Monthly Archives: September 2009

The Week in Tweets for 2009-09-28

Posted on by
Reply

Powered by Twitter Tools

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

The Textile Network

Posted on by
5

I’m spending some time today with the folks at Flagstaff Academy in Longmont and digging into an old bag of tricks. Can you guess which slide is the yarn slide? Flagstaff folk – I hope we can continue some of the conversations that we started today here in the comments.  I’d love to hear your thoughts and reactions.  Thanks.

PS – Terri, the link to the video you saw is here.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

The Week in Tweets for 2009-09-21

Posted on by
3

Powered by Twitter Tools

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

For Vicki – An Expanded Tweet

Posted on by
6

I’m enjoying the review of the week’s tweets that I am basically assigning myself to read.  Looking at the weekly post is a way to review my thinking over that time, and now posting a tweet is also writing a short note to myself that I’ll read the following week.

Here’s one from the other night:

Too much censorship begins with well-intentioned people worrying about other people’s kids.

The tweet came at the beginning of a conversation with Vicki Davis in reference to an idea that she has about ratings on YouTube videos.  I promised her an explanation of my position.  So here goes:

I’m not for forcing one’s will on any organization that exists as a for-profit, private enterprise.  I’m certainly not for forcing one’s values on that enterprise, either, in the name of education or anything else.  It sounds cold – but it’s not YouTube’s responsibility to be everything to everyone.  They built themselves around the audiences that they wished to serve. Further – I think we hide behind the education shield a little too often.

If I wanted to build a school on the block where a popular bar was, and then I decided that I didn’t like having a bar so close to my school, so I attempted to try to shut the bar down, I’d be completely in the wrong.

So, too, with YouTube.  When we go there for educational purposes, and don’t like what we see, how is that the fault of YouTube?

I’d rather let YouTube be YouTube.  I can bring their content into my educational spaces, if I choose too, but I could also be responsible for creating my own space to post and share videos and decide the rules for its use.

It’s not up to them to make a space that I am happy with.  Nor is it up to a third-party to make them change for my benefit.

Hope that makes sense, Vicki.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

The Week in Tweets for 2009-09-14

Posted on by
Reply

Powered by Twitter Tools

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

The Filter. For the Moment.

Posted on by
17

This morning, Darren mentioned that he’s decided to block Facebook in his school district.  To his credit, he then asked:

Nonetheless, I’m as sure as you are that this is a debate far from over, and therefore maintain a stance of open inquiry into whether or not we’re doing the right thing.  So give it to me straight:

  • Would you leave Facebook open on your K-12 network?
  • If so, why?
  • And, what are you doing to train your teachers to effectively utilize it with their students?
  • Additionally, what can you do on Facebook that can’t be done elsewhere?

I think he’s asking important questions – but not the right ones for a filtering decision.  The world’s a big place.  Not everything in it has an educational purpose or goal.  Many things that don’t seem overtly “educational” actually are.  (And vice versa.) Yet – the world is the place that we working in schools are supposed to be helping students to succeed in.  So why do we keep turning off the parts of it that make us uncomfortable?  The questions of Internet filtering are often focused on the notion that we can control everything that happens to a student.  We cannot.   We must create safe environments for learning and teaching – but we should never hide behind empty promises of “safe,” promises we can never actually deliver on.

In our school district, as we made a switch from sharing ISP service with other districts to becoming our own ISP and investing in our own firewall and filtering solutions, we had to make a decision about what to filter and why.  As I’ve never been a fan of overfiltering, and I know that even the best filters make mistakes of both permissive and restrictive natures, I and some others suggested that perhaps it was time for us to rethink our filtering strategy.

Basically, we argued, let’s quit pretending that the Internet filter is something that it isn’t.  Namely, the Internet filter can and should never take the place of a responsible educator working with students to ensure they are working with the best possible resources to accomplish their educational work.  When a teacher isn’t around, we want to make sure that our students are able to move forward and not get mired down in the random world of distractions that the Internet can offer.  But we want students to be able to internalize the discipline that it takes to do that.  And our boss took that idea to our district leadership, and they agreed.  As of the start of the school year, we are blocking the categories we feel meet the requirements of law as well as a few additional categories relating to hacking and software downloads that our technical side of the house deemed risky to the network.  A very few categories (three, I believe, though I am working from memory as I write this), those dealing with particularly sensitive topics, are available only to staff and to students with staff override.  This is a big change and we’re all pretty excited about it.  Filters are like any other source of power and control – they begin to become solutions to problems that they weren’t created to solve – no matter how badly they fail to solve them.

We’re going to block very few things, beyond the legally required ones, that are distractions.  Distractions aren’t a technology problem.  They’re a people problem.  And creating artificial spaces that don’t actually help to promote the behaviors and attitudes that are important for success is maybe the biggest distraction of all.

We could argue the educational merits of Facebook.  (But it’s mostly a distraction.  Every now and then, it won’t be.  Let’s let students and staff get to it when they believe they need to and stop making it and a few other websites such big deals at school.)

We could argue the educational merits of MySpace.  (But same thing.)

We could take a random stab and try to guess what the NEXT BIG WEBSITE will be, the thing that students will want to do rather than do their school work.  (But we’ll probably guess wrong.  And the websites will almost never be the problem.  The problem is that students don’t want to do their schoolwork.  That’s a problem that deserves more attention than whether or not a profile might get updated or a playlist shared.  Heck – at least in the case of a playlist or profile, something is getting created.)

There are an awful lot of distractions on the Internet.  Every time we focus on them, we draw attention to them and away from the educational goals and objectives we’d like to, and should be, focusing on.  Let’s all stop doing that.

Our filters have prevented us from getting a great deal of work done.  Teachers spent lots of time under our old filter trying to route around it to share important information with students.  Students spent countless hours trying to route around the filter.  (And succeeding.)  I’d've rather they’d each have been able to do the thing they wanted to do and then go on with their days.

And now they can. Mostly.  It’s not a perfect solution.  There are still glitches and overblocks – but we are working to unblock things that come up blocked for a teacher as quickly as we are alerted to the errors.  As we see use of resources increase, we may have to do some traffic shaping – which might be a better alternative to blocking outright, or it might create an entirely new set of problems.  We’ll see.

Darren is right about one thing – this is a new idea, the idea that the Internet’s there and (mostly) available.  And there’s plenty of teaching and learning to do about how to avoid distractions, and how to make sure that we are expecting the best of our students and staff.  But let’s not get stuck in command and control positions of assumption that lead us to discredit the experiences and expertise of the adults in the classrooms with our students every day.  Let’s believe in them rather than worry for them.

People will rise to the expectations that are set for them, and in our district, I am proud to say that we are beginning to expect big things from staff and students regarding their Internet use.  There’s lots and lots of work ahead, but I feel very good about the fact that we have finally started framing the problems of Internet misuse as problems of behavior and not of technology.  I hope other school districts can do the same.  And I hope that my district can hold true to its vision.  I have high expectations for us, too.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

The Week in Tweets Ending 2009-09-07

Posted on by
1

Powered by Twitter Tools

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare

20,000 Volumes. 18 e-Readers. (Only 18?)

Posted on by
2

The Boston Globe reports that Cushing Academy will be eliminating their library and replacing their 20,000 physical volumes with 18 e-readers. And a cappucino machine.

The article goes on quote various experts lamenting or praising the decision.  My only question is this: How bad was circulation in their library when the assumption is that 18 e-readers will be enough to meet reader demand for books to take home?

I continue to worry about the rush to replace paper books with electronic ones.  Seems like we’re in the early days of digital rights management with electronic texts, and Kindles are sexy, but not practical for sharing books with others.

Google+EvernoteEmailWordPressRead It LaterInstapaperShare