and Adapt: Implications for teaching & learningImplications for teaching & learning

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pagedooley/3032068934/

Obviously I’m an ignorant 21st century immigrant, but Prensky once again makes assertions that I find not only annoying, but make me wonder what his vision is for "Edutopia."

Catchy phrase, but on what grounds does Mr Prensky base all of his assertions about digital natives?

I agree with what many bright “connected” educators have to say about the “myth of digital natives” (read this commentary—as well as one by Chrissy Hellyer who led me to the connection!) However, I’ve not had any hard data on which to base my own thinking.

Now, having a couple 20 something digital natives live with us for several months, I wonder what data Prensky has to make these sweeping generalizations. These digital natives grew up in an economically advantaged situation, attending private schools and universities while having all the latest in technology at their finger tips. They are both very “connected” via technology, but not much more than me, the digital geezer?

Interestingly enough, there are some ways that they prefer to do “old things in the old way” that I would never even consider. For example, they both write their blogs out by hand before revising and posting. Here I am, the digital dinosaur, who hasn’t written anything by hand in many years. But Prensky says that we digital immigrants are the problem, the barrier to effective use of technology in the educational setting. Hmmm. . . . are we dialoguing with ALL kids and getting their input as to how these tools might help them learn or are we purposely creating a divide between "us" and "them"?

Implications for teaching and learning

How about Prensky's statement that today’s students request to have email and instant messaging . . . “that they NEED things faster than their teachers.” Like the digital natives, we are all expecting faster turn around time. But like us digital dinosaurs, the digital natives are questioning their “addictions” to some of these tools. For example, there are many digital natives giving up “facebook” for lent right this minute, as they think it is disruptive to their focus and studies. Interesting—what would Mr. Prensky have to say about that one?

What kind of learning does he value?

“I bet they would complete the “standard” curriculum in half the time it now takes.” So, Mr. Prensky believes the curriculum is about “getting through” or “coverage” rather than thinking and building understanding? I guess us dinosaurs just think more slowly (I do think my mind has been Googlized) than the digital natives or is it perhaps that Prensky prefers doing things fast to doing things well?

The New World of Work and the Seven Survival Skills (Wagner)

There are many futurists attempting to predict what kids will need for the unknowable future. For example, here is Tim Wagner’s list from The Global Achievement Gap:

1. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
2. Collaboration Across Networks and Leading by Influence
3. Agility and Adaptability
4. Initiative and Entrepreneurialism
5. Effective Oral and Written Communication
6. Accessing and Analyzing Information
7. Curiosity and Imagination

Shouldn’t we educators be thinking of how we’re going to adopt and adapt our current paradigms in order to embed these key needed skills in meaningful, authentic learning, while simultaneously tapping into the appropriate (and often engaging) tools available?

Horizon Report

For that very reason, I think this report is informative and at the same time looking for solutions for the future that simultaneously recognize how kids are meeting their social needs of connection. For example, in the conclusion they state, “educational program could be positioned to step in and support moments when youth are motivated to move from friendship-driven to more interest-driven forms of new media use.” They are recognizing where kids are, but looking for specific ideas where educators can tap into for learning.

The report also recognizes that the focus should be about learning when they suggestion “kids and adults should first be on the same page on the normative questions of learning and literacy.” What a idea—dialoguing about what we need to learn and why BEFORE we talk tools!

The report also brings up the key issue of getting access to the many disadvantaged kids so this current “social revolution” doesn’t remain accessible only to the “elite.” I would like to read more about this issue so we don’t be come further divided between the haves and the have-nots. Anyone have some suggested reading, connections, thoughts on that one?