Just read an interesting blog by Martin Pluss. He refers to a discussion by Stephen Colins regarding the role of the parent in responsible use of the internet.
Arguing for no censorship and using his own children as an example, he explains that learning about the internet in a safe environment with suitable guidance as a parent is a far more valuable learning experience than just trying to block all that might be damaging.
Computers in open spaces, open and honest discussion, and trust.
A good basis to work from when my kids get to that age.
I had an interesting piece of mail come across my desk this week. It was from the NSW government promoting the ‘2009 Youth Week Website Competition’. Basically it is asking for submissions from young people (under 25) to design the look of the website for 2009 Youth Week. A great idea.
And for the most part, it looks like a worthwhile project that some more creative students might like to take on. However, one thing did concern me a little. Under the ‘Style and Layout’ section, there is a heading on Download speed, which essentially says that the total web page should download over a ’slow’ connection in less than 10 seconds, and that the page size should not be greater than 120kb. “There should be no large images or Flash files.”
Does this ring alarm bells for anyone else? Instead of encouraging our young people to design a web site that is engaging and uses the interactive content that is so typical of the web today (I hesitate to use the ‘web 2.0′ term), the participants are hamstrung by conditions that might have been suitable 10 or more years ago, but surely not today!
Needless to say, now I’ve finished this post, the competition details will be filed in the circular file…
I had an interesting meeting yesterday with our IT Task Force here at work. The Task Force is a newly formed body of interested parties from different parts of the school with a view to making best use of technology within the school.
The meeting caused me to ponder again on the chicken and egg theory – i.e. what comes first? Do we investigate technology to implement and then apply to an educational framework, or, do we look at how we can best engage our learners using technology, and then implement the technology to suit?
The more I think about this, the more passionate and enthusiastic I become about the latter. Students have always, and will always learn. With or without technology. The challenge has got to be how to engage our students more completely with the given learning material.
Given that students are now using so many of these so called Web 2.0 technologies (a term that for some reason I’ve got an inherent dislike of) in their personal space, as an educator I’m interested in how we can use these technologies to engage our students into the subject matter of various subjects. As a result, we really need to focus on the educational outcomes first, and then apply the technology to achieve those outcomes. I think if we fall into the trap of implementing technology for its own sake before considering the educational applications, then we risk being the custodians of technological white elephants that have no educational benefit.
Of course, the way forward is far more complex. It involves many hours of experimentation, staff training, and probably many mistakes along the way as we discover what is effectively going to engage learning, and what serves as a mere distraction.
Its an exciting journey – who knows where it will end…
I’ve often wondered if I’m the only one who can’t see the value (in educational terms, or also in value for money terms) in an Interactive Whiteboard. Sure they can do some cool things, but is there any great benefit over a standard digital projector?
You can still create an interactive learning environment with a standard projector – students can use the teachers computer, or whatever is projecting the image.
Then, only recently this was brought to my attention: Build your own interactive whiteboard, where Johnny Chung Lee from Carnegie Melon University in the USA builds an interactive whiteboard with a Nintendo Wiimote and an Infra-red Led light source. A quick check of ebay reveals that you can find a Wiimote for less than $50US, and an IR LED for next to nothing. That makes the several thousand dollar MINIMUM ask for an IWB seem absolutely ridiculous. Paricularly when you can freely download all required software etc.
Do people agree with me? Can anyone categorically prove me wrong? I’d love to hear from both sides of the argument.
