Join StoryChasers! StoryChasers - Empowering Responsible Digital Citizenship - Invent the future! Scratch | Home | imagine, program, share - Play Travian online!
25th July 2008

Will the 4th screen bring us together?

posted in distributed-learning, globalvoices, luddite, mobile, socialnetworking | 2 Comments

I saw the Nokia video advertisement “The Fourth Screen” yesterday for the first time when I watched Chris Abani’s TED Talk “Telling stories of our shared humanity” on my iPhone at lunch. The ad plays at the end of the TED talk. Here is the 2 minute and 22 second ad by itself on YouTube:

While I want to reflect briefly on the message of this “4th Screen” video in this post, I’ll also link to Chris’ message as it is even more memorable as well as heart wrenching.

Chris’ TED bio states:

Imprisoned three times by the Nigerian government, Chris Abani turned his experience into poems that Harold Pinter called “the most naked, harrowing expression of prison life and political torture imaginable.” His novels include GraceLand (2004) and The Virgin of Flames (2007).

The story which got to me the most was of the 14 year old optimist on death row, who taught other, older men who were hardened criminals how to read with two comic books he had smuggled into the prison. The boy was killed by the Nigerian government in one of most brutal ways imaginable. Stories like this can be jarring but also help me keep my life in perspective.

After seeing this video, I was quite impressed by the “Fourth Screen” ad. My work commute podcast today was Clarence Fisher and Darren Kuropatwa’s BLC08 presentation “Everything New is Old Again,” and I was surprised as well as pleased to hear the audio again of this ad which they shared as a video in their session.

Cheryl Oakes captured video of this session to Ustream, while Bob Sprankle captured and shared the audio version I heard today driving in the car.

The message of this “4 screens” ad is compelling, but is it accurate? Are mobile devices permitting us as a society to connect in more personal ways that foster a greater sense of community and togetherness?

I think the answer to this question is a qualified yes, because our new senses of community are different from the historical version. While historical communities were geographically defined as well as limited, the extended learning community of which I am a part is ideologically defined (defined by ideas) and geographically untethered. I have worked with Darren a TON as a fellow K-12 Online Conference convener the past two years, so there is a lot of shared time together and shared history which undergirds my feeling that “I know Darren” and he’s a friend of mine. I really don’t know Clarence Fisher that well personally from face to face contact, although we did meet briefly at NECC this year. Despite that lack of F2F time together or synchronous skype audio time together (which is what I’ve experienced with Darren) I really do feel like I “know” Clarence at an idea level. Perhaps ironically, I’ve never met Darren F2F as I have Clarence, but I know him better. From reading Clarence’s blog, to his keynote presentation last year for K12Online07, to comments I read that he’s made from time to time on other blogs and in other learning communities, I feel much more connected to Clarence than I do to 90% of the people in my own neighborhood.

I was so glad, incidentally, to learn via Darren and Clarence a word to describe much of my learning and social interactive behavior over the past several years: Hyperconnected. There is a glaring digital divide of both knowledge as well as perceptions between the hyperconnected, the moderately connected and the unconnected in our society today. This term alone provided me with a great deal of food for thought and reflection today.

I definitely think our information landscape, which is pregnant with hyperconnected potential, offers great promise for connecting individuals and groups together more closely than we’ve ever been connected before. I don’t think the “picture” of that community togetherness is necessarily captured perfectly in this Nokia advertisement, however. It’s hard to picture it in a video, I think, because people are in different places at different times, doing different things, but yet they/we are connected. That LOOKS different than images of traditional communities, or just F2F community meet-ups.

I don’t think anything is inevitable when it comes to human relationships, but there certainly are trends and tendencies to which we should pay attention. While author and futurist John Naisbitt predicted in his 2001 book “High Tech/High Touch. Technology and our Accelerated Search for Meaning” that technology would increasingly encourage us to live our lives “distanced and distracted” from one another, I think there IS great potential for digital technologies to bring us closer together. The dynamics vary considerably, however.

On a personal note, my wife registered for a Jott account today and actually got on my Twitter account to see what I was up to. Hyperconnected people provide multiple avenues for connectedness, but that same potential can also lead to distraction and a tendency to under-prioritize the time we need to spend in F2F conversations and relationships. As Brian Crosby says, it’s messy! But that’s ok. Amidst these messy interactions and choices, there is GREAT potential for community, connectedness, and action toward shared purposes. The 4th screen IS bringing us together. For me at least, and I suspect many others, however, it’s not just the 4th screen. It’s the 3rd screen too. And the 2nd screen is becoming the 3rd screen which is becoming the 4th screen. I guess this is a hyperconnected person’s dream, and the neo-Luddite’s nightmare. At least each of these conclusions is an option and a choice!

Technorati Tags:
, , , , , , , , ,

9th June 2008

The benefits of unplugging

posted in luddite, travel | 6 Comments

It is good but also somewhat tough to be back online after a full week offline in the Jemez Mountains of New Mexico. If we hadn’t returned home so late last night, driving through and between thunderstorms across the Texas panhandle and Oklahoma, I would have recorded a short video podcast to reflect on the trip as well as show (for fun) my markedly changed facial profile after forgoing my shaving razor for seven days. My family hardly recognized me! A face of long whiskers was certainly a tangible sign I had been unplugged from my normal routines for an extended period of time!

P6070530

There is GREAT value in unplugging from technology and digital information streams for multiple days. This family vacation was the first opportunity I’ve had in over two years to “unplug” completely from technology for several days in a row. We camped near Jemez Springs, New Mexico, which is a fantastic destination for multiple reasons, but one of the best is that it currently has zero cell phone coverage! We were unplugged and offline by choice AND by function of our selected geography. The result was a superb break from the to-do lists and constant information streams which normally characterize our busy lives.

The only interruption in this succession of “unplugged” days took place last Thursday, when we woke to cold, blustery clouds and light snow falling on our campground. After breakfast, we headed out to visit nearby Los Alamos, where we caught a movie and visited the Bradbury Science Museum. Los Alamos National Laboratory continues to operate and is most famous for the role it played in the Manhattan Project. (I’ll post an audio reflection I made at the museum as a podcast later this week.) While in Los Alamos, my wife and I used my iPhone to check email messages and voicemails. That was a MISTAKE. After returning back to our campground, that evening going to sleep we both found our heads filled with issues and concerns which had been brought to our attention by our brief interactions with our “regular lives” via email and phone messages.

It takes awhile to mentally “unplug” from the business of life. My wife taught for the DOD in Germany in the early 1990s, and was impressed by the attitude many Germans and German employers have regarding vacations. Many Germans take a MONTH of vacation at a time, and believe it is necessary to take multiple weeks off in order to decompress and begin to really relax away from work and its related stresses. A multi-week vacation is a luxury many people today outside of education might never be able to consider from a financial perspective. Even for people who HAVE long amounts of accumulated vacation, however, the prospect of being gone from work for more than a week can seem impossible. I know university support staff members who were being forced to take vacation days in a “use it or lose it” situation, and were reluctant even to take those days off. It seems many in our society have forgotten or never learned how to relax, and it can be a real challenge to make the time in our schedules for relaxation. Our lives are so filled with activities and commitments. Even when we go on a vacation, often a “schedule” is maintained which can be exhausting in itself. Extended periods of time to relax and decompress can be elusive.

On our trip across I-40 to New Mexico, we encountered multiple road signs. I snapped this image last night just outside Alanreed, Texas, one of the many small towns which grew up along Route 66. The mammatus clouds were a clear sign of the turbulent atmosphere and storms we’d face on our trek back east to our home:

Interstate signs along I-40

As I face the predictable mountain of email messages, voicemails, and to-dos after a week’s vacation, I’m struck by how important it is that we find regular times during the week to intentionally unplug and disconnect from our screens. On the drive out to New Mexico, I listened to a speech Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. shared at the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. in 1968. I purchased a series of his speeches from iTunes a few years ago. In the speech, Dr. King encouraged listeners to spend time quietly with their own thoughts, instead of constantly “plugging in” to televisions, radios, and other media sources. I was struck by how much “worse,” comparatively, our situation is today in 2008 compared to 1968 when it comes to unplugging from media. I do love my iPod and iPhone, and the opportunities they provide me to learn and be influenced by the ideas of others. (One of the highlights of our return journey yesterday was listening to the latest Seedlings podcast from June 1st, for example.) “Digital discipline” is extremely important in our modern era, however, and although he did not use those words that was my paraphrase of Dr. King’s message from his speech in 1968.

I named our family learning blog “Learning Signs” because I like the metaphor of looking for tangible “signs” of change. What are the signs in your own life, during vacation times, that you have truly unplugged from media and technology? Disconnection from most technologies (not my propane stove and heater, however, and not our cameras we use to document our vacation!) increasingly define “vacation” for me. Here are a few of my favorite public images (which I have not made “private” on Flickr because they contain images of our kids) which seem to suggest signs of “disconnection” and a less technological daily focus.

P6070522

Jemez Springs Bath House

A family hike in the woods in Bandelier National Monument

By the campfire

I miss the mountains of New Mexico already!

Technorati Tags:
, , , , , ,

3rd February 2008

Podcast224: An Interview with Patrick Henry

posted in edtech, ethics, history, leadership, luddite, podcasts, politics | Comments Off

This podcast is a recorded interview with Richard Schumann of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, who was the keynote speaker at the Oklahoma State Department of Education’s annual Social Studies and Fine Arts conference on February 2, 2008. The title of the conference was Revolutionary Matters: “The Virginia Firebrand of the American Revolution.” Schumann portrays Patrick Henry at Colonial Williamsburg, and in keynote addresses like the one he shared yesterday here in Oklahoma City. I asked him for advice he has for a nation beset by divisions and factions. I also asked him about his well known disagreements with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, and Mr. Henry discussed issues of both agreement and disagreement with Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison. I asked him how he sees our nation as able to use the lamp of experience to light our way in our “new” experiment of democratic and republican self-government. I also asked him about his recommendations of political philosophers to read, and found his discussion of Thomas Paine, John Locke, Machiavelli, Montesquieu, and “the good book” (the Holy Bible) to be illuminating and thought provoking. He concluded by exhorting our young people to take their responsibilities as citizens seriously, and persevere despite frustrations and failures in their lives. As he said, NEVER GIVE UP.

 
icon for podpress  Podcast224: An Interview with Patrick Henry [17:34m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (1294)

Show Notes:

  1. The Colonial Williamsburg website and Foundation
  2. Patrick Henry on WikiPedia
  3. John Locke on WikiPedia
  4. Niccolò Machiavelli on WikiPedia
  5. Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu on WikiPedia
  6. Oklahoma Department of Education’s 2008 Social Studies and Fine Arts Conference

Subscribe to “Moving at the Speed of Creativity” weekly podcasts!

Podcast RSS Feed

iTunes Podcast Link

Receive an email alert whenever a new Speed of Creativity podcast is published!

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


18th January 2008

Podcast218: Technology Shopping Cart Podcast04 - An Interview with Steve Muth and Ben Papell (Co-Founders of VoiceThread) Discussing the new VoiceThread for Education

posted in creativity, design, digitalstorytelling, distributed-learning, isafety, luddite, podcasts, socialnetworking, techshoppingcart, web 2.0 | 5 Comments

Welcome to episode four of the Technology Shopping Cart podcast where educational innovation thrives on the food of creative ideas! This week Karen Montgomery and Wesley Fryer host an interview with Steve Muth and Ben Papell, the co-Founders of the VoiceThread website and web 2.0 tool. Steve and Ben discuss the background for how VoiceThread started, design principles of simplicity and “the amazon.com model” of task completion in a few clicks, their implementation of layered complexity within their site’s functionality, and the benefits of creating living multimedia documents via VoiceThread which can live forever. They also discuss the brand new website “VoiceThread for Education,” which is customized with several changes that make it a thoroughly accountable environment safe for student publishing and interactive feedback. Their hope is that more school districts, students and teachers will now be able to benefit from as well as enjoy using VoiceThread as a learning tool inside and outside their classrooms on a regular basis.

 
icon for podpress  Podcast218: Technology Shopping Card Podcast04 - An Interview with Steve Muth and Ben Papell (Co-Founders of VoiceThread) Discussing the new VoiceThread for Education [71:40m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (1827)

Show Notes:

  1. Twitter Karma (view and manage Twitter followers and friends)
  2. Sue Waters’ blog: Mobile Technology in TAFE
  3. Jott (free voice to text service)
  4. Google Alerts
  5. TED Talks
  6. VoiceThread for Education (ed.voicethread.com)
  7. VoiceThread (original site, unchanged with free, unlimited educator accounts)
  8. Steve and Ben’s Interview on EdTechTalk - Teachers Teaching Teachers #86 Giving All Schools Access to VoiceThread-A Conversation with Ben Papelle and Steve Muth-01.09.08
  9. Our Technology Shopping Cart Podcast Wiki

Subscribe in a reader to Technology Shopping Cart Podcasts

Subscribe to “Moving at the Speed of Creativity” weekly podcasts!

Podcast RSS Feed

iTunes Podcast Link

Receive an email alert whenever a new Speed of Creativity podcast is published!

7th September 2007

Realize your dreams today, start virtually attending Stanford or MIT

posted in distributed-learning, history, luddite, podcasting | Comments Off

When I was growing up and especially when I was in high school considering college options, the thought of attending a top-tier school like Stanford, Harvard, or Princeton certainly crossed my mind. Although I had been encouraged by several to pursue an engineering college track (because of the flexible preparation it would provide in equipping me to solve problems and be ready to meet a host of different challenges in a dynamic world) I never really wanted to follow that path. For that reason most likely, going to a school like MIT wasn’t high on my “dream sheet,” although the work of many at the Media Lab I’ve learned about since makes me wonder about those past perceptions a bit. My dream was to attend and graduate from the U.S. Air Force Academy, and go on to serve as an officer and pilot in our nation’s Air Force. I ended up taking a LOT of engineering courses at USAFA, since they were required for everyone, but I always took the “fuzzy” rather than the “techie” options for those required “core” classes.

Later in life, when I considered graduate school options, the idea of attending a top-tier university and earning a Masters degree again occurred to me, but practical considerations of cost and location made that prospect seem unrealistic. Later when I become a doctoral student, the natural limitations which come with the responsibility of having a family intervened and encouraged me to seek a degree from a local university rather than “venturing out” into the wider world as a full-time graduate student at a “top tier” school.

The opportunity to spend several days at the University of Virginia in 2002 with PT3 grant travel funds was a big eye opener for me. That was about the time I first started seriously considering entry into a doctoral program in education. At that point I had taught for six years as a K-12 teacher and was entering my second year of work as a technology integration support staff member (officially the “Director of Distance Learning”) for the College of Education at Texas Tech University and was becoming fairly well steeped in the culture of academe in higher education. I was able to spend a week living and learning on the campus of Stanford in 2004 when I attended the Digital Media Academy’s “Digital Filmmaking Bootcamp - Storytelling and Movie Production” workshop as an adult student. What an amazing and fantastic experience that was! (Those were the days before I started using Flickr, so if photos of that trip are available online, I’m not quite sure where they are!) During that period of my life, when I had started my own doctoral studies and began considering the possibility of becoming a university professor some day, I again opened my mind to the possibility of maybe living, teaching and working at a “major” university.

How many people have dreamed of attending a school like Stanford, Harvard, MIT, or another “top tier” school only to have that aspiration dashed or put aside by the realities and limitations of life? Virtually attending classes at one of these institutions is certainly a far cry from the full experience it must be to attend in person– certainly my brief times spent at Stanford and UVA in person were FAR more powerful than the experience could ever be of watching a video or listening to an audio podcast! I find it absolutely remarkable, none-the-less, that each one of us with access to the Internet now has an open invitation to attend classes at many of these “top tier” institutions anytime we can find the time.

Dr. Tim Tyson, in his post “Be Informed As Change Is Afoot,” encourages all educators to literally “tune in” to the voices of professors at some of our top universities and stay abreast of changes we see (or should see) taking place all around us in our culture, our economy, our homes, and our communities. Specifically, Dr. Tyson recommends the course “The Future of the Internet” taught by Ramesh Johari. All course lectures are available as free downloads from iTunes University.

The slogan of the MIT Open Courseware project is “Unlocking Knowledge, Empowering Minds.” It is mind boggling to confront the amazing access which those connected to the Internet can now enjoy to ideas and content which was geographically and financially inaccessible only a few years ago. Think about the history of the university itself, and how “elite” and “restricted” access to the ideas and personalities of “the academy” have been throughout all previous eras of human history. Is it not AMAZING to witness a fundamental change in the access to ideas which has historically been afforded to the people of the world?

It is one thing to be amazed and awed by the depth and breadth of content now available on the web– it is another thing to PERSONALLY and PROFESSIONALLY LEVERAGE it’s potential for learning. Dr. Tyson’s suggestion of subscribing to one or more university-offered courses (as a free podcast) is excellent. Alex Filippenko’s “Introduction to General Astronomy” course in Fall 2006 has been one of my favorite virtual courses to date. Whether you want to learn about the Internet, the universe, or something else, the range of ideas and information resources available via iTunes University (for free) is staggering.

I can guess what at least a few of you, reading this post, are thinking: I don’t have TIME to take a virtual course! It is true today that many of us feel very time-poor and information-rich. This is a challenging condition and perception, but I’m convinced as an objective situation it is only going to get WORSE as time moves on. The access to information we alternatively enjoy and loathe (when we feel overwhelmed) shows no signs of shrinking in the near or long term. Awash with information and opportunities to learn, how will be choose to live our lives?

Hopefully, contrary to the contention of John and Nana Naisbitt, along with Douglas Philips, we will NOT choose to live our lives in ways that are increasingly “distanced and distracted.” Human relationships and interactions are vital, and we should not aspire to become entirely “virtual” beings shying away from face-to-face encounters in favor of virtual ones in all circumstances. Neither should we become neo-luddites, however, rejecting technology and exuding a hostile fear of the digital information and interaction opportunities which increasingly abound around us. Instead, I think we should aspire to live blended lives, just as we should aspire to teach and learn with blended methodologies, integrating the best the face-to-face world as well as virtual worlds have to offer.

No, you don’t have time to enroll in a new, full-time course at Stanford or MIT. But you do have time to subscribe to something of personal interest that will broaden your own learning landscape and horizon of perspectives on iTunes University. If you have a portable audio device, like an iPod, you can– of course– take that content “with you” wherever you go. But an iPod is NOT required. All that is required is a computer with an Internet connection, a free copy of iTunes, and a desire to learn.

Our lives can be changed in many ways, but the ideas which enter into our minds and rub briefly against our consciousness can often be powerful catalysts for new thinking and subsequent conversations. Realize your dreams today. You won’t get any more time in the day to do this, but you can “virtually enroll” today in a course– for free– at a major university of your choice. What are you waiting for?!

Technorati Tags:
, , , ,

4th September 2007

When mainstream media publicity is harmful

posted in isafety, luddite, socialnetworking | 1 Comment

Andy Carvin’s post “An Open Letter About Cyberbullying” is a reasonably toned response to Mathew Honan of Wired Magazine’s recent article “Beware These Six Lamest Social Networks.” Honan takes unnecessary aim at the “Stop Cyberbullying” Ning which Andy helps administer. It’s sad to see a mainstream media source author take a potshot at an excellent resource and social network addressing a very REAL issue: Cyberbullying.

I have no idea what motivated Honan to assert via his article that cyberbullying is not a viable concern for millions of students and others around the world– and that a group working to promote awareness about cyberbullying as well as proactive steps which can be taken to address it is “lame.” According to Andy, the article has resulted in:

…countless vandals and trolls descend[ing] upon the site, for the sole purpose of - yes - bullying us…

Good grief.

bandaid on a finger

This reminds me of observations Neil Postman made in the mid-1980s in his book “Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business.” Postman decried the loss of context and discourse which technology often invites. Although he was addressing a much older technology (the telegraph) instead of Internet-based social networking, I think his words still apply to us today. He wrote on page 65:

The telegraph made a three-pronged attack on typography’s definition of discourse, introducing on a large scale irrelevance, impotence, and incoherence. These demons of discourse were aroused by the fact that telegraphy gave a form of legitimacy to the idea of context-free information: that is; to the idea that the value of information need not be tied to any function it might serve in social and political decision-making and action, but may attach merely to its novelty, interest, and curiosity. The telegraph made information into a commodity, a “thing” that could be bought and sold irrespective of its uses or meaning.

Unfortunately, in this case it appears Mathew Honan may not have explored and fully considered the context of the “Stop Cyberbullying” Ning before harshly dissing it via a mainstream media source.

Helping our students (and others) seek to identify the context of information is increasingly important in our twenty-first century attention economy. If the telegraph introduced “irrelevance, impotence, and incoherence” on a large scale, the Internet’s World-Wide Web has multiplied this effect a thousandfold. Context cannot often be understood in the blink of an eye, it takes some time to read, watch, listen, and reflect to understand. Hopefully Honan and others will take the time required to understand the context and purpose of the “Stop Cyberbullying” Ning. If they do, and they take time to understand the often hostile digital face of social networking today, perhaps they’ll take the higher road of working to promote the proactive cause of safe, respectful social networking rather than ridiculing it.

Technorati Tags:
,

10th August 2007

Clarifying perceptions about digital social networking risks

posted in isafety, luddite, socialnetworking | 7 Comments

Thanks to my uncle, Ron Henley, for alerting me to a new report supported by NSBA (the National School Boards Association) and others which supports many of the contentions I’ve been advancing for over a year in presentations about safe digital social networking. According to David Cassel’s August 7th article about the report, “Schoolboards: net dangers over-rated; bring social networks to school:”

It [the NSBA report] warns that many fears about the internet are just overblown. “School district leaders seem to believe that negative experiences with social networking are more common than students and parents report,” the study reports. For example, more than half the districts think sharing personal information has been “a significant problem” in their schools — “yet only 3% of students say they’ve ever given out their email addresses, instant messaging screen names or other personal information to strangers.”

This conclusion matches the responses of many K-12 teachers in Spiro, Oklahoma, who I visited with on Tuesday afternoon this week about Internet Safety and Cyberbullying Prevention. In response to the question, “What do you think is the #1 thing that puts kids at risk from online solicitation by a sexual predator?” the top responses were:

  • Using IM
  • Being in a chat room
  • Using MySpace
  • Being on the Internet

Believing that merely “being on the Internet” or just “using instant messaging” puts one at risk to be solicited by a sexual predator is common among the teachers and other adults with whom I regularly work in Oklahoma. There is a grain of truth to this perception, but only a grain… The following comparison may be appropriate. When a person gets into an automobile, are they putting themselves at risk for getting into an injury accident or being killed in an auto accident? Well, it is true that if someone NEVER gets into a car, they are much less likely to be injured or killed in a motor vehicle accident. They could still be struck and killed by a car as they walk down the street as a pedestrian, but even that risk can be mitigated by the person choosing to be careful when crossing busy intersections and taking other precautions.

Taken to an extreme, a person who fears getting into an accident in or with an automobile might choose to NEVER leave their home and venture outside into the wider world. Certainly they might be “safer” from the possible dangers posed by motor vehicles if they stayed locked up in their house or apartment, but their opportunities for life experiences would also be sharply limited.

This comparison is helpful when we think of students, or people more generally, being online and potentially putting themselves at risk for various dangers. Simply being online, using instant messaging, visiting MySpace or having your own MySpace page does not correlate to a statistically high probability that the person will experience an online form of “stranger danger.” The CHOICES we make when driving or riding in a car make a BIG difference, just as the CHOICES we make when we are online make a difference when it comes to potential dangers we face. Do you choose to drink impairing quantities of alcohol and then drive? Do you get into a car with someone who is driving drunk? Do you always wear your seatbelt when riding in or driving a car? Your answers to these questions have a huge impact on the statistical probability of whether or not you will be injured or killed in auto accident, or involved in an auto accident at all. Similarly, the CHOICES Internet users of all ages make when they are online make a HUGE difference when it comes to the probabilities they will encounter online dangers.

If a person avoids going on the Internet ENTIRELY it is highly unlikely they’ll ever receive an electronic solicitation from a sexual predator, but do we want to encourage people to become extreme neo-luddites and refuse to use digital technologies entirely? I don’t think so. The information, communication, and vocational landscape of the twenty-first century is increasingly digital. Suggesting that people should entirely boycott all Internet use is likely to be as effective in supporting the development of relevant life-skills as the ostrich putting its head in the sand to deal with the potential danger of an approaching predator.

ostrich putting its head in the sand

Dean Shareski pointed out in his June post, “Just the Facts,” the critical behavior which people can and do CHOOSE to engage in which puts them at the greatest risk for online sexual solicitations: TALKING ABOUT SEX. As Dean wrote:

Those are the facts. Let me repeat, IT IS NOT GIVING OUT PERSONAL INFORMATION OR BLOGGING THAT PUTS KIDS AT RISK. How about a sign like that in your schools?

Sadly, this fact does not “jive” with many of the presentations I hear and hear about in our schools about Internet safety. Many of these presentations give parents, teachers, and students the mistaken impression that “the entire Internet is evil, so stay off it.” There certainly are offensive and reprehensible things on the Internet, and REAL dangers lurking here, but there are also dangers to be found at your local mall or Wal-Mart parking lot after dark. The CHOICES we make are important. If people go looking for trouble, they are likely to find it, in real life and on the Internet. I think we need to help more people clarify their perceptions about the REAL risks of digital social networking.

Interestingly, my cursory search on the NSBA website this evening did not turn up any references to this research report by Grunwald Associates. According to the Grunwald website, the actual report costs “$9,000 – $12,000, based on company size,” so unfortunately it is doubtful we’ll be able to publicly quote and debate the report’s text. Sadly, having a price tag like that attached to a piece of research effectively makes the document “classified” for most people. I’m sure that is how Grunwald Associates makes its money, but as a person very interested in the ideas of the report, I’d like to read the ACTUAL report rather than just read ABOUT it in an article like this one from David Cassel. I shared my sentiments on this in December in the post, “Charging for that report? I’ll pass.”

At least David has given us a glimpse into the content of the report. Will we see a reference to this on the NSBA website anytime soon? Will school board members around the United States pay attention and start asking the leaders of their curriculum and technology departments to support safe environments for students to engage in digital social networking?

I hope so, but I am not going to hold my breath.

Technorati Tags:
, , , , ,

3rd July 2007

Thoughts on bit literacy and information overload coping strategies

posted in digitaldiscipline, edtech, literacy, luddite, organization | 3 Comments

One of my favorite rhetorical questions to ask during workshops is, “Is anyone here NOT receiving enough email?” I don’t know an adult soul who spends time online (my own children and other kids who don’t yet have email accounts are not counted in that group) who suffers from a LACK of email. Remember “the old days” of email, when people actually got excited when they received a new email message? Those were the days of PINE email. Were we better off in those days in some respects? We certainly didn’t know how good we had it in terms of spam! According to some new research, spam accounted for 90% of all email messages sent in the month of June 2007. Good grief. In many ways, I do long for the simpler days of PINE email!I discovered the relatively new book “Bit Literacy: Productivity in the Age of Information and E-mail Overload” by Mark Hurst today, reading Steve Johnson’s article in the Chicago Tribune, “Before you click send: The rules of etiquette apply to e-mail.” According to Johnson:

…the bigger point of “Bit Literacy” is his evangelical belief that e-mail is part of a new, digital-era phenomenon, the streams of data, or “bits,” also including photos and data files that can overwhelm us if we don’t aggressively manage them. “The basic theory in e-mail and all other bitstreams is: To surmount the problem of information overload, one has to let the bits go,” Hurst says. “It does not mean that everyone should just turn off e-mail. What it means, rather, is that people need to get in the habit of looking for ways to delete, defer, delay or otherwise avoid bits because we’re effectively in an age now where bits are infinite.”

Tim Wilson recommended David Allen’s book “Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity” to me in February, but I haven’t made time to read it yet. I continue to deal with bit-overload each day, however, and I think I need to read both the GTD book as well as Hurst’s thoughtful book on managing data streams. Again according to Johnson’s article:

“‘Bit Literacy’ says bits are heavy, actually, and an infinite number of them has infinite weight, and it crushes people, their productivity, their morale,” Hurst says. “Having 3,000 e-mails in your inbox is unsustainable because that’s 3,000 things asking for your attention. There’s no way to prioritize. I don’t see that there’s any possible solution but that people should learn to achieve emptiness. In e-mail, people should try to get their inbox message count to zero once every day,” Hurst says

I can count the number of days I have “lived the dream” of a “less than 10 message inbox” in the past year on one hand. Having access to email via an iPhone may help this, but as with most things involving technology I think the hardware and software solutions are just part of the remedy which is needed.staring at too many screens of informationA key part of this “remedy” is helping people use the correct communication modality for their purpose and context. I think many, many people are OVERUSING email today. Many people who email daily jokes to their entire distribution list would help everyone’s information overload quotient by starting a joke blog, rather than sending out email blasts. People who need an immediate response to a question are better advised to use instant messaging or the phone (yes, THE PHONE, many people seem to forget its utility in our digital world) instead. I agree with Johnson and Hurst’s observations that the LACK OF TONE in email often leads to problems which a phone call or face to face discussion could avert:

Don’t use an e-mail when the telephone is better, especially for achieving compromise or a deal or broaching a sensitive topic. E-mail, he says, is terrible at tone, and for that reason, “Send” is actually in favor of emoticons.

Johnson includes a great series of “eight reasons you might not want to e-mail” at the end of his article, quoting from Hurst’s book. Hurst’s encouragement to watch what you write/say in email because everything is archivable / forwardable and can become part of a searchable record to which you may be held accountable is important. So is the following observation about email:

You can reach everyone, but everyone can reach you.

In a post last week from NECC, I reflected on some fundamental differences between email and blogging. I wrote:

Email is potentially a “one-to-many” communication modality, but you have to have all the email addresses before you click SEND. (Or they have to be included in a distribution list or listserv.) Email is a “one-to-finite many” communication modality.Blogging is different. When someone publishes ideas on a blog, they are using a “one-to-infinite many” communication modality. I have no idea how many people will read this post, or how many people will respond. The fact that a theoretically infinite number of people could respond (or more accurately I guess, an unbounded potential number of people could read and respond) is earth shattering.

I do need to get a better handle on email, and I’m working on improving my “productivity” and “effectiveness” on that front. I think, however, we’re headed for uncharted waters when it comes to information flows that will require new levels of “bit literacy” for all of us.As a closing “sign of the times” story, I’ll note that many months ago I came across Michael Goldhaber’s 1997 article “The Attention Economy: The Natural Economy of the Net.” I have scanned the article briefly, but have yet to make time to read it in its entirety. This concept of our information landscape as an “attention economy” is something which has and continues to influence my daily thinking, however, despite the fact I have yet to make time to read the full article. Ironic.I think I’ll print out the article and read it this evening, and then make time to start David Allen’s GTD book. I’m hypothesizing both Goldhaber and Allen will have some relevant thoughts for me as I seek to improve my own “bit literacy” skills!Perhaps the #1 thing I’ve changed in the past year or so regarding my digital consumption and sharing of ideas is use the social bookmarking site del.icio.us. At least when I save and “tag” websites during the day as I process information, I help insure I’ll be able to re-locate “that website I saw” sometime down the road. I think my use of del.icio.us has significantly improved both my personal productivity in the digital information environment as well as my value to others as I’m able to simultaneously share my knowledge/ideas (via those tagged and commented web links) with others. The fact that “an infinite many” others can add me to their own del.icio.us networks represents a staggering potential for connected learning I can barely fathom.It’s been a long time since I’ve been bored, and I don’t think an iPhone is going to help that cause. It may be time for another 40 day evening technology fast! :-)

Technorati Tags: , ,

15th June 2007

Taxonomy versus Folksonomy

posted in blogs, luddite, web 2.0 | 1 Comment

I’ve written a new post on the TechLearning blog titled “Farewell, linear conversations?”

Technorati Tags: , , ,

14th January 2007

Cold day in Colorado

posted in luddite, travel | 3 Comments

The winter ice storm in Oklahoma continued today canceling (again) Frontier airline flights from Denver, so I joined my cousin and a Denver friend in a day of unexpected snow skiing at Copper Mountain. Thankfully, we were able to redeem our Frontier ticket stubs for half-price lift tickets (actually buy 1, get 1 free, but that worked out as half price.)

Devin and Wesley at Copper Mountain

The weather was bitterly cold most of the day on the mountain, with the temperature hovering between zero and 10 degrees fahrenheit.

High speed lift at Copper Mountain

That did not stop us from having a great day of skiing, however! I reflected that I had not gone snow skiing since 1995, and given the fact that I’m not in great physical shape right now I was glad to ski the greens and avoid falling down all day! Hot chocolate following our first run of the day never tasted better!

I went to school for four years in Colorado and skied a few times each year, and have been back to the mountains of New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming and the Pacific Northwest a few times since. It was GREAT to be back in the mountains today, and experience the magic of skiing down a slope (in dry and warm clothes, thankfully) as snow softly fell from the sky.

I certainly counted my blessings today. It is a great opportunity to get to go snow skiing… I’m guessing it’s an activity that a relatively small percentage of people on our planet have experienced.

It was also great to enjoy the day without technology, with the exception of my cell phone that let me web-post a few pictures to Flickr early in the day before the battery died. (It didn’t like the cold.) No iPod, no computers or handhelds with WiFi access (although it was available on the mountain.) I love opportunities to get out and experience the majestic wonder of the outdoors. :-)

Technorati Tags: , , ,

24th December 2006

Podcast105: Thinking Critically About Library and School Technologies

posted in luddite, podcasts | 1 Comment

This podcast features a recorded discussion with Dr. Andrew Wertheimer and Jessamyn West at the conclusion of the 2006 Hawaii Library Association’s annual conference. Our topic was the ways in which learners should, perhaps in the spirit of Neil Postman, continually think critically about new technologies touted as the next great trend for libraries and schools.

Show notes for this podcast include:

  1. Homepage of Dr. Andrew Wertheimer
  2. Flickr home of Dr. Wertheimer
  3. Blog of Jessamyn West: librarian.net
  4. Flickr home of Jessamyn West
  5. Upgrading Mindware Presentation at HLA06 (Teaching Beyond the Textbook)
  6. Neil Postman’s book, “Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business”
  7. Neil Postman’s book, “Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology”
  8. Marshall McLuhan and Bruce Powers’ book, “The Global Village: Transformations in World Life and Media in the 21st Century” (Marshall McLuhan is the author I referenced but could not remember in the intro to this podcast)
  9. Good Night, and Good Luck (movie referenced in our discussion)

Subscribe to “Moving at the Speed of Creativity” weekly podcasts! Podcast RSS Feed

iTunes Podcast Link

Receive an email alert whenever a new Speed of Creativity podcast is published!


Powered by FeedBlitz

 
icon for podpress  Podcast105: Thinking Critically About Library and School Technologies [29:16m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (1049)
27th November 2006

Reservations about empowerment without accountability

posted in disruptive-technology, leadership, literacy, luddite, politics, schoolreform | 1 Comment

Joe Makley shared a thoughtful comment last night to my post from December 2005 on “Educational Banner Evangelism.” Joe is questioning advocacy for constructivism and empowering teachers without accountability and at least minimum expectations based on identified standards. He wrote:

The point being, we still have standards, and they are more important than ever. It isn’t supposed to be easy for kids or us, and I don’t think technology will really play that powerful role unless we have some accountability for its use. If we just become constructivist ideologues and “guides on the side” and no one is minding the store; that isn’t going to work. It’s OK for us to tell teachers what to do now and then. And hold them accountable, and show them why and how to do it…I just get very nervous when people talk about empowering teachers, as if they’re all God’s gift to integration and they just need to be unleashed. In most cases, that’s not been my experience.

I agree that some teachers may NOT be ready and want to be “empowered” in the ways I described in this post. What I was (and am still) advocating is really a response to what I view as a very scripted, almost zero-instructional autonomy approach to instruction which has continued to gain momentum in recent years via NCLB and other efforts, including the standards movement. I acknowledge that no solution is going to meet the needs of every context– but generally I think we need MORE autonomy rather than less so that teachers and instruction itself can be truly differentiated to meet the needs of each learner. I do not want to be perceived as advocating an educational environment devoid of leadership or vision. To the contrary, our need for visionary leadership is as great as ever.

We still seem to be captives of our school-as-factory paradigms, and the fact that few people (if any) seem to have a firm grasp of how technology can be blended into face-to-face learning as well as online learning spaces poses a real challenge to us all. I do hear Joe’s point that some teachers (and even administrators) still refuse to even use email– and as a result miss important bulletins and other informational items. Late adopters / laggards when it comes to digital technology use are and will continue to be an issue with our teacher cadre… but I don’t think these people (who have a variety of reasons for not adopting technology use) should cause us all to remain focused on a standards-based, scripted curriculum in which everyone is expected to fall in line and walk lock-stepped through the instructional timeline of the year.

isolated desk

I continue to be captivated by what David Warlick discussed in his K-12 Online pre-conference keynote regarding “side trips” for learning. Often the “side trips” are the most engaging and worthwhile parts of the school experience for learners, and the times when learning opportunities can become most differentiated. Our present K-12 educational climate of “mandated standards for all learners” assumes that a single mold is going to work for everyone. It hasn’t, it doesn’t, and it won’t. Again this does not mean we have lower expectations for student and teacher achievement: it should in fact mean we have HIGHER expectations. I don’t think we should or must have UNIFORM expectations for everyone, however.

I also think we need to frame discussions about education and a vision for educational reform in terms of BLENDED learning. We should be wary of proposals to make all learning digital. Similarly, we should be wary of absolutist neo-luddites who categorically oppose all digitization of learning environments. Education needs to be RO (read-only) at times but also RW (read-write.) I agree we don’t need to become mindless “constructivist ideologues,” but we certainly need to become more vocal advocates for constructivism in education that we currently see in many quarters. Accountability and the standards movement have effectively crushed support for constructivist teaching and learning methods in many schools, and I think this trend is lamentable.

Is it “wrong” for a teacher to not use email? The neo-Luddite in me is about to emerge. I don’t think it’s wrong if that teacher is a good teacher. My oldest two children’s kindergarden teacher did use email, but that had really nothing to do with her status (in our minds as parents and educators ourselves) as a “master teacher.” Her use of developmental centers, the ways in which she was able to differentiate learning for the students in her care– her ability to challenge students and also have fun learning with them– all of these skills had nothing to do with technology.

So, do we need standards? We need to have curricular and learning goals and objectives. “Standards” have come to reflect the idea that EVERY student in EVERY context needs the same things. This perception on my part probably best explains my opposition to the standards and accountability movements as they have been imposed on me as a learner, parent, and teacher-leader. I am an advocate for differentiated education, authentic assessment and messy learning. I oppose scripted education which holds as its ideal vision every student sitting quietly in his/her desk, open to the same page of the textbook at the same moment in time, filling out the same worksheet that will lead to uniformly “acceptable” or even “exemplary” performance on a subsequent summative assessment measured with a bubble sheet.

I stand by my original position, but do appreciate Joe’s perspective and challenging thoughts. We need to empower teachers and administrators. If a teacher is doing a poor job, we should help him/her improve– but if they won’t change, we need to get rid of them. Yes, we need to fire them. And principals should have greater power to do just that. The problem today, of course, is that many administrators have a myopic focus on standards and student achievement as measured by summative standard tests– and in such an environment, it is likely to be precisely the out-of-the-box, creative and innovative teacher who is challenging students by teaching in differentiated ways that might be singled out by the principal as being WRONG.

The schoolhouse should not be a factory. We’ve all grown up with factory-style schools, so it is an extremely challenging task to ask each other to envision a school that follows a different model. Yet that is precisely the work to which I think we should all commit ourselves more in the months and years to come. To the extent that “standards” and “accountability” serve to primarily reinforce the vision and outcomes of a factory-style school system, I oppose them.

We need teachers who are able to engage students in educational work that matters, not just meet standards through digital worksheets that permit greater levels of technocratic efficiency. We need a school system that empowers teachers to be creative and passionate, and helps them stretch the learners in their care beyond all expectations. If the standards movement and big-stick accountability was going to “save us” in the education space, I think we’d be seeing much better results than we are currently. My perception is that much of the accountability movement as it has been promulgated most recently has everything with continuing to discredit schools and teachers so the coffers of public education dollars can be opened for private, commercial interests– instead of honestly trying to help students learn and making learning environments more effective. We do need educational deregulation– and our need for visionary leaders as well as teachers with high expectations for learners is as great as ever.

13th November 2006

Reflections on Ewan’s keynote on Professional development

posted in blogs, literacy, luddite | 1 Comment

Well, I am currently riding the red-eye flight from Honolulu to Dallas, and have slept a good bit of the time. I now find myself awake, however, and looking at the clocks it appears it is 5:34 am US Central time, and 1:34 am Hawaii time. We’ve been in the air almost five hours, and just just crossed over the western coastline of the United States and are now over California.

I have just listened to Ewan McIntosh’s keynote for the K-12 Online Conference, and am actually listening to his preso a second time and now taking notes on it. If the K-12 Online Conference had just been a traditional conference this would not have been possible: I would have had ONE OPPORTUNITY to listen to his ideas, and if I didn’t “get” or understand something the first time that would be too bad. Not so with an online conference in which the presentations are shared in an asychronous format. There is POWER here, POWER which I did not have access to in my own formal education. This is POWER I want my own children to have access to in their formal and informal educations, and it is exciting (as I probably mention quite a lot here) to be living in a time when such transformational power over the publishing and sharing of information is accessible to so many.

Ewan asked metaphorically in his keynote: “How did we know in the past what we were learning in professional development?” My answer to this is: We didn’t and often still don’t know what teachers are learning via professional development because we persist in “spray and pray” models of training. Often session surveys and assessments are conducted to see how presenters did in the eyes of the participants, but LEARNING is not actually measured in any complex, authentic way at most conferences, district or regional professional development meetings.

Ewan raised some great points in his podcast when he related how he asks kids “the class they enjoy the most,” and then asks them about “their best teachers.” He points out, correctly I think, that the answers you get to these questions are often not the same. Sometimes, and perhaps most often, the teachers students identify as the best are the ones who challenge and stretch them the most. This reminds me of some ideas I’m reading now in “Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience” by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi regarding pleasure and enjoyment. Csikszentmihalyi claims that pleasure does not take effort, but enjoyment does: because we have to invest our “psychic energy” in the activity. On page 46 of the book he writes:

Enjoyment is characterized by this forward movement: by a sense of novelty, of accomplishment. Playing a close game of tennis that stretches one’s ability is enjoyable, as is reading a book that reveals things in a new light, as is having a conversation that leads us to express ideas we didn’t know we had. Closing a contested business deal, or any piece of work well done, is enjoyable. None of these experiences may be particularly pleasurable at the time they are taking place, but afterward we think back on them and say, “That was fun” and wish they would happen again. After an enjoyable event we know that we have changed, that our self has grown: in some respect, we have become more complex as a result of it.

Experiences that give pleasure can also give enjoyment, but the two sensations are quite different. For instance, everybody takes pleasure in eating. To enjoy food, however, is more difficult. A gourmet enjoys eating, as does anyone who pays enough attention to a meal so as to discriminate the various sensations provided by it. As this example suggests, we can experience pleasure without any investment of psychic energy, whereas enjoyment happens only as a result of unusual investments of attention. A person can feel pleasure without any effort, if the appropriate centers in his brain are electrically stimulated, or as a result of the chemical stimulation of drugs. But it is impossible to enjoy a tennis game, a book, or a conversation unless attention is fully concentrated on the activity.

I think what Ewan is getting at in asking students which class was their favorite and who was their best teacher has a lot to do with this distinction between pleasure and enjoyment, as Csikszentmihalyi defines the terms.

Ewan encourages us to think about and focus on the idea of “teachers as learners.” I totally agree with him on this. He observes that MANY TEACHERS ARE CLOCK WATCHING when it comes to professional development. This reminds me of the last few conferences I’ve attended and participated in relating to learning and educational technology. The Region 9 (Wichita Falls, Texas) technology conference back in October provided a classic example of the way we tend to measure professional professional development most often in these types of conferences. What was the measurement method? STICKERS ON A WORKSHEET AWARDED BASED ON SEAT TIME. The similarity to my own daughter’s first grade classroom where the students “fill their honey pots” with a positive consequence for good, compliant behavior was striking. My session at that conference on “Enhanced Search Strategies” was attended by over one hundred people, and they formed quite a long line after the session literally “getting their sticker” for having attended my session and sitting politely in a chair in the room for 45 minutes while I talked (and did ask a few questions, as well as provided some time for small group discussion, I will add.) I am not condeming all “sit and get” professional development here, but am highlighting the accuracy of what Ewan is talking about regarding CLOCK WATCHING teachers. Our educational systems tend to strongly reinforce CLOCK WATCHING by both students and teachers. I think CLOCK WATCHING is a carry-over from the 19th century industrial factory-model of education, and it is high-time we adopt educational paradigms which move beyond and transcend CLOCK WATCHING. This goes for teacher professional development also.

Ewan also challenges us (in his K-12 online podcast keynote) to think about how many “top classes” in our schools now are still taught primarily via lecture. His challenge is similar to the message I had in my “Upgrading Mindware” session during HLA 2006– we need to think about those activities which we do now as “synchronous, non-interactive” learning activities (like non-interactive lectures) and consider how much of that content can be “off-loaded” to online/offline time when students are not necessarily face to face with each other or their instructor. That way the intrinsic value and possiblities of the FACE TO FACE environment can be realized, and as Ewan says we can focus on INTERACTIVE learning experiences when we are physically in the same place and time as other learners (and the teacher) which challenge us to think DEEPER rather than just memorize and regurgitate information accurately.

When i was thinking about these sorts of topics on my flights out to Hawaii a few days ago, I was reminded of my own biology class experience in college. I remember the lead instructor was adamant that everyone memorize the “Krebs cycle.” Like everyone else in the class, I did my best to memorize it, but today I find that I only have a vague idea of what it meant. If I had online access I would visit the WikiPedia article for the “Krebs Cycle” now (I’ll link it here later before I post this) to read more about it. The point is that in my education at that time, the focus was on memorization and regurgitation. We certainly could have utilized a variety of different video lectures (probably on VHS tape I guess, personal computer technology was just getting started in the fall of 1989 when I took that course and did not include video/multimedia like it does today. I find myself wishing that more of my REQUIRED technical classes as an undergraduate (especially Electrical Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, Biology, Physics, and Chemistry) had focused more on interactive labs and collaborative experiences than on bookwork and memorization.

I think one of the big fallacies and elephants in the rooms about learning, at least in my own college experience, was that all the students were reading the assigned material for class each session we met. Yes, there were certainly some classes that I did read all the material before each class as I was supposed to, but those classes were honestly few and far between. More often I would go to class and take notes, and possibly skim the assigned material– particularly if I had to complete an assignment for that day. Based on my notes, the handouts from the instructor, any assignments or worksheets we completed, and usually some cursory skimming of the assigned material I would manage to pass tests and complete assignments. This varied a lot, of course, depending on the course and the assignments which were required. But even in classes that required daily homework which was assessed, like the Calculus class I took as a freshman in college, the focus was much more on getting the answer right (the same answer that was worked out in the book) rather than truly understanding the concepts and taking ownership of them myself. I simply had too many things I had to do each day to physically have time to read all the assigned materials for class– even though I was probably a pretty decent reader speed-wise. Had I been provided with video podcast versions of class lectures would I have learned more? Undoubtedly I would have. I was freqently traveling away from class as a member of the college debate team, and it would have been WONDERFUL to have a video iPod full of the class lectures that I both missed an attended. As I said, however, not of this technology was available at the time I was an undergraduate student from 1988-1992.

So on a very personal level, I resonate with these ideas Ewan discusses of needing to make learning that is F2F (face to face) more interactive and focused on authentic concept mastery. Ewan also talks in this podcast, however, about the importance of remembering that all learning activities of value CANNOT BE DIGITIZED. This is also a great point we should all remember, and I need to be reminded about often. My personal online workshop curricula site is, after all, titled “Teach Digital.” (teachdigital.pbwiki.com) This title by itself seems to imply a contention that all learning should move into a digital environment. While I certainly do think that an increasing amount of our instruction, collaboration, and knowledge product creation should move into the digital space, I really do have a neo-luddite (or as I talked about a couple of years ago at the Texas state computing in education conference, a member of the “Luddite Litterati”) which makes me resonate with those who emphasize the value of FACE TO FACE experiences and interactions.

I know this blog post is getting long, but I rationalize that for myself by remembering that anyone who is bored with this long post can and will just stop reading– and that is fine, since no one is paying for these ideas and I’m sharing them more to help myself process the ideas Ewan shared in his podcast than anything else. As Ewan mentions in the podcast also, there are many reasons for educators to blog, and one of the most important is to use blogs as tools in our own continuing learning process. As a self-proclaimed reflective practicioner, I am committed to continually learning and growing in my ideas about what it means to be both a novice and expert learner in different contexts in the 21st century. Sharing my discoveries and ruminations about learning (and often also about technology) via my blog is a powerful way of both processing ideas, documenting them for later reference myself, and also sharing them with a wider audience that in all liklihood will contribute back comments and feedback which will in turn further assist in my own journey of professional development.

Well, I think that’s enough listening and writing for now on this red eye flight. I think I’ll try to get a few more winks of sleep! How fun and amazing it is to be at 32,000 feet above the earth’s surface probably going somewhere around 600 miles per hour, and be taught by an innovative edcuator from Edinburgh, Scotland who is an entire continent and other ocean away from me in physical terms– but right here in my headphones in virtial terms. Long live the K-12 Online Conference! :-)

Technorati Tags: ,

11th November 2006

Reflections on librarians, web 2.0 and educational change

posted in luddite, web 2.0 | 1 Comment

What a great treat it has been to be here in Hawaii at the state librarian’s conference to present, listen, share and learn! I presented three times today, which was a bit exhausting, but it was also a lot of fun. I was able to take in several fantastic sessions given by others too. The after-dinner presentation by noted Hawaii filmmaker Edgy Lee was awesome. She gave me permission to record and share as a podcast her presentation, but as I left the iRiver USB cable back home (and don’t have another one to borrow) I’ll work on that as well as other podcasts next week after I’m back home. A presentation I missed but was able to record (and will also share as a podcast, with permission of course) was Victor Edwards’ preso “Webcast, Podcast, Sakai and the Millenial Student.” Victor is at UC Berkeley and heads up their IT group, which is heavily into webcasting. I really enjoyed visiting with Victor at dinner last night along with Aaron Schmidt, who is presenting tomorrow on “Meeting Teens on their Own Terms: Games in Libraries.” Aaron is the author of the Walking Paper blog. Michael Porter (shown below during his preso today) was quite inspirational and thought provoking on the subject of flickr and librarian “digital social networking.”

I really enjoy hanging out with librarians and listening to the issues they care about, because librarians really are at the center of the technologically-wrought changes our educational systems seem to be chafing under. Like classroom teachers, I perceive many librarians are not aware of some things that may be taken for granted here in the edublogosphere– WikiPedia, wiki technology, RSS, etc. The key is that the librarians here are LEARNERS and they’ve come to expand their ideas and instructional repertoire.

The discussions I’ve had online and offline the past few weeks regarding the digital native / digital immigrant dichotomy have definitely changed some of my perceptions and the messages I am sharing in presentations like those I gave today. It is not very helpful to convince an audience they are “digital immigrants,” while the students we teach are “digital natives,” because this often does become an excuse for not attempting to be fluent in new digital technologies. The key is that we are all LEARNERS, and we all have the capacity to grow and learn together in the use of digital technologies as well as anything else.

I was delighted to be able to skype with Cheryl Oakes, Jen Wagner and Graham Wegner during two of my sessions. Each one of them added fresh perspectives on the topics we were discussing, and I am so grateful for the connections which web 2.0, blogging, and the Internet in general has and continues to enable. I also invited Cheryl to explain and share a plug for Women of Web 2.0 as well, which is a group few of the librarians in attendance at my sessions had heard about previously.

I read with interest Will Richardson’s post tonight “So What Do We Do Now?” I think the answer to this is pretty straightforward: We continue the conversations. We continue to empower students to create digital media, to discover and share their own voices, and learn how to use digital tools to think deeply, ask and answer questions that are worth exploring. We also strive to engage leaders at all levels in discussions about what it means to teach and learn in the 21st Century. I am wanting to really work in the coming year in Oklahoma on initiatives that get our educational and political leaders to recognize the high quality, digitally powered work our students are doing and can do. Focusing on the leadership and political piece of the web 2.0 puzzle is undoubtedly challenging, but I think ultimately “the answer” lies with continued dialog and conversations with a wide variety of stakeholders. Heck, my own school district in Ok