Re: :: TALO :: Re: Learning In The 21st Century - Some Questions

[Janet Hawtin]

Hi folks

Here is a first cut of some questions which might be useful. Add your
own, mash these, as you wish.
The idea is not to find fault with existing systems but to understand
risk from a student centred perspective
and including wider social risks and opportunities to help see the
implications of institutional
or systemic risk management choices. Feel free to wrangle these into
themes on the wiki or in blogs etc.
I think creating some useful ways forward or examples aroung these
kinds of questions might be constructive.

Physics of safety.
Institutional risk and student development? What role does risk play
in learning?
If there are 'no risk' approaches to working with technology in
schools, where does that risk then happen?
Students are active in myspace, facebook, youtube, online games
forums, sites for sharing artwork and self expression.
These tools are a part of the fabric of young lives. If it is too
challenging for students to learn the impact of choices in
online media in schools, where does it happen? Where could it happen?
What does it look like?

Supporting systems
Do the current legal and insurance models serve Australian society well?
What kinds of models as used elsewhere, do they result in different
opportunities/risks.
eg Which policies on websites send children underground rather than
providing means for supported participation
Do blame based insurance models work at counterpoint to systems where
shared responsibility is required.
What are the methods and processes for review of these frameworks for
a 21 century networked community.

Participative safety - safety is something I make.
If safety is seen only as a fence around a cohort of students, what
opportunities are lost to ensure safety as a function of constructive
participation? Bullying is a concern in schoolyards. What happens if
the schoolyard points of reference for power are the loudest
exemplars on the internet, perhaps reinforced by media which promotes
conflict, win/lose, models for managing communities.
Big brother house, biggest loser, weakest link, largely gladiatorial
approaches to conflict resolution.
If these models are the context which students see, where can win/win
collaboration and inclusive solutions be formed.

Visible power.
Where do students find exemplars of best practice collaboration,
participation and power online?
If the kinds of 'voice' made possible by using technologies visibly
online to generate instances of constructive use of power, leadership,
participation, online are not available in school, where do children
find the norms for collaboration which might fit in a workplace or
university?

Developing safe adults
If a student should have the skills to participate in a workplace
using only 'appropriate use guidelines' by the end of school, where
does that
skill and maturity develop. How could it be staged. Who could
contribute to decisions about when the student is ready for new
challenges?
Safety for elderly people is a societal risk. How do practices in
participation which respect the needs for safety of others develop in
contexts where students learn safety as a function of same age
participation with the bad people all being 'other'.

Success and diversity.
Students use the internet primarily to connect with people they know.
Adults often connect around ideas hobbies, interests or projects which
they are following, regardless of the location of participants.
Bikeriding, technology, dogbreeding, music, art.
Are there ways for students to find their own path for work or special
interest in online communities.
Are there mentors who can support the development of these skills?
How does/could this kind of special interest community work offer
support for students learning at school.
What kinds of negotiations should happen and what kind of online
systems are well designed for children to participate in these kinds
of communities? What kinds of mentoring communities engage in skill
based criteria for participation?
Perhaps this kind of online diversification provide useful
opportunities for different kinds of community and work success and
ways forward.

Artichoke's blog has a post on teen suicide which includes some
relevant links and many more questions.
http://artichoke.typepad.com/artichoke/2008/04/education-signi.html

Janet

[Janet Hawtin]

I have found this event and thread difficult work but it feels like
work which needs doing.
For me this is about facing fear. Systemically and socially I think it
might also be
a matter of how we process fear and what facing it looks like.
Two aspirational perspectives about the kinds of work we might need to be doing:

Matthieu Ricard habits of happiness
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/191
Mind training matters.

Stuart B Hill's values for social ecology have been useful
http://www.shintaido-australia.org/shill/index.html#nextsteps

And a challenge.
I found Clifford Stoll difficult to watch and felt impatient, but went
back the next day to listen again.
Imagine Stoll as a student. A student who wants to be a scientist. We
want to encourage participation in science.
What does this mean in terms of encouraging inquisitive journeys.
http://www.ted.com/speakers/view/id/213
He is brilliant, quirky and passionate about learning and looks like a
challenge for a teaching and learning context.
And yet he is contributing, and cares deeply about the importance of
other people caring about that kind of contribution.
What does this mean? Imagine Stoll as a student. Do we have skills for
being inclusive of diversity in the ways we structure learning.
What is efficient/rich, what is useful/interesting, how can parents
and students choose what feels valuable.
How can teachers get support for trying things which have no precedent.
How can students get support for trying things which have no precedent.
What kinds of systems help our society to face its fears in ways which
make us more connected and whole.
When things break do we have methods for healing individually and collectively.

Teachers and schools are under a lot of pressure because we have
socially so much disparity and unprocessed mess.
It is not fair to pack all of this challenge into schools for
industrial processing.
It is equally not useful to exclude who we are from our education system.
So there needs to be some flow and shared responsibility.
We need the ability to develop skills in constructively negotiating
for a diverse and aspirationally motivated Australia.
The Beyond Beliefs Islam and non Islam Australia conversations were powerful.
I see these kinds of cross connections and conversations being a
larger part of our social processing.
They help us to do the work required to deal constructively with diversity?
There are other ways too? Fun and festivals. Music and language.

We probably cannot do some of these things using the industrial
processing techniques which have become familiar in education.
Class sizes and timetables, standard tests come with some underlying
assumptions about value, goals and common directions which might need
review. Perhaps we need to review resourcing for schools and to do
this as a social responsibility(as per Clifford Stoll) as much as a
funding question for a sector of governance.

We could do with constructive Media participation which finds ways to
make commercial value through supporting inclusive and constructive
negotiation of contention.

Perhaps each individual in society could be seen as a contributor who
is on a learning journey facing fears and finding ways to collaborate
constructively. Doing the mind training. The mix of opportunities,
negotiations and also fences which relate to that person's
contributions
need to be about making safety through the kinds of participation
which is required and through encouraging them to take new steps.
Fences used need to relate to the point on the path of the person on
that journey, whether that is because they are very young or because
there is a problem which needs to be handled in a controlled space.

These are just my thoughts.
Passing the baton back to the gang there are many folks on list who
are more experienced
in the specifics of these issues in a school context.
What does your ideal outcome look like?
Which pieces of puzzle need to be in place to make first steps in
those directions?

Janet

[Janet Hawtin]

Two other thoughts which have been suggested are comparisons between
traditional forms of connection for children and modern equivallents.

Penpals are an example.
Perhaps blogs are a similar model to penpals.

Is transparency of the correspondence something which contributes to security
by enabling the parents to see what is being shared and to be part of
the dialogue/negotiation.

[alexanderhayes]

There is some really great things here Janet.

Phew....hmmm....just overwhelming really. So much thought out into
this and some great questions. We could quote the whole thing really
and run with that but I'd like to hear some other voices come into
this conversation.

Perhaps a voice thread might work.

I'll test my new pro-threads account now and post the link back here
and perhaps embed it in the wiki.

On Apr 6, 4:08 pm, "Janet Hawtin" <lucych...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have found this event and thread difficult work but it feels like
> work which needs doing.
> For me this is about facing fear. Systemically and socially I think it
> might also be
> a matter of how we process fear and what facing it looks like.
> Two aspirational perspectives about the kinds of work we might need to be doing:
>

> Matthieu Ricard habits of happinesshttp://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/191
> Mind training matters.
>
> Stuart B Hill's values for social ecology have been usefulhttp://www.shintaido-australia.org/shill/index.html#nextsteps

>
> And a challenge.
> I found Clifford Stoll difficult to watch and felt impatient, but went
> back the next day to listen again.
> Imagine Stoll as a student. A student who wants to be a scientist. We
> want to encourage participation in science.

> What does this mean in terms of encouraging inquisitive journeys.http://www.ted.com/speakers/view/id/213

[Janet Hawtin]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 7:58 PM, alexanderhayes
<alexander...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There is some really great things here Janet.
>
> Phew....hmmm....just overwhelming really. So much thought out into
> this and some great questions. We could quote the whole thing really
> and run with that but I'd like to hear some other voices come into
> this conversation.
>
> Perhaps a voice thread might work.
>
> I'll test my new pro-threads account now and post the link back here
> and perhaps embed it in the wiki.

Yes I am hoping the ideas get munged refined and added to by other folks.
There must be so many people with hands on experience who could make
the questions more specific or better informed.

Janet

[alexanderhayes]

http://voicethread.com/share/99590/

On Apr 6, 4:08 pm, "Janet Hawtin" <lucych...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have found this event and thread difficult work but it feels like
> work which needs doing.
> For me this is about facing fear. Systemically and socially I think it
> might also be
> a matter of how we process fear and what facing it looks like.
> Two aspirational perspectives about the kinds of work we might need to be doing:
>

> Matthieu Ricard habits of happinesshttp://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/191
> Mind training matters.
>
> Stuart B Hill's values for social ecology have been usefulhttp://www.shintaido-australia.org/shill/index.html#nextsteps

>
> And a challenge.
> I found Clifford Stoll difficult to watch and felt impatient, but went
> back the next day to listen again.
> Imagine Stoll as a student. A student who wants to be a scientist. We
> want to encourage participation in science.

> What does this mean in terms of encouraging inquisitive journeys.http://www.ted.com/speakers/view/id/213

[Leigh Blackall]

Yes, but are they "credible"?

--
--
Leigh Blackall
+64(0)21736539
skype - leigh_blackall
SL - Leroy Goalpost
http://learnonline.wordpress.com

[Janet Hawtin]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Leigh Blackall <leighb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, but are they "credible"?

Sorry Leigh

The link hangs for me. fwiw I am not in any position as a non-educator
participant in an open community to critque who is credible in a
discussion about safety in schools.

I felt I was in a position to try and make an opportunity for those
folks who might have something to bring to the topic. I have tried to
structure the opportunity to keep the focus on what might be and to
avoid ligntning strikes through people who are having a go from any
perspective. ie I am trying to make an opportunity about sharing
responsibility not finding villians.
I think there is room for the wider community to have an impact by
using that kind of conversation wherever they are.
One day is a small target so I am trying to find ways to get the
conversation sitting on a broader base and with a wider contribution
than the kind of scope which might fit in a one day face to face. Any
groundwork done online in weeks prior could be very useful.

If a framework which supports open practice in schools is the goal,
what are your ideal approaches to safety and learning
What first steps feel useful to you.

Janet

[Janet Hawtin]

copying the text from the link:

Mike Seyfang and I [John Travers] have been talking about the event, and.....
I'll be in Japan for most of April, so won't be able to take a lead. Mike is just taking up a full time job and will need his sleeps.

We think that a predominantly online panel discussion with some distant and local panelists for about an hour with an agreed structure using panelists with credibility, representing both sides of the liberty and control viewpoints and hundreds of listeners to the discussion, who have the ability to text in questions and comments [breath] would be a good plan.
So, a) what do you think of this? And b) a good convenor in Adelaide is needed to make it happen on the day.

fwiw this was what made me think I should try and make something happen which made more use of the presence of people in Adelaide.
The event is quite different and the wiki includes the kinds of things we are aiming for now?

The format is now a 1 day face to face event with online contributions happening in a more general way.
I dont know if the current format is better or worse for people. Feel free to comment.

Not trying to do online participation on the day because I figured it would be a full day face to face and that the online conversations could work just as well in an asynchronous way. Keeping it simple.

I thought that building the online perspectives in the weeks prior would provide opportunities for more people with different voices to participate. This conversation is one that is surely happening in many nations and in many schools and communities. Doing good work online regarding solutions for these questions is hopefully a useful project beyond the scope of the Adelaide event.

Joan Russell has offered to chair the event. I think that is a groovesome thing.
Trying for a mix of perspectives
Student, parent, teacher, tech, librarian, department, community, law.
Room for 8 perspectives in the am session.
Can have 14 folks there if we use the boardroom.
There is an open space which can fit more but that would be in the open office area/lunch room.

For me this felt like something might happen at the event if there was a good mix of people there but that the wider conversations around these questions online would be likely to bring together more useful work long term.

Janet

[Bill Kerr]

janet wrote:

The idea is not to find fault with existing systems but to understand risk from a student centred perspective and including wider social risks and opportunities to help see the
implications of institutional or systemic risk management choices

risk from a student centred perspective?

I think that's the wrong approach - even if you frame risk as a positive (which is true) but still if the overall framework is "risk" then you'll get the wrong answers

on the other hand, if the framework is learning (for example) then some risk taking emerges from that discussion as essential

when students take risks they are normally thinking about something else eg. curious, looking for adventure etc. - possibly even those who are "at risk", which again arises from other social factors

if you make risk the focus then you'll end up with a conservative agenda - this risk is justified / is not justified for some wider reason, what wider reason?

Just as if teachers talk about "behaviour management" without factoring in wider issues (such as learning) they'll get the wrong answers too

you could call this the tyranny of the subgoals

- Bill
--
Bill Kerr
http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/

[Janet Hawtin]

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Bill Kerr <bill...@gmail.com> wrote:

janet wrote:

The idea is not to find fault with existing systems but to understand risk from a student centred perspective and including wider social risks and opportunities to help see the
implications of institutional or systemic risk management choices

risk from a student centred perspective?

I think that's the wrong approach - even if you frame risk as a positive (which is true) but still if the overall framework is "risk" then you'll get the wrong answers

on the other hand, if the framework is learning (for example) then some risk taking emerges from that discussion as essential

when students take risks they are normally thinking about something else eg. curious, looking for adventure etc. - possibly even those who are "at risk", which again arises from other social factors

if you make risk the focus then you'll end up with a conservative agenda - this risk is justified / is not justified for some wider reason, what wider reason?

Just as if teachers talk about "behaviour management" without factoring in wider issues (such as learning) they'll get the wrong answers too

you could call this the tyranny of the subgoals

- Bill
--
Bill Kerr
http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/

Thanks Bill
Fair points
I guess I am thinking about the role students play in safety
http://artichoke.typepad.com/artichoke/2008/04/education-signi.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/07/2209870.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/07/2112667.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/01/2079334.htm

I am not suggesting student centred as student right of way, but some correlation between accepted responsibility and opportunities.
The kinds of support or scoping required for younger children is different to the kind of responsive context for older students being responsible or not which might help with learning for an older child? Some of the risk happens using mobile phones, some online, some face to face. The school systems are focusing on internet based risks because those risks are new to that system. ie it is a review of risk to the system not to the child.

If the risk to the child is considered then the idea that the phone, the face to face space, the peer group, games at home, general community opportunities are all a part of the whole is more evident. The role parents play is more obvious and the idea that if the school does not find ways to negotiate risk the child has one less supporting structure for the risk inherent in growing up?

I am probably putting this poorly.
How would you write a framework for learning?

Janet

[rgrozdanic]

is anyone going to ask the kids? or the older kids who will soon be in a position to make these choices for themselves? or is this meeting going to involve only people within the system?

i looked through some stuff today on projects which had been funded under a program i won't name just now - they'd produced ok-ish elearning materials but i was fairly surprised that they were so rudimentary and full of bugs (does noone do user testing any more???).  so i weaved my way back to the parent website to find project reports, evaluations etc and found documentation that was impressively comprehensive and tidy showing the consultation processes, surveys, user research and so on that had taken place as part of the process.

i couldn't work out what was wrong at first and then i noticed what it was - none of the questions related to the content or the stated purpose of the material.  all the questions were along the line of "do you like my new coat?" where, (espeically if you had just been given a nice lunch) you would have said "absolutely - you've done a WONDERFUL job of making what you said you'd make".  what got me was that if you'd instead asked the questions "do you think this is the best way to learn this material?", "will your employees be able to access this material easily" or "as a result of undertaking this activity have you learned a/b/c?" you might get a different answer and (just like always) i found that most of the bugs started occuring at the 8 minute mark, so i have to conclude, again, that when these things are tried, distributed, marketed etc, ppl only spend a few minutes flicking through the thing before throwing it in a box with all the other freebie pilot samples.

i know this probably isn't the right forum for this TANGENT i'm on tonight, but it has really struck me as very odd.  why are there so many projects being funded to do the same thing? and always at the prototype stage - the petrified proof of concept that's like an edu-groundhog day?

anyway - that then stimulated me to jump in here and ask "in adelaide, how will you make sure that you ask the right questions or at the very least work out who needs to be part of the conversation?" (ie the "done to" group)

avoiding uni homework again - can you tell?... :-/

r

[Janet Hawtin]

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 9:00 PM, rgrozdanic <rgroz...@gmail.com> wrote:

is anyone going to ask the kids? or the older kids who will soon be in a position to make these choices for themselves? or is this meeting going to involve only people within the system?

Yes aiming to have a student perspective represented, also aiming to have a parent perspective.
teacher, librarian, tech, department, law, community.

Suggestions for students in Adelaide who are likely to be old enough to handle the conversation and young enough to be able to represent that perspective are welcome.  I have one person who has studied in a Waldorf school who did not do computing at school but now participates on free communities. His perspective is interesting because he now does technical work.
It would be nice to counterpoint that with a student who has experience of technology in a school context.

anyway - that then stimulated me to jump in here and ask "in adelaide, how will you make sure that you ask the right questions or at the very least work out who needs to be part of the conversation?" (ie the "done to" group)

Hoping to use TALO as a sounding board on the questions.
I have posted the questions I have at the beginning of the thread.
Others might think some of them are not core or useful. That is useful to hear.
Other people's core questions around these issues would be useful to hear.
These questions were intended to get people talking about the issues online and hopefully helping us to refine what kind of focus might be most useful on the day.

I already understand the goals are more around trying to make a good framework for decision making at a school level
and to avoid aproaches which are based on a top down policy to apply across the board regardless of learning stages and goals etc.

Hoping folks will tease it out more.
Which examples tell us which approaches or questions need to be tackled?

Janet

[alexanderhayes]

Good points raised here Bill.

Could the psychology underpinning perceptions that 'teachers at risk
' form a subversive and highly networked form of communal academic
discontent be the heckler in the counterpoint gallery ? Deeper still,
perhaps in coming together to talk through this issue at hand there is
an opportunity to better inform those individuals who'd rather
interrogate the legal stance of subversively engineering
communication, positing such action as a global sub-plot leading to a
breach of organisational constitution.

How best do we value knowledge architects who built their empires on
identity and who are left speechless when there voicebox if
forensically examined for risk laden detritus ?

Surely you also share in the position that DECS have a brilliant
opportunity to assure those who are looking down the short barrel of
digital oblivion to calmly include a range of sensible and informed
attributes to those who would rather be out than in when it comes to
preparing their learners for a flat (bumpy) ride into reality.

Lest we all be lost in an otherwise chaotic soup of sidebar ego-
mania.

I dont expect you to speak for all teachers.

Just Bill.

Blogs.

On Apr 7, 8:58 pm, "Bill Kerr" <billk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> janet wrote:
>
> The idea is not to find fault with existing systems but to understand risk
> from a student centred perspective and including wider social risks and
> opportunities to help see the
> implications of institutional or systemic risk management choices
>
> risk from a student centred perspective?
>
> I think that's the wrong approach - even if you frame risk as a positive
> (which is true) but still if the overall framework is "risk" then you'll get
> the wrong answers
>
> on the other hand, if the framework is learning (for example) then some risk
> taking emerges from that discussion as essential
>
> when students take risks they are normally thinking about something else eg.
> curious, looking for adventure etc. - possibly even those who are "at risk",
> which again arises from other social factors
>
> if you make risk the focus then you'll end up with a conservative agenda -
> this risk is justified / is not justified for some wider reason, what wider
> reason?
>
> Just as if teachers talk about "behaviour management" without factoring in
> wider issues (such as learning) they'll get the wrong answers too
>
> you could call this the tyranny of the subgoals
>
> - Bill
> --

> Bill Kerrhttp://billkerr2.blogspot.com/

> > SurelJanet

[grahamwegner]

I'm going to do what Janet suggests and that is speak from the
perspective of working with kids and what the issues at hand might
mean for them and me. I work with primary school kids - mainly 10 and
11 year olds. I really like this age group because they are still open
to new ideas (they haven't closed their minds down into that's cool,
that's not, learning sucks, teachers suck, we're really good type of
thinking ... yet) but they are independent enough not to have their
hands held all of the time. They are the right age to be guided to use
the web responsibly, ethically and safely in my opinion. Many have not
made their own "digital footprint" and many know a fair bit about a
few limited things - MSN chat, and video games to name a few.
I've started off cautiously introducing them to social web tools using
avatars and nicknames for two reasons - one, I know the media hype and
scare stories and I didn't want to have alarmed parents denying their
child's participation, so slowly does it and I also reckon it's
everyone's right to have control over and determine their digital
identity. What we created when we started a wiki project with Doug
Noon's Grade Six kids in Alaska were sort of disposable identities. We
worked on this wiki throughout the second half of this year - a great
opportunity for their research to be for a purpose, they were
accessing primary sources of information via the wiki and then
creating something that could be shared with others. All of that
happened.
This year, I started the kids with their own blogs. I was (am) hoping
that this was a chance for regular writing, creation of a repository
of their learning, building up of a class community of learners via
reading and commenting. Again, I was cautious so that the rug couldn't
be quickly pulled from under our feet - avatars, no real faces,
nicknames or first names only, close monitoring of content, moderation
of comments, clear guidelines about what constituted private
information.
What does this event have to do with this?
I'm scared - scared not what might happen to the students because I am
confident that my caution will nip anything remotely inappropriate in
the bud - but that one complaint from a paranoid source could shut
down this opportunity for my students. We've learnt heaps along the
way in only six weeks - mistakes have been great learning
opportunities but we've kept them in-classroom and no-one has suffered
embarrassment or felt slighted or unsafe. I'm concerned because I have
to think of all of the contingencies and possibilities in advance,
knowing that my department's policies have not kept up to date.
I want the policy makers and vision creators to come to the table and
hear where grassroots educators think that the read/write web could be
heading for education and learning. I want them to consider the
factors and offer to help innovative educators by providing guidelines
that keep pace with change, so that opportunities can be offered to
students to be responsible, safe and ethical users of the web.
I listened to a very negative "cyber safety" talk the other night and
every time a story of doom was trotted out (and we've read them and
seen them on A Current Affair) I kept thinking if someone had taken
the time to weave appropriate use of web technologies into their
classroom program, then a lot of these horror stories may never have
occurred. These risky situations keep popping up because of amny
student's complete inability to foresee potential negative outcomes
when left to work things out on their own. I'm not saying that a
blogging program will stop any of my students from doing something
silly in the future - but at least, they are not approaching their
teenage years without some form of grounding.
There you go, I'm spoken for me.

On Apr 7, 9:03 pm, alexanderhayes <alexanderhayes1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[Michael Coghlan]

Eloquent and very clear Graham - thanks.

- Michael

> > Bill Kerr http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/

[alexanderhayes]

Bloody brilliant prose Graham.

We could do with taking a page from your book and looking at how best
to support your initaitives from ground ( policy ) up.

I look forward to meeting and discussing this and many other things
this coming May 2nd.

:)

> ...
>
> read more »

[Janet Hawtin]

Hi Rose

If any of these projects are edna or educationau ones I'm happy to take feedback.
Comments like these are always useful fed straight back into a project.
So if its not our stuff I'd say go for it and tell the people.
Hopefully it will help.

Janet

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 9:00 PM, rgrozdanic <rgroz...@gmail.com> wrote:

[rgrozdanic]

not really - the projects i mentioned were sincere and seemed to fulfil the requirements - it was the requirements that needed redefinition in my opinion. or at least they needed to guide the projects differently.

i think we all do that to some extent - come from our own headspace and then get bewildered when the "done-to" don't seem to respond as we'd hoped, in spite of all the data we collected that told us how on track we were.

am currently reading some stuff on assessment validity in VET - how i wish the rudd govt would hold some kind of open pow-wow to talk about the whole VET system in general... there must be so many stories out there in VET land, waiting to be told

r

[Janet Hawtin]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 2:48 PM, rgrozdanic <rgroz...@gmail.com> wrote:

not really - the projects i mentioned were sincere and seemed to fulfil the requirements - it was the requirements that needed redefinition in my opinion. or at least they needed to guide the projects differently.

i think we all do that to some extent - come from our own headspace and then get bewildered when the "done-to" don't seem to respond as we'd hoped, in spite of all the data we collected that told us how on track we were.

am currently reading some stuff on assessment validity in VET - how i wish the rudd govt would hold some kind of open pow-wow to talk about the whole VET system in general... there must be so many stories out there in VET land, waiting to be told

r

What kind of constructive theme could it be oriented around. What kind of goal?
Can't hurt to be specific and see what happens. People are thinking in 2020 ways atm.
Perhaps something might be possible.

Janet

[botheredbybees]

"Safer Children in a Digital World: the report of the Byron Review"
might be of interest - http://www.dfes.gov.uk/byronreview/pdfs/Final%20Report%20Bookmarked.pdf


Commissioned by the UK government, this lengthy (226 page) report
looks at children's exposure to 'risk' in both internet and video
games. Chapters 3 to 5 focus on the internet aspect (but even then,
mostly from a consumer's perspective, rather than as content
developers - which somewhat missed the point IMO).

One of my favorite bits:

"Children and young people need to be empowered to keep themselves
safe - this isn't just about a top-down approach. Children will be
children - pushing boundaries and taking risks. At a public swimming
pool we have gates, put up signs, have lifeguards and shallow ends,
but we also teach children how to swim."

[James Neill]

interesting, graham, so you've basically gone the sock puppet route with kids

another experiment would be to only allow direct true, honest, and transparent self-expressions - otherwise take it home / do it outside of school - ideals about honesty, etc. often appear in school mission statements - but perhaps school and education department mission statements should be modified to reflect actual practice

--
Email:     ja...@wilderdom.com
Web:       http://wilderdom.com
Twitter:   http://twitter.com/jtneill
Wiki/blog: http://ucspace.canberra.edu.au/x/fIAeAg
Bookmarks: http://del.icio.us/jtneill

[Janet Hawtin]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:22 PM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com> wrote:

interesting, graham, so you've basically gone the sock puppet route with kids

another experiment would be to only allow direct true, honest, and transparent self-expressions - otherwise take it home / do it outside of school - ideals about honesty, etc. often appear in school mission statements - but perhaps school and education department mission statements should be modified to reflect actual practice

ouch. ok What would you be doing? Assume your students are around grade 3

j

[James Neill]

ask parents and children what digital identity they want their child to have - and go with it

Janet Hawtin wrote:

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.9/1364 - Release Date: 7/04/2008 6:38 PM
  

[Janet Hawtin]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:29 PM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com> wrote:

ask parents and children what digital identity they want their child to have - and go with it

ok cool.
so some kind of fact sheet about options might be useful?

j

[James Neill]

yes, exactly, provide info about digital identity options with various pros and cons, with examples, etc.

sounds like a kid these days probably needs to maintain at least:
- actual identity
- nickname/avatatar/sock puppets

our uni looks like it might drop providing student email services - instead students would simply advise the uni of their email address for official correspondence

similarly, schools needn't necessarily even be in the business of deciding policy about this stuff - instead parents and students could be required to provide their own digital identity(ies) for students to use in school learning projects

i tried this approach last semester with uni students - about 2/3 decided to blog with actual identities and about 1/3 with hidden identities. interestingly i noticed that as semester wore on, more and more of them 'came out', revealed who they were, and some set up new blogs with their actual identity as they become more confident in expressing who they were

just a thought



Janet Hawtin wrote:

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.9/1364 - Release Date: 7/04/2008 6:38 PM
  

[Janet Hawtin]

Parents guide for an online game
This game still has no play under 13.
They have in game mentors so they could perhaps do that kind of thing.
Main problem being generally ratty behaviour from other players.
http://www.runescape.com/kbase/view.ws?guid=parents_guide

[Janet Hawtin]

Tom's pick:
http://thewoodverdict.blogspot.com/2008/03/wa-gvnt-shows-some-cyber-cents.html
http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,23348279-15306,00.html

[Janet Hawtin]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:49 PM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com> wrote:

yes, exactly, provide info about digital identity options with various pros and cons, with examples, etc.

sounds like a kid these days probably needs to maintain at least:
- actual identity
- nickname/avatatar/sock puppets

our uni looks like it might drop providing student email services - instead students would simply advise the uni of their email address for official correspondence

similarly, schools needn't necessarily even be in the business of deciding policy about this stuff - instead parents and students could be required to provide their own digital identity(ies) for students to use in school learning projects

i tried this approach last semester with uni students - about 2/3 decided to blog with actual identities and about 1/3 with hidden identities. interestingly i noticed that as semester wore on, more and more of them 'came out', revealed who they were, and some set up new blogs with their actual identity as they become more confident in expressing who they were

just a thought

does it cause logistical issues if folks are using different systems or has it been ok.
there is probably variation in the kinds of things people can post and write about which goes beyond  identity choices when the folks are youngsters. different levels of participation might be more complex to negotiate in a class of 30?

j

[James Neill]

i had no problems - admittedly this was with 80 adults

the students could set up their blog anywhere, using any name - they submitted their feeds which were then aggregated - i kept an eye on postings and only found 1 or 2 postings out of many hundred that i considered inappropriate or potentially unsafe (e.g., revealing someone else's identity and some private information about the person) which were dealt with quickly and amicably

my sense is that education depts need to DROP policy not create policy around this - the important stuff is getting on with learning/experiencing - the administrators' job is to REMOVE barriers

when something inappropriate happens, it is not the end of the world - it is a learning opportunity. how else are students and parents to learn if mistakes can't be made? are we going to leave students to learn about negotiating real online issues by themselves in unsupported environments - or are we going to provide supported real-world encounters in which they can make mistakes (which are easily fixed!)? education policy must allow for, and encourage mistakes to be made, otherwise they may as well just read the encyclopedia brittanica.



Janet Hawtin wrote:

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.9/1364 - Release Date: 7/04/2008 6:38 PM
  

[alexanderhayes]

Capitals are so yesterday.

"....interestingly i noticed that as semester wore on, more and
more of them 'came out'."

Cant exactly picture conducting information sessions for primary
school parents under the banner of " Coming Out: Ridding Your Sock
Puppet & Other Digital Demons " now can we James ?

Graham's building where others fear to tread.

I take your sock puppet thing though.

Identity is at the core of this and....*ducks flying objects*....how
many times have we gone over than one.

Nah....lets just leave to their own devices and cop flak in twenty for
the no-brainer avatars we made them hide behind eh eh eh ?

:)

> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG.
> > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.9/1364 - Release Date: 7/04/2008 6:38 PM
>
> --

> Email: ja...@wilderdom.com <mailto:ja...@wilderdom.com>

> Web: http://wilderdom.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/jtneill
> Wiki/blog:http://ucspace.canberra.edu.au/x/fIAeAg

> "...Bookmarks:http://del.icio.us/jtneill

[alexanderhayes]

Quote today read in local paper.

" The issue we are having with education as to the benefits of high
speed broadband is that like highways their needs to be a forseeable
function for it to be needed and used "

Ah like.....uh huh.

So.....I get into my Land Rover and push metal to metal and then when
I'm at the top end the smooth highway was warranted ? Like swimming as
a function of water safety so is digital identity management online as
part of ICT delivery in education.

Digital identity management ?

Do I get frys with that ?

On Apr 8, 4:29 pm, botheredbybees <botheredbyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Safer Children in a Digital World: the report of the Byron Review"

> might be of interest -http://www.dfes.gov.uk/byronreview/pdfs/Final%20Report%20Bookmarked.pdf

[Janet Hawtin]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 11:04 PM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com> wrote:

i had no problems - admittedly this was with 80 adults

the students could set up their blog anywhere, using any name - they submitted their feeds which were then aggregated - i kept an eye on postings and only found 1 or 2 postings out of many hundred that i considered inappropriate or potentially unsafe (e.g., revealing someone else's identity and some private information about the person) which were dealt with quickly and amicably

my sense is that education depts need to DROP policy not create policy around this - the important stuff is getting on with learning/experiencing - the administrators' job is to REMOVE barriers

when something inappropriate happens, it is not the end of the world - it is a learning opportunity. how else are students and parents to learn if mistakes can't be made? are we going to leave students to learn about negotiating real online issues by themselves in unsupported environments - or are we going to provide supported real-world encounters in which they can make mistakes (which are easily fixed!)? education policy must allow for, and encourage mistakes to be made, otherwise they may as well just read the encyclopedia brittanica.

 

ok so spending on
mentoring for parents in setting up tools
how to set up a blog
what kinds of sites might be good to use.
issues and how to remove them.
sign in to comment by teacher?
parent doesnt like the comment and blocks it?
family gets a bit random with what they put on their blog?
would have to negotiate collaboration between students as permission to post to each others blog.

pd teachers supporting others in technology.

[James Neill]

janet, re your ?s:

>
> sign in to comment by teacher?

teacher may wish to restrict the range of acceptable site domain
teacher uses openID

> parent doesnt like the comment and blocks it?

it should be up to the student which comments s/he does or doesn't allow
if a comment is blocked, too bad - this is no different than students
and/or parents ignoring other forms of advice and feedback from teachers

> family gets a bit random with what they put on their blog?

a family can put whatever it likes on its blog
a student's class-related blog, however, is for student-use only, just
as with any other schoolwork, homework, etc.
>

[Janet Hawtin]

with parents participating in making the digital home
the school might work on a wiki which they specifically choose for collaborative work
but at least the practice of managing online space is a shared experience.
i think it is interesting.

putting individual photos into flickr, youtube might be family maintained
putting work drawings into n might be school maintained
group photos or individual photos could be school with permission
this stuff is likely to be the negotiation space?

myspace/facebook is generally set up as their own student site not for school
the child has 2 avenues of conversation if the wheels fall off and they need help.

having the parents play a part in contributing an aspect of online space is a
nice way to encourage home support and to enable a sense of participation.

any thoughts about managing mobile stuff?
 

[grahamwegner]

Hi James and Janet (and others),
I've been struggling for time to track this thread and have noticed
that some interesting points have been raised along the way and where
I might have reacted and added something, the conversation has moved
on and even sprouted new discussions. That's fine.
I'm not sure what to make of the "sock puppet" comment - something
tells me that I should be offended or at least reacting to it as some
form of jibe. Is it just another name for an avatar/nickname based
identity? Is the concept of a "disposable identity" for students under
the age of 18 such a bad thing?
Maybe I wasn't clear about my choices here - and it could well be that
my thinking is full of holes - I may be on a lower intellectual level
anyway. To me, while the concept of real images and use of real names
might be desirable, it isn't crucial to how I wanted to start my
students in using read/write tools for learning for the first time.
Part of my thinking is that once you are 18, as an adult in an
educational setting, you can choose how to portray yourself in your
online identity - disclose as little or as much about yourself as you
feel comfortable with. But my students are still minors under the law,
I am their "legal guardian" during school hours and for any school
based projects that I set up. Any choices I make and set up for them
could affect their future digital history if linked closely to their
actual non-online identity. A "disposable identity" that has enough in
it for the classroom community (and by default their families) to know
who is who allows them to sever ties with that classroom project if
they want. After all, this is new territory for me and them. There are
unanswered questions in my mind about how any blogs of theirs should
be used anyway after they finish in my classroom and move on. Wikis
are different because they are collaborative anyway and the sum result
is much more important than the individual contributions. But the
blogs are personal - and I don't know whether I will turn them over to
the kids at the end of the year and say "It's all yours now - I'm
removing myself as administrator." which might be akin to the driving
instructor tossing the keys over to the learner and saying you're on
your own. I might be able to hand the controls over to another teacher
and their blogs might then be a 2 year journey before they start high
school. Or they might be stopped and sealed off as digital time
capsules at year's end which might be the cleanest option - but the
least real world.
I'll concede that the "sock puppet" treatment is conservative but I
think it is very early days to be using these tools in the primary
school setting. And at least in primary school, there is one teacher
mentoring this whole process - in high school when things get
fragmented, who's doing the guiding and teaching then? I want other
teachers to come on board and they need to feel sure that they are
doing the right thing in their appointed role - adults themselves use
"fictional identities" until they feel confident in the online world.
I'll emphasise again that for the vast majority of my kids (10/11 year
olds) this is their first foray into online read/write interaction. My
parents expect that I will be keeping them safe but they also know
that this may be the only time their child might be doing individual
online authoring in their school life - so their support is not
something to be treated lightly. If their comfort level is at ease
because we've equitably agreed that we'll go down the avatar/nickname
path - having different options would only muddy the waters and make
it very hard to manage. (Especially as I have the rest of the
curriculum to deliver.) Again, make things too complex or hard to
manage and other teachers following behind will baulk.
I think that while it's nice to think in terms of ideals, the
practicality of delivering those ideals in a classroom of minors is
too much to ask. And even with the compromises I make on those ideals,
the kids are lot more savvy and in control of their online skills than
without any read/write exposure at all. This is an important part of
my job (and one that is sadly neglected by the vast majority of K-12
teacher in my opinion) but it is not my entire job, and it is a useful
and much needed tool for my students' learning but it is not the sum
of their learning either.
I apologise for being unable to make my points more succinctly - it
means I won't be adding any of my thoughts on your other posts and
points right at this point in time.

[Janet Hawtin]

Thanks for your thoughts Graham. Fair call on many points.
Including that I live in my sock puppet online and I am sometimes introduced face2face by it.
I should be more careful not to follow the conversation in ways which cut out perspectives.
I guess I have been trying to poke at what is offered to see what esle might be in there.
If there is any higher or lower thinking in any of this it is probably around people like yourself who are
actually having a go and for whom these issues are a part of your working day.
Feel free to poke the thread as and when it is useful for you. Thats basically what its here for.

Janet

[Michael Coghlan]

Perfectly succinct for me Graham. Once again, thanks for taking the time to contribute the perspective of the practicing classroom teacher.

- Michael

[James Neill]

hi graham/janet,

i suggested the term 'sock puppets' might be relevant earlier on as another word/phrase for describing one approach to handling the issues raised by the minis not being allowed to blog anyone - they could go they route you have chosen. i also suggested we might reclaim the negative connotation of the word, just as 'true' hackers have tried to reclaim the good meaning of hacking.

i am curious whether you have actually been given any guidelines within which to operate - or have you intuitively picked your way through the minefield of 'what might happen if' in order to get the project to fly?

i've got no problem with people using multiple and fictitious identities - when there's an authentic purpose. but if the fundamental reason is to avoid political scandal, then it's time for online educators to start the revolution.

from what i can smell from here, i suspect that the current conservativism in online education is undermining the quality of education for our future workforce

sincerely,
james




Janet Hawtin wrote:

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.10/1366 - Release Date: 8/04/2008 5:03 PM
  

[Janet Hawtin]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:53 PM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com> wrote:

i've got no problem with people using multiple and fictitious identities - when there's an authentic purpose. but if the fundamental reason is to avoid political scandal, then it's time for online educators to start the revolution.

student safety
privacy
learning how to handle yourself or facet yourself online

from what i can smell from here, i suspect that the current conservativism in online education is undermining the quality of education for our future workforce

do we have something to contribute which will help this move forwards constructively?

i dont get why everything gets binary
system and maverick polar positions seem like such a rut.
i cant see anything useful to do from there.

j

[James Neill]

homeschool?

Janet Hawtin wrote:

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.10/1366 - Release Date: 8/04/2008 5:03 PM
  

[Janet Hawtin]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:06 AM, James Neill <li...@wilderdom.com> wrote:

> much of what i've suggested can be summed up as my view that the R+ is greater than the R- for open online education with kids - R+ is the risk of positive outcome and R- is the risk of negative outcome - more info on such a conceptualisation of risk here -
>
> The concept of risk: Perceptions of the likelihood of loss (R-) or gain (R+)
>
> ...and then the day came when
> the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful
> than the risk it took to blossom.
> - Anais Nin

> http://wilderdom.com/risk/RiskConcept.html

Some nice thoughts in that one thanks James
The risk of risk aversion feels recursive.

[rgrozdanic]

graham i think what you're saying is spot on - it's the most convincing stuff i've heard yet in that it's balanced, incremental (ie reversible in the case of contingencies that warrant it), cautious without being stifling/repressive, optimistic and innovative without being reckless and so on.  most people in the population would prefer to make a conservative mistake in these matters (ie in relation to kids, minors etc), especially parents, and i think your approach would be one that all parents i can think of would find reasonable.

i've found all the discussions here useful and thought provoking however i find your view of things best captures the best of both positions in a way that will reassure people and show a way forward. 

bye for now

rose

[grahamwegner]

Thanks Rose, it's in my diplomatic nature to seek out the middle
ground. I think that's what I can bring to the discussion - others can
look big picture, focus on the relevant research, represent various
points of view - but I'm thinking what are the practicalities of
implementing this in my classroom. Because if I and others like Al
can't get our students into the online world (clad in sock puppet
clothing or otherwise), the majority of teachers of K-12 students who
don't know their blog from their wiki are not gonna get involved. And
interacting with kids who are still working out who they are, who they
may want to be is a very different ball game to the majority of active
TALO participants who either work with adult students or other
educators. My job's not harder - just different things to consider.
I'm really appreciating having some topics to be involved here lately
- it helps me to really examine why I am doing what I'm doing - and
stops me being an over-awed lurker.
Graham.

[alexanderhayes]

Over-awed lurker.

Hmm....well I'm apparently the sardonic charmer...not :)

I really appreciate your middle ground Graham. As Rose states what
your about is spot on.

It's amazing though what a digital interrogation can look like.

What we are exploring I think is the very real ways in which to guide
those who are making tentative steps.

We have seen what can happen to seasoned punters and the manner in
which the world reacts.

Thank goodness we live in it.

ps. I'm hoping your shoulder will recover...we may need it :)

[ntine]

>17 APRI 2008 ekat...@gmail.com Namibia
I want to know more teaching career and professional development
opportunities?

[Janet Hawtin]

Hi folks

Re: The May 2 event in Adelaide
I posted this message on April 6 regarding the format and asking for people to comment.
I apologise to Sheryl and danah or anyone who has been expecting to beam in to Adelaide today.
I didnt realise that the suggested format was not clear for folks outside of TALO.

I do feel that if people who have been a part of the conversation on the TALO list have been confused that they have had opportunity to ask and contribute through a range of digital avenues including interviews with Alex Hayes or Kerry Johnson or through the vox pop wimba, voice threads, through posting to a blog or commenting, or through the wiki spaces or through making something
happen with the available Elluminate service. Many thanks to the folks who have done so.

The choices about making the digital contributions more distributed are based on a hope to engage the people in the room in conversations about shared responsibility, good process, making space for constructive student voice and a partnership role for parents. I felt that it would be more useful to engage people who could commit to a share of local responsibility or a process for local shared responsibility than to have a conversation which made the local participants an audience. I am hoping the process might be a model for useful work.

I do hope that there are events in Elluminate which are parallel or after and think that the offer of space/time was a useful opportunity.

Janet


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Janet Hawtin <lucy...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: :: TALO :: Re: Learning In The 21st Century - Some Questions
To: teachAndL...@googlegroups.com

The format is now a 1 day face to face event with online contributions happening in a more general way.
I dont know if the current format is better or worse for people. Feel free to comment.

Not trying to do online participation on the day because I figured it would be a full day face to face and that the online conversations could work just as well in an asynchronous way. Keeping it simple.

I thought that building the online perspectives in the weeks prior would provide opportunities for more people with different voices to participate. This conversation is one that is surely happening in many nations and in many schools and communities. Doing good work online regarding solutions for these questions is hopefully a useful project beyond the scope of the Adelaide event.

Joan Russell has offered to chair the event. I think that is a groovesome thing.
Trying for a mix of perspectives
Student, parent, teacher, tech, librarian, department, community, law.
Room for 8 perspectives in the am session.
Can have 14 folks there if we use the boardroom.
There is an open space which can fit more but that would be in the open office area/lunch room.

For me this felt like something might happen at the event if there was a good mix of people there but that the wider conversations around these questions online would be likely to bring together more useful work long term.

Janet