The Newest

Collaboration, Transformation and Innovation: Challenges for the future in a "new school" context

0

I have had the unique experience of being invited to be a foundation staff member of an Education Queensland school that opened its doors to students on the first day of the 2010 school year.  My role was to establish the school library, or “Discovery Centre” as we call it, the computer network, and to support teachers with digital pedagogies in the planning, resourcing and to a certain extent, collaborate on the implementation of rich and differentiated curriculum.  A key aspect of my role is to develop digital literacies in both students and staff alike, and as we are constantly growing in numbers, my colleagues are also my learners, and I continually reassessing needs as our school community defines itself and evolves.

As Dezuanni (2010) states, the relationship between young people, media and popular culture is changing, and education needs to respond to this.  I see myself perfectly situated to not only respond personally in my role as eLearning/Resource Manager, but as a member of our school curriculum leadership team I can ensure that my colleagues do so as well.  In fact I think it imperative that I lead by example as an advocate for transformational pedagogies.

I stay up to date by:

•    Subscribing to the blogs and “follow” influential practitioners in digital pedagogies using social networking applications such as Twitter
•    Maintaining membership on a range of TL, curriculum and eLearning discussion lists as well as professional associations such as SLAQ, QSITE and ISTE
•    Participating in OneChannel (EQ’s version of Elluminate) live and “on demand” (recorded) PD sessions
•    Attending the annual eLearning Innovation Expo and Creating Future Libraries Conferences (have also attended the Leading Digital Schools and Digital Diversity Conferences, both in 2010) and Slide-to-Learn conferences and online events this year
•    Participating in eLearning, 1:1 and Library 21 masterclasses as the opportunity has arisen
•    Undertaking Master of Education (Teacher Librarianship) studies
•    Attending the Australian Council for Computers in Education international study tour in 2009 (planning to go again in 2012, visiting a number of international schools that are leaders in digital pedagogies, culminating in the ISTE International Conference)

Having always been an early adopter of new technologies, utilising and promoting the use of the tools and resources available through the Learning Place, Education Queensland’s (EQ’s) secure eLearning environment and mentoring my peers in its effective use became and has been a part of my role over the past 10 years as a district and regional eLearning Mentor.  In addition to this I am an Accredited Facilitator of the Digital Pedagogy Licence level of the Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework, as well as an Intel Teach to the Future Master Trainer.

Most importantly, I have collaboratively coordinated statewide online events such as the 2007 and 2008 Online Literature Festival, and continue to utilise the Learning Place’s edStudio and Virtual Classroom spaces in my daily practice.  I design online collaborative spaces that engage my students and colleagues in contemporary teaching and learning experiences and modeling digital literacy lessons for my colleagues at school.

Why am I sharing this information??

Because maintaining my accreditation and personal certification (Digital Pedagogy Licence Advanced - 2009) for this period of time is a result of currency of knowledge with digital practices and current learning theories.

My goal is to continue mentoring my colleagues, as I have found a passion for collaborating with my peers and enjoy their successes with new ways of teaching and learning as if they were my own!

I believe the Australian Curriculum is a perfect vehicle to explore and extend the relationship between young people, popular culture and text.  The term “prosumers” (Lee & McLoughlin, 2007) is an appropriate description of where the Australian Curriculum writers see our learners being situated in the coming years, where they will not merely consume content that is already available, but produce content and artifacts of their own to share their ideas, knowledge and understandings of the world with others.  The Internet is a media form that enables students to do this with a wider audience than has ever before been possible.

An example of the HOW of Curriculum into the Classroom, EQ's response to the Australian Curriculum (Education QLD, 2011)


Examples that lend themselves to prosumerism can be found throughout the English curriculum.  Students having opportunities to construct multimodal texts or respond to bias in advertising by viewing and analyzing advertisements accessed from YouTube will be more the expectation rather than the curricular exception in future classrooms.

This means that our teachers need to “get with the program” NOW!!

The availability of and ready access to resources via the Internet means that our students will more that ever be faced with the challenge of judging the quality of sources they come across, and determining their validity, suitability or otherwise for a variety of purposes (Lee & McLoughlin, 2007).  A new set of digital literacies needs to be developed to ensure that students can participate effectively in this new knowledge economy which emphasises creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation and is enabled by ICT tools designed to extend personal boundaries and increase social connectedness (McLoughlin & Lee, 2008).

Jenkins (2006) describes an extension of existing literacy skills that incorporate higher order critical thinking skills and visual literacies associated with interpreting information online.  Beetham and Sharpe (2007) also subscribe to the notion of different kinds of knowledge practice, and new processes of inquiry, dialogue and connectivity.  Prensky (2009) calls this practice “digital wisdom” - the wisdom arising from the use of digital technology to access cognitive power beyond our innate capacity, as well as in the prudent use of technology to enhance our capabilities.  This wisdom involves understanding the implications of accessing and remixing or retransmitting information produced by others, including awareness of Copyright restrictions and acceptable use and attribution requirements.  The flip side of this is students being aware of the implications of sharing their own artifacts and personal information beyond their trusted circle of immediate family and friends.

As an educator in these changing yet exciting times, the challenge is to facilitate learning, be open to new media tools and strategies, as well as fostering information evaluation skills, as well as the blending, remixing and recombination of ideas to reach creative solutions (McLoughlin & Lee, 2008).  It is my goal to stay abreast of the tools, contemporary media forms, technologies and pedagogies so that I will be able to continue to succeed in my role! Not a small task, but one that I relish!

This blog entry was posted by Bronwyn White


References and Resources

Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R., (2007). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning. London, England: Routledge.

Dezuanni, M. (2010). CLN647 Innovative Pedagogies, Transforming Institutions and Mapping Future Directions. Lecture 11 QUT Portal [Lecture Notes]. Retrieved from: http://week11resources.notlong.com

Jenkins, H. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. MacArthur Foundation

Lee, M. & McLoughlin, C., (2007), Teaching and Learning in the Web 2.0 Era: Empowering Students through Learner-Generated Content. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 4:10, 21-33

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M., (2008), International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. The Three P’s of Pedagogy for the Networked Society: Personalization, Participation, and Productivity. 20:1, 10-27

Prensky, M (2009). H. sapiens digital: From digital immigrants and digital natives to digital wisdom. Innovate: Journal of Online Education. 5(3). Retrieved from: http://www.wisdompage.com/Prensky01.html

Twitter link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NshQFrpC2O4
(Clip on YouTube explaining the social networking tool Twitter)

Continue..

Filed Under:

The Internet’s Door to Learning: Opening it wider for our youth within the context of formal education

0

When searching for a journal article to blog about, I was keen to locate one that explored the pedagogical implications of young learners’ engagement with Web 2.0.  While there was a proliferation that investigated learner-generated knowledge using Web 2.0 tools in a tertiary setting, few dealt with the concept of youth as producers or creators of knowledge online in a primary or secondary schooling context. 

The journal article Teaching and Learning in the Web 2.0 Era: Empowering Students through Learner-Generated Content (Lee & McLoughlin, 2007) describes a gradual transformation of curriculum and instruction in a higher education context in response to the emergence of Web 2.0 technologies and social networking tools.  This transformation has lead to a higher prevalence of user-led content and knowledge production, which the authors suggest necessitates changes in pedagogy to cater for the shift to greater learner control, agency and engagement in content creation.

Lee & McLoughlin (2007) detail three metaphors of learning: the acquisition metaphor and participation metaphor (Sfard (1998) cited in Lee & McLoughlin, 2007), and the more contemporary knowledge creation metaphor of learning (Paavlova & Hakkarainen (2005) cited in Lee & McLoughlin, 2007).  They then go on to provide exemplars of learner content creation in higher education, and suggest potential challenges that tools such as web logs (blogs), media sharing applications, wikis and social networking sites may present educators.  In this blog posting I will outline those learning metaphors, which in my opinion make a relevant framework for reviewing contemporary pedagogy.  I will then respond to the metaphors with respect to modern learning theorists, relating them to the Circuit of Culture (du Gay, Hall, Janes, Mackay & Negus, 1997) with respect to the Internet.  I will also explore my experience with these learning metaphors in my own primary school teaching and learning context.

Acquisition Metaphor of Learning:

Learning is receptive, a process of acquiring chunks of information, typically delivered by the teacher (Lee & McLoughlin, 2007).  With respect to the Internet, the learner would then become the consumer of resources accessed online. 

With respect to the Circuit of Culture (du Gay et al, 1997) and the Internet, there is an extremely heavy emphasis on learners as consumers of information that is available to them, but little else in the way of the other elements of the circuit, or the interplay between the elements.  This metaphor relates a didactic approach to pedagogy, albeit with some interactivity as students utilise interactive resources such as learning objects.  Students are still however very much directed to the conclusions they will draw though their interactions with such resources.


Graphic of acquisition metaphor (Sfard, 1998), with respect to the Circuit of Culture (du Gay et al, 1997) Bronwyn White, 2011.

In my primary school context, much of the use of the Internet is typified by the teachers delivering Internet resources such as YouTube clips, informative podcasts or simply by sharing websites with the students via a data projector and Interactive Whiteboard as a provocation to classroom discussions.  Pedagogically, teachers are using “new ways to do old stuff” (Prensky, 2001).  


Participation Metaphor of Learning:

Learning is a process of participating in various cultural practices and shared learning activities.  The focus is on the process, i.e. the learning to learn, rather than on outcomes or products (Lee & McLoughlin, 2007).  This metaphor places an emphasis on the social process of knowledge construction espoused by socio-cultural theorists such as Vygotsky (1978), and Lave & Wenger (1991).

Again referring to the Circuit of Culture (du Gay et al, 1997) and the Internet, there is much more of a balance as learners, albeit with regulated access in some education systems, are able to adopt an online identity when participating and communicating with peers to access the information that is available to them via the Web.  (Note the exclusion of production from this model as the emphasis is on the process of learning.)


Graphic of participation metaphor (Sfard,1998), with respect to the Circuit of Culture (du Gay et al, 1997) Bronwyn White, 2011.

My teaching colleagues who have been incorporating digital pedagogies into their practice have instigated their students’ participation in online events such as the annual Online Literature Festival, which involves their students taking part in synchronous activities such as author chats and asynchronous activities such as book raps, where students respond to questions about a shared text, and can view other’s responses to the same questions, enabling a deeper interpretation and understanding of the set text.  The activities that students undertake are designed by teachers, and the learning outcomes, although varied, are typically those that are anticipated in the planning stages of constructing the event activities.  Nonetheless, students have the opportunity to share their ideas with others beyond their immediate classroom environment, and they are learning a new way of forming information by accepting/rejecting ideas and comments from other learners in the process.  These are typical examples of how the learning theory of connectivism (Siemens, 2004) might be enacted in a primary (or secondary school) education setting.

Knowledge Creation Metaphor of Learning:

Learning means becoming part of a community, through creation and contribution of learning resources.  Students become “prosumers” (both producers and consumers) of knowledge, ideas and artifacts (Lee & McLoughlin, 2007).  In this type of learning community, the members are the managers of the information and artifacts, and move beyond mere participation to be active creators of ideas, resources and knowledge. 

Access to the Internet and a raft of Web 2.0 tools enables learners to bridge geographic and age and cultural gaps to share ideas and resources on a scale that has never before been possible.  “Wisdom of crowds” (Suroweicki, 2004) has become more of a reality through the use of tools such as wikis and more possible through cloud computing applications such as Google docs, and social networking sites such as Facebook and Nings.

This reference to the Circuit of Culture (du Gay et al, 1997) and the Internet includes the element missing from the previous learning metaphor: production.  When learners actively create knowledge utilising the Internet as a form of Media, every element of the Circuit is in play, and interrelates with every other element on some level.


Graphic of knowledge creation metaphor (Paavlova & Hakkarainen (2005), with respect to the Circuit of Culture (du Gay et al, 1997) Bronwyn White, 2011.

Although regulation by my employer determines that social networking sites such as Facebook and Nings and cloud computing activities that require individual logons such as Google docs are filtered and therefore not available to my students, we have been provided with a secure online environment called the Learning Place. Within this eLearning environment my students CAN become active creators of knowledge and collaborate and communicate with their peers 24/7 utilising wikis, blogs, chatrooms and virtual classrooms.  Those teachers who are transforming their pedagogies in an effort to prepare their students for participation in 21st Century society are enabling their students to share multimodal creations, seek and receive feedback, blog their learning reflections, collaborate with peers to produce joint texts, design online digital portfolios, “favourite” commonly accessed resources, “like” blog postings and resources, and generate their own online identity by creating a profile and avatar to represent themselves within this learning community.


Lee & McLoughlin (2007) conclude their article by identifying potential challenges to academe in incorporating the production and adoption of learner-generated content in higher education, with suggestions of possible ways to meet those challenges.  Concerns identified include copyright, ownership and intellectual property implications in this era of "mix, rip and burn".  In addition to this they identify the learner's challenge of judging the quality and validity of information sources they come across, as well as the need for essential generic skills such as communication, presentation and digital literacy skills.  They make the final point that current pedagogical practices need to be extended and transformed, whilst keeping the learners and their learning needs at the forefront in a bid to afford students the capacity to create and disseminate ideas and knowledge.


This final point is very much in line with the strategic direction of my employer, to the extent that I can draw distinct parallels between the three metaphors of learning that Lee & McLoughlin (2007) believe conceptualise the dynamics of student learning, and the Smart Classrooms Professional Development Framework:
  • Acquisition metaphor pedagogies - ICT Certificate level of teacher accreditation
  • Participation metaphor pedagogies - Digital Pedagogy Licence teacher accreditation
  • Knowledge Creation metaphor pedagogies - Digital Pedagogy Licence Advanced, which acknowledges teachers who employ transformative practices
Detailed discussion of these parallels would however be a topic for an entirely new blog posting!



If you were inspired by this blog you can access the original article online here or you might also like to read further publications by the authors such as the journal article below on the subject of pedagogy for a contemporary online society:  

McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. (2008),  The Three P’s of Pedagogy for the Networked Society: Personalization, Participation, and Productivity. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 20:1, 10-27

(Further exploration of pedagogical implications of learner-generated content)

Or

Luckin, R., Clark, W., Graber, R., Logan, K., Mee, A. & Oliver, M. (2009), Do Web 2.0 tools really open the door to learning? Practices, perceptions and profiles of 11–16-year-old students. Learning, Media and Technology, 34:2, 87-104

(A study of student engagement online with students from 27 UK schools... findings that with this age group the Internet was used largely for communication rather than collaboration or creation!)

This blog entry was posted by Bronwyn White

References:


Du Gay, P., Hall, S., Janes, L., Mackay, H. & Negus, K. (1997). Doing cultural studies: the story of the sony walkman. London: Sage/The Open University.



Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, M. & McLoughlin, C., Teaching and Learning in the Web 2.0 Era: Empowering Students through Learner-Generated Content. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 4:10, 21-33

Paavola, S. & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor – An emergent epistemological approach to learning. Science and Education, 14(6), 535-557.

Prensky, M., (2001), Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9:5, 1-6

Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4-13.

Siemens, G., (2004), Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age
Retrieved from:
http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
22nd October, 2011

Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds. New York, NY: Doubleday.

Vygotsky, L., (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Continue..

Filed Under:

The Dilemma of Regulating the Internet

0




The internet provides opportunities for creativity and innovation, social connection, and the free flow of information. It also exposes users, particularly children, to harms, e.g., sexual exploitation, racism, cyber bullying and charges of copyright infringement. Thomas Wold published an article in Norway in 2010 entitled "Protection and access: to regulate young people's internet use". Wold wanted to look at people dealing with these dilemmas in actual life, considering not only the “grand ideals of free flow of information and civic participation” (p.64), but also mundane daily life in schools and libraries where practical arrangements for computer access and proper use of computers must be considered. His aim was to examine how the risks might be limited without limiting opportunities at the same time – a balanced approach. I will consider here what is a balanced approach to regulating the internet.

In examining regulation, it is useful to also consider the connections between regulation and other aspects of its use – such as consuming material from the internet (consumption) and producing material to contribute to various sites (production). The “Circuit of Culture” referred to in this blog models these and other interconnections – and argues that only by including other aspects can you consider the whole of a cultural phenomenon (Dezuani, 2010). Regulation and its effect on consumption and production in particular will be considered here.

In Norway one of the documents to be complied with in internet use is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Wold, 2010). Wold says the two sided picture (regulation versus freedom) emerges in this document: it protects children’s right to distribute and seek information of any kind through any medium of their choice, but the right is subject to legal restrictions. The legal restrictions safeguard rights and reputations of others, and protect national security, public order, public health and morals. This provides a sound basis for his argument for a balanced approach.

Wold (2010) conducted a detailed study in Norway, using semi-structured qualitative in-depth interviews with teachers and librarians to obtain his evidence. These teachers and librarians thought of the internet first and foremost as an educational resource, and saw that young people enjoyed using it. Their approach to the undesirable web pages children could be exposed to was to deal with it through dialogue with the children rather than strong restrictions. They saw misleading or false information on the internet presenting a golden opportunity to have students reflect on the validity of the content on hateful pages and aspects of freedom of expression (p.77). They further stated the importance of children being able to play around and find information on sensitive or taboo topics – echoing the rights of children in the UN Convention referred to earlier.

In the UK in 2004 a survey was conducted into experiences of young people using the internet, and their parents, called UK Children Go Online (Livingstone and Bober, 2004). The authors of report of this survey support Wold’s (2010) statement of faith in children’s ability to learn about and deal with harmful material – saying the widespread risks in internet use are in fact experienced by many children as worrying problems they would like to solve. In fact the survey found children perceive a higher incidence of risky, problematic experiences online than do their parents. Even so, the parents themselves favoured a multi-stakeholder approach to regulation – including more education in internet literacy, more and better teaching and guidance in schools. The authors concluded children’s involvement and co-operation in managing, guiding and regulating their internet use is easily sought and effective.

Wold (2010) agrees with this argument of involving children in learning about harmful material, saying dialogue with children is a better way of mediation than strong restrictions. Wold found the biggest challenge for teachers in his study was to teach students to use the computer in a sensible way, with critical awareness. The students were already mostly acquainted with the computer as a source of entertainment but unaccustomed to using it as a tool. They thought teaching critical awareness should include noticing manipulative rhetoric, and being aware of potential dangers of revealing personal information, as well as the obvious exposure to violent, pornographic, hateful and unreliable content. Teachers in his study even saw that students lacking competence to be critical of sources of information was a more important challenge than protecting against harmful content. Others may not give such a high priority to critical awareness – he makes no claims that this is a general attitude, so it may be a high priority only for this particular group.

Another argument against strong regulation of internet use in schools is the promotion of equity and access. Wold (2010) considered access in terms of availability of computers to students as well restricting web pages. His study found that for some children the library was the only place they could access computers. Livingstone and Bober (2004) found in their survey higher internet users have more benefits but also more risks, and lower users less benefits and risks. This supports the argument for increasing access in schools, and providing guidance and education for a higher benefit to harm ratio.

Kapitzke (2009), in an Australian context, supports Wold’s argument that young people need room to push the boundaries of language, sound and image for literacy learning – but sees the regulation which most inhibits this coming from governments. She says present day governments, in spite of their rhetoric to “be creative”, impose an increasingly onerous copyright permission environment, particularly since the signing of the 2004 Australia-US Free Trade Agreement which has preceded increasingly restrictive litigious copyright law. Changes have included moving copyright infringement from the domain of civil law to that of criminal law – so that school children sharing retooled songs online can be classified as criminals (p.3). This analysis of criminal legal classification is not supported by any instances of such charges actually be made against children, at least in Australia – so may be an untested legal change. Kaptizke urges school libraries to resist the temptation to return to the “compliant safe spaces of conformist copyright education practices”.

In conclusion Wold’s article argues for a balanced approach to internet regulation – guiding school students’ use of the internet by paying attention not only to the kinds of websites used, but teaching them how to be critical of content of all sites. Other authors support this approach to provide students with the many benefits of competent internet use.


REFERENCES

Dezuani, M. (2010). CLN647 The ‘Circuit of Culture’ in New Media Contexts: Lecture 6 [Lecture Notes]. Retrieved from http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_75617_1%26url%3D

Kapitzke, Cushla (2009) Rethinking copyrights for the library through Creative Commons licensing. Library Trends, 58(1). P 95-108 (In Press). Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au

Livingstone, S. & Bober, M. (2004) UK Children Go Online. Retrieved from http://www.children-go-online.net.

Wold, T. (2010). Protection and access: To regulate young people’s internet use. International journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 6, 63-79. doi: 10.1386/macp.6.1.63/1


Posted by Paula

Continue..

Filed Under:

Representation: Transforming My Library

0

Image: Wilson, T. (2005) via Flickr

Throughout the study of the unit ‘Youth, Popular Culture and Texts’ I have constantly found myself nodding along to the lectures and audibly exclaiming ‘yes’ or ‘that’s right’ when completing the readings (much to the confusion of my husband!).  I have found that the opinions of experts, as well as core materials from the unit, have reinforced the picture of young people’s learning and online interaction, as well as the challenges faced by educators, that I see on a daily basis in my library.

In the business world, the Internet has created a unique opportunity for marketing digital products.  In 2004, Chris Anderson of ‘Wired’ magazine coined the term ‘the long tail’ to describe the way the Internet was able to allow companies to market a very large number of products, that were not on any ‘top ten’ lists, in a very profitable way (Anderson, 2006 ).  In other words, web stores such as iTunes and the Book Depository offer people the opportunity to not only purchase the most popular or promoted music or books, but a vast range of products that cover every possible representation of the world imaginable (Dezuanni, 2010).  For young people, this wealth of choice allows them to truly explore their interests and the way they see the world.
 
In the same way, the Internet allows our students to access a large amount of information that can’t be monetised but may only be valued by a small proportion of the population (Dezuanni, 2010).  In this way, students who are interested in Japanese anime may access the online fan community as a method of self-expression or alternatively, students who desire to know the specifics of python ownership can also find instructions and support via the Internet.  This ‘long tail’ of knowledge can be immensely powerful in education, however is also be feared by some teacher librarians who worry that physical library collections may become obsolete due to their inability to house such timely variety of informative material.

In our library, we have just introduced ‘OverDrive’, an online collection of eBooks and audiobooks which can be accessed by students via the Internet and downloaded to any personal digital device they choose (OverDrive Inc, 2011).

The theory of the long tail is a good reference point as we choose our collection.  Via OverDrive, we will be able to choose a variety of materials that may only be valued by smaller proportions of the school community.  Whereas these students may not currently access the library’s collection regularly, by providing material that appeals to their world view we are hoping to promote reading and engage them more with the services offered by the library.  OverDrive also allows the cross-promotion of material, something that libraries traditionally are only able to achieve when students ask staff for recommendations.  In Chris Anderson’s research he discovered the power of the long tail in the way that Amazon, an online bookstore, created a best selling product from a book that was nearly out of print, simply by offering it to patrons as they purchased a similar title (Andersen, 2004).  Via OverDrive, I hope to expand the literature experience of students by promoting new or similar titles as well as encouraging students to diversify their reading (or listening) into unfamiliar genres.

Another feature of OverDrive is the ability for the school to upload local content for access by students and parents.  This has allowed us to upload content such as our College Annual (magazine), as well as videos of school events and student work (with permission) such as outstanding artworks or short stories.  This process allows students to create representations of themselves and life as they know it to publish in a safe place that is accessible by their peers.  In this way, students gain recognition for their accomplishments and are able to access information that is localised

Through this unit, I have realised that young people do care about the way they, and the world around them, are represented.  Many wish to access information, entertainment or learning resources that reflect the way they make meaning of the world.  The Internet allows young people to do just this.  In my practise, I will continue to promote digital literacy so that young people may safely and responsibly navigate and contribute to the wealth of resources that is the World Wide Web.  In the same way, I will continue to enhance the school’s digital library using OverDrive to provide young people with a variety of resources from external sources, as well as ensuring that student work is valued and made accessible to their searching peers.

References:

Anderson, C. (2004) The Long Tail. Wired, 12(10).  Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/tail.html

Anderson, C. (2006). The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. New York: Hyperion.

Dezuanni, M. (2010) CLN647 Youth, Popular Culture, and Texts: Lecture 9 [Slides & Audio].  Retrieved from http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_75617_1%26url%3D

OverDrive. (2011). About. Retrieved October 11, 2011 from http://www.overdrive.com/About/

Wilson, T. (2005). The Long Tail [Image].  Retrieved October 11, 2011 from http://www.flickr.com/photos/timwilson/38467067/

Continue..

Filed Under:

Transformation Into a 21st Century Classroom

0

It is not unusual today to find that students in a classroom are more technological savvy then their teachers. Some teachers feel like they’re losing control because students know more than they do. For teachers there is the problem of rapidly changing digital media, which makes it difficult for them to keep abreast of the latest devices and how to use them effectively. A simple way to assist teachers to stay abreast is to listen to the students. Let them lead the way in what they know and can do with new media. We are all learners and we can gain so much from shared knowledge (Prensky 2007; Dezuanni, 2010).

Some examples of how new media could be used in the classroom include using certain digital games to inspire descriptive and creative writing and posting homework assignments online whereby the students have to submit it back online (Prensky, 2007). The teacher-librarian plays an important role in introducing some of these key technologies into the school by offering professional development to teachers to build their knowledge and build different perspectives of how new media can be implemented into the classroom. Teachers need to develop innovative pedagogies to use new media in the classroom. It takes small steps to bring about change and below offers a starting point. Here are four brief descriptions of digital media, each having a valuable learning focus that could be used in the classroom.

Wikipedia
There have been negative comments made about Wikipedia, however research is showing that this need not be the case, if the site is used wisely. Firstly, it offers a quick reference for some general information about a topic and gives the user some further ideas as to what they could be searching for. The differences between online searching and online research should be raised when using Wikipedia. Secondly, teachers should be encouraging students to become contributors to this site and evaluate one another’s contributions, therefore building a participatory culture in the classroom. Using Wikipedia raises the issue of intellectual property, so a classroom discussion on this subject would enhance learning in a real-life context (Prensky, 2007, p. 43).

Podcasting
This is a simple easy format for students to submit an oral report as an assignment. This can be done at an individual level or as a group to present a group report. It does not take long at all to work out how to record an MP3 file and save it to the computer (Prensky, 2007, p. 44).

Instant Messaging
One way to be creative with digital media is to ask students for ideas on how to use the digital media in the classroom. An example of what one class came up with is below.




“… interviewing experts using standard English, practicing business etiquette and conversational skills, doing research on the health risks of mobile phones, text messaging ideas such as to speakers while they are debating, reviewing silently for quizzes, and taking pictures of notes and assignments on the board (Prensky, 2007, p. 44)."

Mobile Phone Cameras
The use of mobile phone cameras in the classroom is limitless. Students are able to collect evidence for journalism articles, see the progress of a science experiment by collecting scientific data, and be able to visually present ideas from all curriculum areas (Prensky, 2007, p. 45).

Teaching students the aspects of the theory Circuit of Culture (Du Gay et al. 2007)when using digital media only increases understanding of culture and develops higher order thinking. Promoting digital media knowledge, communication, creativity and innovation skills in the classroom, will only enhance strong leaders for the future global environment (Gee, 2008, p. 32).

As a teacher-librarian it is important to stay abreast of the latest technology to be informed if an item would be beneficial to students’ learning. Areas that I would pursue include:




  • Build a rapport with the administration team and be committed to attend meetings in pursuit of implementing new media into the classroom.



  • Stay informed of the latest research by joining discussion groups and following blogs and by being affiliated with professional associations.



  • Run Professional Development to inform teachers of the latest research and devices available to enhance learning.



  • Assist in curriculum planning sessions with teachers to ensure that technological activities are used, such as Education Queensland’s The Learning Place.



  • Include parents in information sessions to inform them of the benefits of students using new digital media.

    For schools to become 21st Century learning hubs everybody needs to work together to enable technologies to be successful. This not only includes teachers and students, but also administrators and parents. Acknowledging strengths in each other leads to everybody learning simultaneously. As Prensky states, “We are all learners. We are all teachers (2077, p. 46).



    References

    Du Gay, P. Hall, S., Janes, L., Mackay, H. And Negus, K. (1997) Doing Cultural Studies: the Story of the Sony Walkman. London: Sage/The Open University.

    Dezuanni, M. (2010). CLN647 Innovative Pedagogies, Transforming Institutions and Mapping Future Directions. Lecture 11 QUT Portal [Lecture Notes]. Retrieved from http://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_75617_1%26url%3D

    Gee, J. (2008). Getting over the slump: innovation strategies to promote children’s learning, The Joan Ganz Cooney Center for Sesame Workshop. Retrieved from http://www.joanganzcooneycenter.org/Reports-19.html

    Prensky, M. (2007). Emerging Technologies for Learning (Volume 2). British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (Becta).
    Retrieved from http://www.sosuaarhus-international.com/dokumenter/Computer%20Clubhouse%20Inspiration/Game%20based%20learning%20inspiration/PRENSKY%20-%20How%20to%20teach%20with%20technology.pdf

Continue..

Filed Under:

What Happens to Our Online Identity?

2

There are many online resources available to aid teachers in teaching about digital media. While working on Youth Identity and the Internet I came across the following video, from a 2010 Summer School held at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society. It depicts a young person called Molly when she first started using the Internet as a teenager, and the types of information she uploaded to the Internet. Years go by and Molly grows older and matures and wants to change her profile online. The bottom line is the original information Molly put out there when she was a teenager is still a part of her online identity. It will never go away! Have a watch!



Re: Born Digital, in Video: Identities






This short video is simple and straight to the point about what becomes of the information we upload to the Internet. I think the clip is a great discussion topic and it gives something for students to think about.

As an educator, the topic of Identity and the Internet needs to be addressed at the beginning of each teaching year to reinforce the idea of being safe while working online. YouTube is a popular form of Web 2.0 media and easy to use in a classroom. Using a YouTube video to teach young people about issues, helps to reinforce the message or key point and it is a way of encouraging students to reflect and be creative to come up with new ideas (Duffy, 2008).


References

Berkman Center for Internet and Society. (2010). Re: Born Digital, in Video: Identities [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvrbgKDEii0

Duffy, P. (2008). Engaging the YouTube Google-Eyed Generation: Strategies for Using Web 2.0 in Teaching and Learning. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 6(2), 11-30. Retrieved from www.ejel.org/issue/download.html?idArticle=64

Continue..

Filed Under:

News Alert D-Day is Coming and You Will Lose Your Identity!

2

freedigitalphotos.net: Hacker


The following subheading caught my eye when searching the Internet:
D-DAY is coming for a generation of young fraud victims who post too much personal information about themselves on the Internet. The Adelaide Now subheading made me stop and think about the future for our younger generation who freely give information about themselves online.

After a Parliamentary Inquiry into Cybercrime it was noted that organised criminals are preparing intimate details of young people ready for future use. Queensland police have stated that this information is regularly updated through a third party by cyberstalking their victim, ready to create credit cards in their name for when they turn 18. See also a recent report from Sunrise on 7 (2011) that supports these claims.

A South Australian police officer claims that because young people do not have the life skills, they are unaware of how much information they reveal about themselves online. With statistics as high as 2.7 million children aged five to fourteen, 79% have had Internet access in Australia (Milnes & Viellaris, 2010). This raises concerns about the safety of using the Internet.

Livingstone (2010), a professor in Social Psychology, offers another view to this panic alert of online risks to children. In a keynote speech she talks about her study into online risks and states that there has always been the nature of risks and vulnerability offline and evidence is growing to state that young people who are vulnerable offline are also vulnerable online, however the benefits working online far outweigh not having access to it. It does make an interesting read, however, personally, I feel it is up to parents and educators to forewarn and continue to discuss with young people about the consequences of revealing too much information about themself online.

What do you think the future holds for young people who do this?


References

Livingstone, S. (2010). E-Youth: (future) policy implications: reflections on online risk, harm and vulnerability. Keynote address at e-Youth: balancing between opportunities and risks. UCSIA & MIOS University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27849/1/eYouth_(future)_policy_implications_(LSERO_version).pdf


Milnes, M. & Viellaris, R. (2010). Youth Identities an Online Commodity. [Online] Adelaide Now. Retrieved 20/09/11 from http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/attack-of-identity-the-online-thieves/story-e6frea83-1225842543290


Sunrise on 7 (2011, October 5). Child Identity Theft. [Video file]. Retrieved from http://au.tv.yahoo.com/sunrise/video/-/watch/26825601/child-identity-theft/

Continue..

Filed Under: