Achieving a Balance: That’s not fair… or is it?

“The World Is Flat!”

“Anything that can be done WILL be done!”

These were some of the terms that were bandied about at the start of this journey into the 21^st century classroom.  Utilizing technology’s current potential within educational settings brought promises of a classroom without walls, where physical geography was no longer a limitation.  However, legal issues of copyright have quite a lot to say on this matter.

Take for example, the use of items such as images for educational use either within the classroom (i.e. digital storytelling), or for uses on blogs are protected by copyright.  As such, they should not be used without express written permission from the owners.  Even work that can be freely copied is still licensed to certain conditions.

The problem is that the technological tools that enable exact reproduction of digital media are often totally separate from the guidelines that govern their “fair dealing”.  What tends to complicate matters even more, is that copyright issues vary from country to country (i.e. “fair dealing” in Canada does not provide EXACTLY the same liberties as “fair use” in Canada).  Students learn so much about technology simply by physically “doing”, when will they actually learn what’s legal to use, and what’s not?

I now realize that teachers who boldly accept the task of teaching 21^st century skills have an added responsibility to instruct students about what is considered “fair dealing”, wherever possible and applicable.  This needs to be done in the following ways:

• Explicit instruction:  When assignments using technological tools are given, we need to instruct students on what materials to avoid.  I must admit, I was planning to do a digital story using images, software, and even some music, but then became intimidated at the prospect of having to find images and music that I was sure could be used legally.  We should direct the students appropriately, and give guidelines as to how they can produce student products and still be responsible internet citizens.
• Lead by example:  This is the most important one, and this means that our use of technology must be very calculated.  Ensure that any videos or media shown are not simply intended for home use, etc.  Being careful will encourage students to be more careful as well.
• Provide Rationale:  Many will naturally find this attention to detail simply “cumbersome” and “unnecessary”.  However, sites like Creative Commons help put things in context for them.  As their student products are shared with the world, each student gets to be a “creator” and thus have a say as to how their material is used (and that no one makes a profit off of their work without their consent).  Especially considering the facts that laws will consistently change over time and applicable regions, giving enduring ethical and spiritual principles will help students navigate how to honour God through technology going forward.

Group Projects: The Good, The Bad, and The Wiki

Teacher: “This assignment will be a group project”....  and cue the collective groans.

Students seldom look forward to group projects.  Parents dread them as well, because, depending on the student, they’ll have to hear them complain about it in the near future.  Then, there are some students that you are almost suspicious as to why they are so eager to work in a group project.

THE GOOD

Why does it seem like such a problem?  The truth is we are all social beings, and we learn best in collaboration with one another.  Wise students already collaborate wherever possible.  They create their own study groups, both in person and online.  Whether a class assignment or a life-problem, they use as many human-related resources that are at their disposal, and physical proximity is not a barrier.  Many students are most likely “experts” at informal collaboration without even knowing it.

From http://collaborativelearning.pbworks.com/w/page/16092838/CollaborativeLearningOverview

THE BAD

So, why is it a problem in the classroom? For one, the interdependence that naturally occurs in a joint student product also means a loss of autonomy.  If there are not clearly defined roles, what happens if a student does not hold up their end of the bargain?  There are always some students that are left holding the bag, as others wish to ride on their coattails.  There are also other students who dominate the project and refuse to delegate responsibility.  As a teacher I have tried to add certain group peer evaluation tools; to "get to the bottom" of what really happened, but I can't say that they have all been "foolproof".

These are some of the reasons that students hate group work.  Students know who they want to work with, who they don’t want to work with, and why.  They feel forced into “being forced into arbitrary, mismatched teams in the name of social correctness.”[i]  The reality is, not everyone in the real world will always have the autonomy of choosing who to and not to work with, but this still an understandable source of frustration.

THE WIKI

So where do Wikis come in?  In all fairness, a Wiki is just one of the many tools that can alleviate such problems in collaborative work.  Let’s say there is a collaborative group assignment that a teacher initiates for students to work and collaborate on.  Instead of meeting in ONLY in person, a Wiki, Google Doc or similar tool is initiated by the teacher, and students are added as users.  Each group member is able to meet and share information electronically at their own time, and contribute to the same space.  Based on each individual’s unique user identification, it is easy to verify and trace how each group member contributed, at what point, and in what way.  There is also a meeting space for the teacher to see what is going on throughout the entire process.  This way, teachers can help ‘mediate’ and problem-solve earlier in the process so that the “group work” term does not have to have such a negative stigma.

---

[i] http://elupton.com/2009/10/why-collaborate/

Digital Storytelling’s True Cost

Digital Storytelling is an EASY choice, but takes a TRUE commitment!

Should a teacher consider use digital storytelling?  Well, let me ask you this… could a house use a microwave? 

Why would I make such a statement?  Well, consider that digital storytelling is simply using computer-based tools to tell stories, it makes perfect sense.  Using stories within the classroom has always been a simple way to engage or “hook” in your audience.  Stories immediately speak to the listener’s emotion, it’s hard for the audience to resist actually placing themselves within the setting of the story.  In every subject matter I’ve taught (from Computer Science, to Mathematics, to Religion), storytelling has been a part of a lesson or objective at one point or another, and that should be no surprise.  A story will win the battle over students’ attention as opposed to lectures any day.

So, supposing that storytelling is truly an easy sell, what about digital storytelling?  It’s just changing of the medium, by using computer-based resources to tell the story.

How digital storytelling might benefit current/future students from sunshine71600

As many have pointed out, digital storytelling is not new.  It’s just the next step in our teaching progression as classroom teachers and students become better acquainted with current technology and better utilize its true capability.  I can think a specific devotional story I would tell to students that I made into Powerpoint presentation by including old photos I found from the internet, simply to show students that the story was based on an actual historical figure.  Perhaps, unknowingly, that was the “first steps” to my digital storytelling journey.  I can think of several students, when handing in presentations, who have chosen to use various presentation software that could definitely qualify as digital storytelling as well.  Once again, this is just a structured definition to a form of technology that has grown almost organically.  I once developed a lesson plan in a Secondary Methods course to entice several English teachers (who had horrible experiences with Math) by focussing on the history of the mathematician who developed the particular theorem I was teaching.  By using digital storytelling, that same lesson could be converted into an RLO, and made into a video similar to “Pythagorean Theorem”.  Also, I would love to integrate a video in Religion as a discussion starter similar to “The Reality of Television”. 

One of the greatest advantages of digital storytelling, as I just alluded to, is that its utility in is not just limited to teacher creation.  Students can easily be tasked with using this to enhance their own student products to share both inside and outside of the classroom.  As pointed out in The Educational Uses of Digital Storytelling, by publishing digital stories online, “students have the opportunity to share their work with their peers and gain valuable experience in critiquing their own and other students’ work, which can promote gains in emotional intelligence and social learning.”[i]  This tool is a tangible way to help develop many 21^st century skills, especially considering that there is an art to doing this well[ii].

Honestly, reading many of the articles and information based on this, I actually considered doing this entry as a digital story for practical application, but then I asked myself, Do I have the time?  I’m being honest here, and that is going to be one of the biggest issue for many educators.  To do something well will take a serious investment of time, energy, resources, and the like.  As pointed out by Sara Cardine:

A teacher's willingness is not the only factor for getting a classroom to operate on the cutting edge of technology: Access to current hardware and software as well as administrative visions will set the technology scene at a school or district. Some teachers may not have a computer in the classroom or means of accessing technology-enhanced curriculums, Pasnik added, and an instant infusion of computer-based learning may not necessarily be the best move for a class to make.[iii]

It may sound like a selfish question, but many teachers (or individuals in their respective fields of study) will make regular decisions about experimenting in new technological areas where students may be “lightyears” ahead of them already (and risk looking silly), or remain “masters of their own domain” (at least in their own estimation)?  These are the type of decisions that will differentiate a technological tool from being something that a teacher cannot live without, and a shiny new toy that was never truly adopted into the rotation, and is now collecting dust.

The real question is to ask, can I afford NOT to adopt this type of tool?  It’s honestly not a big jump to what is already being used, and (as established in earlier blog entries), many of our own classrooms are significantly behind the current technology curve.  There is still plenty of opportunity to learn and teach these skills to even the students who think they know how to do it well enough, but could be much better.

My wife changed careers much later in life, and went from Graphic Design to Social Work.  At one point she felt like the time she spent in the Graphic Design field was such a waste, but I marvelled at how many people looked at her resume and asked her to transfer those skills of marketing, advertising and logo design into her social work field.  I believe that will truly develop into one of those skills that will not only be a vehicle for collaboration and critical thinking, but a valuable method of communication and teaching tool in itself.  Students will truly benefit from its inclusion.

It’s an opportunity we can’t afford to miss.

---

[i] http://digitalstorytelling.coe.uh.edu/page.cfm?id=27&cid=27&sublinkid=30

[ii] http://digitalstorytelling.coe.uh.edu/page.cfm?id=27&cid=27&sublinkid=31

[iii] http://www.centerdigitaled.com/edtech/Is-Education-Ready-For-YouTube.html

RSS SOS...

First Attempt Using Feedly.

Okay... this activity was DEFINITELY “hit-and-miss” for me.  Mind you, this is my first experience with an RSS.  I love the concept.  I wish I learned about this long ago.  I would be using it all the time.  My wife (and anyone who looks at my computer) always complains / comments on how many browser tabs and windows I have open at the same time.  Having information come to one central location for the “user” as opposed to the “user” going out to retrieve and toggle between a myriad of sites of different types, mediums, and the like... it’s a no brainer.  I get it!

I just found it a little difficult doing searches for specific content.  Mind you, this implementation gave the option of looking for examples, and I chose to look for the specific examples mentioned.  Some were problematic for me.  Here are my results.

• BLOG – I chose to keep it simple and use the example given (http://bacchem.blogspot.com/):

• A Podcast – Had trouble finding the particular podcast mentioned in the example, but I chose to add this one instead (http://dougandlori.podbean.com/):

• A set of FLICKR images – Ironically, I was able to add the set of images given in the example, but these were NOT the images that I initially wanted to add.  I spent a lot of time trying to a DIFFERENT set of FLICKR images found at this URL (http://www.flickr.com/photos/30334094@N05/3117795939/) unsuccessfully:

• As I mentioned before, I was still able to add the example specified to my Feedly (www.flickr.com/photos/21961199@N02/with/4267717517/):

The benefits of RSS feeds for individual and personal use are clearly apparent.  A course that contains a varied amount of information constantly being updated from blogs, podcasts, and other types of news feeds would clearly be able to utilize such a program to direct and engage each student on a regular basis.  The next challenge is to find subject-specific material that maximizes a website like this to its full potential.

A True Litmus Test

A closer look at Technology Integration and the SAMR Model.

Last week in my 2^nd blog entry, I commented on Torres and Henderson’s discussion of Doing Things in a Different Way as opposed to Doing Different Things.  Admittedly, while I was a bit unclear as to how to differentiate one from another at times, Dr. Ruben R. Puentedura has most certainly cleared up that problem for me.

The SAMR Model, developed by Dr. Puentedura in the late 80s to early 90s, is a model with examines how four levels of technology each affect student learning.

While these levels use a different terminology, the ENHANCEMENT level seems to correspond to Doing Things in a Different Way, while the TRANSFORMATION level corresponds to Doing Different Things.  I will discuss each of the four levels below, using examples that I have seen in my classroom, and extensions that I could project seeing in the future.  The particular class that comes to mind is my Grade 12 religion class.  One of the most engaging units (and most personally relevant to students) is the Marriage and Family Unit.  As one of their culminating activities, I ask students to choose many of the themes, lessons, and ideas discussed during the unit, choose a married couple to interview, and see if their experiences match up with what was examined during the unit.  Here is what I believe the 4-levels have looked like in the past in this unit, and what they could look like in the future:

·         Substitution – This is where the task could be completed without the use of technology.  Many students (if not most) have simply included, along with their comments, a formatted transcript of the couple that they decided to interview.  Of course, presentation is an obvious benefit, but other than that, there was no other functional change.

·         Augmentation – This year, for the first time ever, I had two students actually videotape the interview of the couples to show to the class.  They were both informative and entertaining (especially because one student who chose to interview their parents… many do… actually added “subtitles” to clear up the thick heavy accents that were heard in the responses).  Actually seeing the couples and the nature of the responses added so much more, and this would definitely be a functional improvement.

·         Modification – Many times throughout the unit I ask students to compare the material we cover in Marriage and Family with current and popular media portrayals.  I haven’t done this before, but I see an opportunity here to have students actually find and collect media examples, and collaboratively document them together using technology, to collectively examine common themes.  If each student finds 3 or 4, multiplying that by an entire classroom would give a large sample size to examine and compare in a short amount of time.  This would definitely be a significant task redesign.

·         Redefinition – In the past I have tasked students with interviewing 1 couple, but utilizing social media, a large number of couples could EASILY be interviewed anonymously, spanning over different cultures and parts of the globe.  Ensuring accuracy and honesty in responses may be a consideration, but I don’t think it would be any more of a concern than in personal interviews as well. 

What I appreciated most about Dr. Puentedura’s presentation was that he was very clear to point out that the use of Substitution and Augmentation is not necessarily inferior, for there may be situations where such an approach is merited.  Say, for instance, if I encouraged students to find a couple to interview that they particularly admire or respect, and wish to learn from.   The Enhancement level use of technology would still be valid.  Nevertheless, opportunities for Transformation should always be actively sought and included.

21st-Century Skills & The MOVATOR...

21^st Century Skills:  Education’s Future or Latest Fad?

In the summer of 2000, I remember flying out to California with my family for my sister’s graduation from dental school.  The particular airport escapes me, but I remember my family and I having to rush to make a connecting flight that was far across the airport in a distant terminal.  I ran across several movators in efforts to get the plain to wait while my family caught up to me.  Sure enough, I arrived and informed the flight personnel at the gate that my family was on their way.  Each member of my family came rushing one by one, but we noticed that my now late great Aunty Angela and her husband were nowhere to be found.  After moments of waiting, I headed back only to find them walking solely on foot, walking BESIDE the movator, instead of walking on it.  When I asked them why didn’t they walk on the movator, my aunt simply stated, “Well it didn’t seem much faster than walking to me!”

What does all this have to do with 21^st century skills?  Well, I marveled at the fact that my aunt considered “walking” and using the “movator” as two mutually exclusive activities, and that’s what I believe in essence is happening in the 21^st century skills debate.  To better prepare today’s students to make tangible contributions and compete in the global marketplace, an education system based on 21^st century skills would intentionally focus on:

•  thinking critically and making judgments
• solving complex, multidisciplinary, open-ended problems
• creativity and entrepreneurial thinking
• communicating and collaborating
• making innovative use of knowledge, information, and opportunities
• and taking charge of financial, health, and civic responsibilities[1]

Greater detail can be found below as articulated by Partnership for 21^st Century Skills president Ken Kay:

The 21^st century skills movement does have skeptics such as Jay Matthews who questions if the whole movement will be doomed from the onset, if it is phased in with an “all-at-once” mindset?[2]  He also wonders if the 21^st century skills movement reduce a wealth of knowledge and diversity of perspectives to a simple, business-minded set of skills at the expense of literature, art, music, and the like?[3]  This sentiment is echoed by Andrew J. Rotherham, who observes that some proponents believe that students should focus on critical thinking instead of content, thus pitting the two against each other.[4]

And thus, we're back to the movator!  Even detractors acknowledge that 21^st century skills and current content need not be mutually exclusive, nor should they be.  In fact, the many times the inclusion of critical thinking, collaboration and the like are simply recognized as good teaching practices that many so-called pioneers have already incorporated.  Take, for example, this TED Talk by Dan Meyer:

I would personally argue that he was a proponent of the 21^st century skills movement, but he does not mention that "buzzword" even once!  Much of the paranoia that exists surrounds the fact that it the education system might run into this movement without fully understanding and appreciating or understanding the core issues (which would be QUITE ironic, I would think).

Labels and buzzwords aside, this can and should work, and should not be feared, but carried out with understanding.  Let's get on the movator and MOVE!!!

---

[1] http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/21st_century_skills_education_and_competitiveness_guide.pdf

[2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/04/AR2009010401532.html?sid=ST2009010401569&s_pos=list

[3] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/04/AR2009010401533.html?sid=ST2009010401569

[4] http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2008/12/15/21st-century-skills-are-not-a-new-education-trend-but-could-be-a-fad

My Implementation 1 Experience

My Implementation 1 Experience:

                In my early years in Computer Science, I used to teach basic HTML, and that gave me a lot of confidence in embedding a YouTube video.  I found it quite easy, but I must confess that I’m not sure if I would have considered doing this before now, and I’m not sure why.  To be quite honest, I quite prefer seeing embedded videos on web pages that allow me to immediately reference the media content to other text or material that it was linked to.  It is simple and effective, and I now plan on doing this again in future.

                The search using iTunes was not as favourable and experience for me, simply because I’m still not sure how to download and archive this information.  The “RealPlayer” format where you can download files, save to computer, convert, etc., seems to be more “user-friendly” in my estimation.  However, the simple fact that iTunesU provides this vast repertoire of information at my disposal means that it will still be quite useful.

                Torres and Henderson’s discussion of Doing Things in a Different Way and Doing Different Things was thought-provoking for me.  It really spoke to the fact that if new technology is not MAXIMIZED to its potential, it’s a wasted opportunity.  Now, how do these two categories relate to my teaching experience in technology:

• Doing Things in a Different Way: (disclaimer: I’m not sure if I’m misinterpreting which label is which, but I’m interpreting this as doing the SAME thing in a DIFFERENT way)
• I would say that my usage of PowerPoint in the past would be an example of doing the same thing in a different way.  Sometimes the use of images and music add “limited” added value to a lecture.
• Using a PanaBoard (Panasonic’s equivalent of a SmartBoard) merely as a “WhiteBoard” would also be a classic example of this... not maximizing the true potential of the technology.
• Doing Different Things: (disclaimer: I’m interpreting this as doing things that would only be possible using the given technology, thus bringing inherent “added value” to the level of instruction)
• One of the first “JigSaw” activities I created for my math students was an activity in transformations, where groups of students divided and investigated various types of transformations on “parent functions” using geometry software.   Once they investigated, discovered the correlation and mastered the concepts, they would come back and teach the concept to their original group.  The software was vital to this exercise, because students were able to change numerical inputs on the fly to help them decipher relationships themselves.  This could only be achieved using dynamic software, not static.
• Using a PanaBoard for self-assessment in graphing was also a “different” thing that I did with my upper level math students.  To test accuracy in curve sketching in Calculus, I would have a set of axes projected on the PanaBoard and have a group of students work out what an equation should look like through algebraic calculations, and draw it on the PanaBoard.  Once their graph was finished, we would super-impose the ACTUAL computer-generated function on the same set of axes, so that students could check the accuracy instantly, often reinforcing the concepts they learned.