At the beginning of this course, when we were just starting to discuss what qualities distinguish 21rst Century teaching and learning from what has come before, we read an article about learning "peripherally" as part of a "community of learners", where you can begin to learn the skills and norms of particular sites / groups / etc. and contribute "real" things even before becoming an "expert". (Here's a link to the notes and responses that I wrote about that article at the time.) At the time, I found these ideas interesting but didn't really "get" them emotionally.
As the course went on, at times I felt very frustrated about the amount of time that it was taking to begin to learn the various tools we were being introduced to. At one particularly low point for me mid-way through this course, I had reached such a level of frustration that I wasn't even really seeing what was on the pages in front of me, any more! At the next class session we did that inner circle / outer circle activity where we were sharing ideas for our projects, and while talking with Patrick I asked him how to add a new page to a wiki. (This turns out to be trivially easy to do, but like I said, I had become so frustrated by then that I'd really lost sight of any sense that I could figure such things out on my own!)
That one bit of assistance was enough to get me going again, though, and since then my confidence has just grown and grown as I've used my class wiki for several "real", meaningful projects with my class (especially our Marionette Myths projects and our Reader's Choice book), and taught myself the skills I needed along the way in order to do so.
Over the past week, I've been working feverishly to manage a project where my students were writing, editing, and illustrating a "Reader's Choice" book about the 1970's on our class wiki. At the same time, I've been trying to get examples of student work uploaded to other parts of the wiki. I've had to learn lots of new tools (both online tools and software that I hadn't previously even known was on our home computer) in order to do this, and I've done so entirely by experimenting, looking for buttons (for things like making links) that looked similar to those on other platforms that I now know, and reading online documentation (FAQ's and other Help pages). Unlike when I started this course, I've had no qualms about joining new sites online in order to use these tools. It feels wonderful to be able to gain new online skills so quickly and confidently!
A month or two ago, I was talking with another classmate, Suzanne, as she gave me a ride home from class. That was at another point when I had grown somewhat frustrated with the need to teach myself so many new skills so quickly. Suzanne commented that she thought that learning to do that was a big part of Dennis' goal for participants in this course. It took me a while to come to share her confidence and enthusiasm about this sort of learning, but after the past week or two of working at a sort of crazy pace on a really exciting classroom project (using our class wiki and many new online and software tools to have my students write the Reader's Choice book and fill it with lots of their illustrations, links, embedded pictures, etc.) for a 1970's assembly that my principal organized, I think I finally really "get" it. I've actually found it very exciting to learn this latest batch of new tools and skills so quickly and so independently, and I've loved seeing my students' enthusiastic response to the oppotunities that it opens up, in turn, for them. I finally feel that I both can and will continue to learn and use lots of new web 2.0 tools after this course ends.
Here are some of the tools (both online sites and software) and skills that I've taught myself just in the past two weeks (and mostly in the past week):
www.mind42.com, for my Summary of Personal Learning
www.YouTube.com (Including learning what formats are acceptable for uploading videos, and what software might convert the formats for me, and what glitches to watch out for in that software.)
Windows Movie Maker (which I used on my home computer to convert .AVI files to .wmv format in order to upload them to YouTube)
How to download pictures and videos from my husband's camera to our home computer -- I hadn't even known how to do that, before!
www.Flickr.com, and how to search it for pictures that have a Creative Commons license.
www.wallwisher.com (which I learned about from a k12online talk, recommended to our building Principal last week for a need that he had, and then used with my class yesterday to write poetry together)
www.slideshare.com (For uploading a PowerPoint -- and I also spent time searching online documentation to find out why it would upload my own PowerPoint just fine but not one that one of my students had made -- It turns out that it can't handle the particular types of images that my student used. So then I spent some more time searching for a tool that could handle her images, and I found a couple, but unfortunately they would have been expensive to buy.)
www.XTraNormal.com (OK, that one was a couple of weeks ago.)
www.makebeliefscomix.com
Promethean Planet (for my other course)
www.mathplayground.com (Just a site I found for my math teaching, not really a "tool" -- but very useful!)
www.prezi.com (I ran out of time before managing to complete the little presentation that I had started -- but, at least I know how to use this tool, now.)
(There are probably others, but those are the ones I remember or have written down!)
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Finding my usernames and useful sites
This is a note to myself that if I forget my userids for various sites, I can find them at www.docs.google.com. My google ID is my _w email account.
Experimenting with how to make a link in the body of a blog post
I've linked some of my post titles to the sites or articles they refer to, but I haven't tried that in the body of the post, and I've been wondering how to. I think I see a similar symbol to the paperclip-like one used on wikis, though! Let's try it. I want to link to one of my earlier posts, on social learning communities. Let's try it here.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Writing in the 21rst Century -- NCTE web site and PDF
The other Session 7 readings:
The National Council of Teachers of English website discusses the importance of validating all of the different types of writing that students do both in and out of class. At the same time, one article talks about "writing about literature" as an excellent way to foster deep reading and analytical thought, even though that sort of reading might seem to have limited practical applications at first.
PDF:
Historical background: Reading, historically in our culture, has "warm fuzzy" associations to communal activities such as church services. Also, reading was a way that the government could influence people (or so the article asserts). Writing, on the other hand, was associated with hard work, "episodes of despair", testing, etc. Through writing the common person might ASSERT control rather than BEING controlled, so the powers-that-be had less of an incentive to make sure everyone learned to write well.
From the 1960s through the 1980s, the "writing process" model came to have a big influence on writing instruction, with mostly positive results.
The invention of the personal computer added some other dimensions, such as being able to explore how visual and verbal elements of a piece work together.
21rst Century writing is EVERYWHERE, and a big part of the appeal may be just the sense of participation. Writing and reading on sites such as Facebook may be providing an electronic "commons", much like the village green of yore, and in ways that work to overcome the social isolation that Robert Putnam described in _Bowling Alone_. [What about those of us who don't WANT to replace our face-to-face communities with electronic ones, though?]
Right now could be called an "Age of Composition", where people learn to write partly through an "extracurricular social co-apprenticeship". (This is like what we talked about early in the course -- learning by playing on the edges of a community of practice, at first, and then building skills and an awareness of norms while gradually diving in more and more.)
Two interesting examples: (1) A teenager in Florida sent out email and photos of her neighbors, some disabled, trapped in their trailer park homes after a hurricane came through. All were rescued from the rising waters. (2) 30,000 high school students organized over Facebook to write "THIS IS SPARTA" or "THIS IS MADNESS" in cross-outs on their AP tests, worked into their answers in clever ways -- thus managing to relate to the graders (some of whom were amused) as human beings, not just as graders.
Summary: Seek a new theory of teaching writing; validate all of the various types of writing that people do; etc.
The National Council of Teachers of English website discusses the importance of validating all of the different types of writing that students do both in and out of class. At the same time, one article talks about "writing about literature" as an excellent way to foster deep reading and analytical thought, even though that sort of reading might seem to have limited practical applications at first.
PDF:
Historical background: Reading, historically in our culture, has "warm fuzzy" associations to communal activities such as church services. Also, reading was a way that the government could influence people (or so the article asserts). Writing, on the other hand, was associated with hard work, "episodes of despair", testing, etc. Through writing the common person might ASSERT control rather than BEING controlled, so the powers-that-be had less of an incentive to make sure everyone learned to write well.
From the 1960s through the 1980s, the "writing process" model came to have a big influence on writing instruction, with mostly positive results.
The invention of the personal computer added some other dimensions, such as being able to explore how visual and verbal elements of a piece work together.
21rst Century writing is EVERYWHERE, and a big part of the appeal may be just the sense of participation. Writing and reading on sites such as Facebook may be providing an electronic "commons", much like the village green of yore, and in ways that work to overcome the social isolation that Robert Putnam described in _Bowling Alone_. [What about those of us who don't WANT to replace our face-to-face communities with electronic ones, though?]
Right now could be called an "Age of Composition", where people learn to write partly through an "extracurricular social co-apprenticeship". (This is like what we talked about early in the course -- learning by playing on the edges of a community of practice, at first, and then building skills and an awareness of norms while gradually diving in more and more.)
Two interesting examples: (1) A teenager in Florida sent out email and photos of her neighbors, some disabled, trapped in their trailer park homes after a hurricane came through. All were rescued from the rising waters. (2) 30,000 high school students organized over Facebook to write "THIS IS SPARTA" or "THIS IS MADNESS" in cross-outs on their AP tests, worked into their answers in clever ways -- thus managing to relate to the graders (some of whom were amused) as human beings, not just as graders.
Summary: Seek a new theory of teaching writing; validate all of the various types of writing that people do; etc.
Fair Use: Notes on the report "The Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Media Literacy Education"
These are notes from the Session 7 reading on interpreting the doctrine of "fair use". The main point seems to be that the broadness and flexibility of the fair use doctrine are good things that work to the advantage of educators, and that should give educators a lot of confidence in being permitted to use materials for educational purposes.
The article includes five main principles:
(1) It's fine to use copyrighted materials to teach the techniques of media literacy (such as analyzing the form and content of different genres, looking at historical context and effects, etc.). Use only as much of the work as necessary, whether that means an excerpt or the whole thing. Give the source. Try to keep uninvolved third parties from downloading it.
(2) I don't quite understand this one, but basically they seem to be saying that it's OK to use copyrighted materials in lesson plan materials, much as above. Include educational goals, etc.
(3) Again, this is kind of confusing, but it seems to be saying that some sharing of illustrative materials at conferences, etc. is OK, but if you're trying to "promote" (Do they mean market?) your curriculum work, you should get all the proper permissions for anything you wish to include. Also, any license agreed to by a school district will be binding, even if it impinges upon the usual fair use guidelines.
(4) This is the one that I have been wondering most about: When is it OK for students to use excerpts of copyrighted materials in their own creative work. The answer is easier to understand than for #2 and #3, but it's more complicated and requires more situation-by-situation analysis than I had hoped. The report says that it's fine for students to use parts of copyrighted works in order to comment upon them, analyze them, etc., but NOT just to "create a mood", add interest to something they are creating, etc. This seems very "fuzzy" to me, as a guideline. . . The report also says that just giving proper attribution does not automatically make a use OK. . . . I think part of my concern is that I teach relatively young students. They're just starting to be metacognitive about WHY they choose particular resources. If my students can label the mood they want to create and find something to help them do that, I think that's a great first step. I'm not sure how much further I'd expect them to go, in analyzing how they're using the material. . . . One thing I like, here, is that the article says that incorporating bits of copyrighted material should not substitute for students' own creative work.
(5) If students are distributing their creative works more publicly than just within a classroom or school -- for example, if they're posting the projects on the Internet -- then fair use will be less of a protection. It is good to model for students the process of deciding which sorts of materials need which sorts of permissions.
The article also tries to debunk certain "myths" about fair use. For example, it says that the fair use doctrine is purposefully broad, and this "vagueness" shouldn't scare people off. However, "rules of thumb" such as "It's OK to use 10 seconds of a video clip" are not really true; fair use has to evaluated on a case-by-case basis, for the educational merits of the use.
"Transformativeness" is a key value in fair use law. However, this does not have to mean writing critiques or parodies; it just means using the material in a new way in a new context -- for example, to make an instructional point. Transformativeness is actually MORE important than non-commercialness, which is neither always necessary nor automatically sufficient to qualify for fair use protection.
A bunch of legal experts were advisors on this report.
The article includes five main principles:
(1) It's fine to use copyrighted materials to teach the techniques of media literacy (such as analyzing the form and content of different genres, looking at historical context and effects, etc.). Use only as much of the work as necessary, whether that means an excerpt or the whole thing. Give the source. Try to keep uninvolved third parties from downloading it.
(2) I don't quite understand this one, but basically they seem to be saying that it's OK to use copyrighted materials in lesson plan materials, much as above. Include educational goals, etc.
(3) Again, this is kind of confusing, but it seems to be saying that some sharing of illustrative materials at conferences, etc. is OK, but if you're trying to "promote" (Do they mean market?) your curriculum work, you should get all the proper permissions for anything you wish to include. Also, any license agreed to by a school district will be binding, even if it impinges upon the usual fair use guidelines.
(4) This is the one that I have been wondering most about: When is it OK for students to use excerpts of copyrighted materials in their own creative work. The answer is easier to understand than for #2 and #3, but it's more complicated and requires more situation-by-situation analysis than I had hoped. The report says that it's fine for students to use parts of copyrighted works in order to comment upon them, analyze them, etc., but NOT just to "create a mood", add interest to something they are creating, etc. This seems very "fuzzy" to me, as a guideline. . . The report also says that just giving proper attribution does not automatically make a use OK. . . . I think part of my concern is that I teach relatively young students. They're just starting to be metacognitive about WHY they choose particular resources. If my students can label the mood they want to create and find something to help them do that, I think that's a great first step. I'm not sure how much further I'd expect them to go, in analyzing how they're using the material. . . . One thing I like, here, is that the article says that incorporating bits of copyrighted material should not substitute for students' own creative work.
(5) If students are distributing their creative works more publicly than just within a classroom or school -- for example, if they're posting the projects on the Internet -- then fair use will be less of a protection. It is good to model for students the process of deciding which sorts of materials need which sorts of permissions.
The article also tries to debunk certain "myths" about fair use. For example, it says that the fair use doctrine is purposefully broad, and this "vagueness" shouldn't scare people off. However, "rules of thumb" such as "It's OK to use 10 seconds of a video clip" are not really true; fair use has to evaluated on a case-by-case basis, for the educational merits of the use.
"Transformativeness" is a key value in fair use law. However, this does not have to mean writing critiques or parodies; it just means using the material in a new way in a new context -- for example, to make an instructional point. Transformativeness is actually MORE important than non-commercialness, which is neither always necessary nor automatically sufficient to qualify for fair use protection.
A bunch of legal experts were advisors on this report.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
"Pay Attention" video for Joe's course
I just watched the "Pay Attention" video on U-Tube for Joe Ahern's course that is about to start on integrating technology. Some facts it asserts:
By the time they graduate from college, today's students will have spent. . .
10,000 hours playing video games
10,000 hours on cellphones
20,000 hours watching T.V.
(Actually, if this data is correct, it's interesting to me that the tv time is only half the video game time.)
Kids and teens, the video says, spend an average or 2.75 hours / wk. on home computers.
70% of 4-6-year-olds in the US have used a computer. (This does not seem surprising, since one experience at a daycare, preschool, or public library could presumably count for this.)
The author of this video equates all of this to "richness", which I don't necessarily agree with. There IS an interesting quote from a high school senior, "When I go to school, I have to 'power down'."
A study has found that students commonly ask only one question every ten hours in school -- yikes! (I'm not sure what grade level this was.)
Only 28% of 12th-graders surveyed believe schoolwork is interesting.
At the end is a link that I have not had a chance to explore yet, for more info.:
www.t4.jordandistrict.org
This video did give some sources for it's information, but not, if I remember correctly, for all of it.
I'm tagging this post for the 3cs course even though I watched it for Joe's course, since it is relevant to both.
By the time they graduate from college, today's students will have spent. . .
10,000 hours playing video games
10,000 hours on cellphones
20,000 hours watching T.V.
(Actually, if this data is correct, it's interesting to me that the tv time is only half the video game time.)
Kids and teens, the video says, spend an average or 2.75 hours / wk. on home computers.
70% of 4-6-year-olds in the US have used a computer. (This does not seem surprising, since one experience at a daycare, preschool, or public library could presumably count for this.)
The author of this video equates all of this to "richness", which I don't necessarily agree with. There IS an interesting quote from a high school senior, "When I go to school, I have to 'power down'."
A study has found that students commonly ask only one question every ten hours in school -- yikes! (I'm not sure what grade level this was.)
Only 28% of 12th-graders surveyed believe schoolwork is interesting.
At the end is a link that I have not had a chance to explore yet, for more info.:
www.t4.jordandistrict.org
This video did give some sources for it's information, but not, if I remember correctly, for all of it.
I'm tagging this post for the 3cs course even though I watched it for Joe's course, since it is relevant to both.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)