EdTechTrek

Having just read a recent post by Scott McLeod over on Dangerously Irrelevant, I felt compelled to ask the same questions that he raises… that being, why are districts compelled to enforce the same level of filtering on their teachers as they do for their students? The result of this is that so many potentially useful resources and related learning activities go unrealized. I do understand the vicious cycle that precipitates all of this, though. I don’t think anyone is intending to treat teachers like children, yet that is the perceived result. From an administrative point of view, I think all employees are simply not trusted to avoid situations that could bring about embarrassment and even litigation for individuals, schools, and districts. I also believe that is true… that there are always “bad apples” mixed in with the great apples of any basket. The problem is that policy tends to err on the side of caution rather than risk. The result is that all employees get treated like children… except for the I.T. folks who control the filters.

Although ‘how things are’ make sense to me, they do not appear ‘right’ to me. I cannot for the life of me understand why teachers cannot have control over filtering and enable or unblock sites they deem professionally worthy. Just as we have consequences for poor choices that students make, we should also have the same logical consequences for the poor choices that teachers [may] make.

On one hand, we criticize and admonish teachers for not quickly adopting new tools and implementing them in innovative ways, yet in the other hand, we put so many roadblocks in their path that – for most – are just not worth the time and frustration. If the administration is not going to advocate for teachers, then who?

Perhaps scissors and other sharp objects should also be off limits to teachers. After all, they are potentially dangerous. Heck, how about just removing the power cords on those interactive whiteboards while you’re at it. Oh, and put that software on all of the teachers’ computers so that if any changes are made to the system, they will all be undone on a reboot. After all, it’s all about minimizing risk and need for intervention/support.

…of course, we could always expect and assist teachers in being the professionals that they are.

(image by Scott McLeod)

A great deal has been swirling around in my brain over the past weeks. It has felt as if I have been pulled in way too many conceptual directions. This seems to be what is happening as access to resources and people who share ideas and resources (diigo, twitter, plurk, rss, blogs, elluminate sessions, UStreamed events, podcasts, Coveritlive live blogs…) continues to abound. It is wise advise to be able to filter all of that information, but somehow I have not quite gotten my filter to the point that I need it to be. It is all interesting. It is all relevant. I love it all. But, it reminds me of one of the toughest lessons that I had to learn as I went through the grueling dissertation process… narrowing and focusing in on a specific question/issue to be investigated. For me, that was the most difficult process. I wonder if I need to go back to that idea just a little in this fantastic information age…

So, in the sprit of that thought, I am returning to some ideas that I have been wrestling with as a result of reading Neil Postman’s book, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business (1985). If you have not read it, I highly recommend it. Like anything else Postman writes, it is not an “easy” read. But you need to be doing this type of reading. Reading blogs has been wonderfully rewarding and challenging, but at times it can be a little synonymous with “quick mental snacks”. In these exciting times of immediacy of information and access to so much great public discourse, don’t rob yourself of the opportunity (and discipline) of getting lost in important ideas found in great books. Be certain to feed yourself in diverse ways that both feed and strengthen your noodle.

Here are two related quotations that I have yet to reconcile:

“…television clearly does impair the student’s freedom to read, and it does so with innocent hands, so to speak. Television does not ban books, it simply displaces them.” (p. 141)

We know that “screen time” has increased over the years with kids and adults alike (Pew1 Pew2). There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Yet, one can’t help to raise the question, “What’s being lost?”. And, to follow up on that question, “Is what’s being lost worth losing?”

Neither of these questions are easy to answer. The first question requires one to determine if indeed something is being lost, and secondly, if the answer is “yes”, then is the loss significant? Does it matter? Is increased screen time simply altering tools of reading (like the Kindle), or is it displacing valuable reading habits altogether? Although I have no statistics to support my hunch here, I tend to think that the Kindle and other such devices are not “the rage” with kids. Although great writing can be accessed and read online (not yet where it needs to be, though), I know that is not how most kids are spending their “on-line” screen time.

Here’s my next springboard in this thought stream:

“As a television show, and a good one, Sesame Street does not encourage children to love school or anything about school. It encourages them to love television.” (p. 144)

So, to extend Postman’s idea, is the Internet encouraging children to love learning or simply love the Internet?

No doubt, kids are learning on-line. However, it seems to me that the challenge to teachers is greater than ever. Kids are huge users of the Internet, but to generalize, they are not such great learners who are able to harness the incredible power of Internet resources and capabilities to connect to unparalleled learning networks and learning opportunities. They need teachers to show them this side. They need teachers to set them up to be part of powerful, meaningful, and relevant learning that takes advantage of the incredible resources just a few mouse clicks and browser plugins away. They need teachers to help them form (not give) worthy questions to pursue. They need teachers to help them organize their “plans of attack”. They need teachers to show them how to efficiently and effectively find relevant and valid information. They need teachers to make them think about the hard questions they are not thinking about or are avoiding. They need teachers to help them see that hard work is a worthy endeavor. They need teachers who understand multiple ways of collaborating, sharing and creating learning artifacts without compromising the quality of the learning outcomes. They need teachers who understand the great learning potential that can be harnessed with new tools and new ways to work and create and share. They need other leaders and administrators who understand all of this as well.

So where does this all leave us?  Where does it leave you? These ideas continually challenge me. They challenge my students and sometimes come from my students, which I love.

Photo credit: Cayusa

Addendum

This is NOT how we want kids to be using their network potential!

I came across an article that discussed Internet safety for students and it briefly touched upon different ways students find to get around our “safety” mechanisms. This one in particular caught my eye and struck me as being quite insidious. Hidemyass.com states:

.. An anonymous free proxy service aimed at hiding your online identity. Use our service to hide your IP address and bypass your work/school web filter with ease. For example, is MySpace blocked at work/school? It won’t be any longer if you use our free service

It also provides a link to 28 more such services.

The Internet has certainly brought so much value and power to the individual learner. I just wonder if there is any documentation out there that would let us know the percentage of students who are using such services to LEARN vs. those who are using them to access inappropriate content and services. MySpace, Facebook, and other social networking sites are commonly blocked at many schools and are frequently destinations for students multiple times throughout the day. I would not put those in the inappropriate category, but they can certainly be a distraction when time is supposed to be put on learning activities rather than social ones. Yes, students can and should be networking as part of their learning, but I doubt that this is the majority of social networking use for teens.

But, what if teachers structured things so that students needed to network virtually in order to complete learning assignments and projects? Many teachers are doing just that. This would require that social networking services not be filtered while at school. The solution – many districts now host and manage their own such services in-house. But somehow this still takes control and responsibility away from teachers and students and keeps the power in the hands of the administrators who play “god” with permissions, settings, accounts,… something many of us resent as we are used to controlling our own learning and networking when not at school. When we take such control away from students, to the benefits (safety)  outweigh the drawbacks? If so, from whose perspective? Teachers? Parents? Administrators? IT personnel? Students? Or, are we fooling ourselves with such protection mechanisms, as students who want to can easily get around them. For every new proxy service that gets discovered and added to school filter rules, new ones emerge. Is it a game worth playing? Is it a game that must be played? Kids are kids, after all.

Internet-facilitated networking and learning sure makes things more messy and potentially problematic. If anyone out there knows of some documentation that reports on the types of interactions students are embarking on while using these proxy services to get around school-based filters, I’d love to hear about it.

Having more fun with Flickrtoys – inspired by a recent discussion on internet filtering in schools. I firmly believe that if we must have filters that teachers should have control over filter settings, not IT personnel, administration and a huge mound of red tape. If I, as a teacher, find a valuable website blocked by our district filter, I would like the power and professional courtesy of unblocking the site myself… immediately. I can’t wait until tomorrow or next week – or to be denied access… period.  Anyway, I hope this image conveys my feelings here.  What are your stories/frustrations/solutions on this topic? I would especially like to hear your realistic solutions.

Photo Credit