Michelle Fulks Read, Ph.D.

Stop Smothering the Fire

Here is a thought:  Let’s focus on education as a personal journey.

Each year the New Media Consortium publishes information regarding trending and predicted future technology by both K-12 and higher education. This year, apparently, they are also discussing solvable, difficult, and “wicked” problems faced by educators attempting to integrate technology in teaching and learning. Today, the Center for Digital Learning wanted to discuss three of the anticipated highlighted constraints stating, “Three major challenges threaten to hinder education technology adoption in K-12 schools.”  These include:

1.  Personalized learning (solvable)
The CEO of the NMC believes solving this issue is as simple replicating existing personalization models.
2.  Privacy concerns (difficult)
The CEO describes this as a problem that could be solved by adopting “reasonable policies that open doors to students.”
3.  Relevant formal education (wicked)

Knotty challenges such as how to make education relevant for students don’t have many answers, and that’s why they’re classified as “wicked.” In higher education, conversations about relevance come down to the cost of a degree. But in K-12 education, conversations are more complex and involve wrestling with the purpose of school, Johnson said.

I don’t believe this article was meant to be used as a resource for addressing any of these challenges, which is good because it doesn’t. In my opinion, it doesn’t even do an adequate job of describing them.

For example, personalized learning can mean a couple of things including using computer-based learning (CBL) software and learning analytics software to match students to their particular skill sets in any given discipline or discipline topic. These CBL programs have been around for years.  I was using Josten’s version of it back in ’98.  We had five windows-based computers in the back of the room and we rotated through them during centers. For some, it makes a pretty nice baby sitter.  The students get on, answer a few select questions from which the computer assigns them a starting point for lesson progression; assessments are provided and grades automatically taken to be used (or not) by the teacher. Very little interaction with the teacher is needed as it all occurs with the computer program.  On the other hand, if used responsibly, these programs can assist teachers in identifying specific issues and areas for growth.

The other idea of personalized learning is similar, but more interpersonal.  The student and teacher set goals and choose strategies for learning. The student masters his/her own learning by having choice and autonomy.  This is scaffolded by the teacher and slowly released to the student. It is both personalized (e.g., Jenny’s learning) and differentiated (e.g., Jenny’s is different from Bobby’s).  That doesn’t necessarily mean the students aren’t both studying geometric shapes, but perhaps Jenny is learning about the attributes that make a shape, while Bobby is focusing on identifying shapes. Personalized learning is highly student-centered.

How can implementing personalized learning strategies be an issue related to technology integration?   Technology, particularly computers and the Internet, make personalization easier by providing tools for learning and gathering seemingly endless information and resources, not to mention potential access to experts, from the Internet. In fact, I believe a teacher’s biggest challenge would be TMI syndrome (too much information).  Well, that and safety concerns.  Therefore, a teacher should have some preselected options.

The challenges more specifically lie in the very reasons why educators have a difficult time with student-centered learning.  From my experience, I find that there are 3 reasons why teachers have a difficult time using student-centered teaching approaches:
* They weren’t raised or trained that way and thus traditional methods are engrained;
* They have a difficult time letting go of the “expert” role, aligning expertise with authority–you’d have to be an expert in literally everything to fully embrace student-centered, personalized learning as a teacher holding traditional learning philosophies;
* They are constructivist in thought and would prefer to use student-centered approaches but time and demands (such as preparing for standardized testing) interfere.

Many of my observations are supported by research.  For example Pederson & Liu, 2003, Ertmer, 2005, and Gillies, 2007, among many others, discuss similar constraints and barriers for teachers ‘being’ student-centered in their teaching and learning approaches.

The CEO is correct about privacy concerns, although I’m not sure exactly what he means by opening the door to students. So that???  Anyway,  by law, students have a right to privacy, meaning their grades and the work they produce are between them and the teacher (and their parents if minors). Policies should be created to address issues of others having access who do not need access and to prevent hackers from accessing. (Does this really happen a lot?).  And the concerns must be taken seriously by all schools and educators because just as I asked if hacking into student records is a big problem, the possibility does exist. Also, by absentmindedly using just any app on the Internet, students are exposed to others, and that could violate their right to a “safe” learning environment. Solutions already exist. Google Apps for Education is one solution many are adopting in order to provide private learning environments for their institutions where students can communicate, collaborate, and create.

Finally, the “wicked” (nearly impossible to solve) challenge of making education relevant?  It is NOT solved by justifying learning with obtaining a degree.  However, this relevancy problem is often solved when #1, personalized learning, is solved. When students are given choices they begin to own their learning, thus making it relevant. When students can make connections to themselves, their dreams, their goals, then learning becomes more relevant. But then the purpose of education all together is raised by the author when she quotes Jim Vanides from HP:

Relevant education is tough because technology, careers and jobs change so quickly. Even after students graduate, they have to work hard to keep their job skills up with the times, said Jim Vanides, global education program manager for HP, which funded the Horizon Project’s research.

“It’s a moving target,” Vanides said, “and the target that’s moving is accelerating.”

Again, this relevance concern is solved when we embrace and utilize student-centered and personalized learning. Students become motivated and develop skills for self directed learning, becoming a “life-long learner.”  K12 and college isn’t supposed to be about learning a specific trade (like Trade or Vocational Schools), it is about developing skills and a foundation for ongoing, self-directed, “lifelong” learning.   No professional should exit school, get a job, and then learn nothing else about his/her profession.  This is the professional development for teachers that is also common among many other professions including law, medicine, and business.

Now maybe I’m oversimplifying this.  But it seems to me that 2/3 of the challenges examined in the article are in fact solvable by one thing:  a shift in the way we view education. Rather than education being a one size fits all solution, education should be considered a personal journey not to be measured against others but against self and self’s goals. K-12 students, of course, have certain foundational skills (i.e., reading, writing, math, science and social studies concepts, etc.) that are needed to be productive members of society.  If they are taught that through as much choice on their part as possible, making learning personal and relevant, they will become life-long learners. They will also have been taught the skills needed to be self-directed in their own learning. College degrees lay thicker foundations.

I’ll go out on a limb here and say, these issues don’t challenge technology adoption as the article suggests. In fact, some could say technology is a part of the solution.

“Education is not the filling of the pail, but the lighting of a fire.”
                                                                              ~William Butler Yeats

Let’s stop smothering the fire.
http://www.centerdigitaled.com/news/3-Significant-Challenges-in-Education-Technology-Today.html

Back from Philly

Phew–whirlwind trip to Philadelphia. Really enjoyed it. Greg got to try an authentic Philly Cheese-steak…Lol.  Sometimes authentic isn’t as good. We visited all the proper historical sites, or as many as we could. Found a “Read”–Benjamin Franklin’s wife. Since my family didn’t get ‘here’ until the late 1800’s, I’m thinking we aren’t likely related. 🙂

Sarah Jones, Joan Hughes, and I presented a paper, A predictive profile of Youths’ Web 2.0 Outside School Activities.

AERA 2014 – Philadelphia

Planning on being at AERA this weekend in Philadelphia?  I am co-presenting on a paper entitled,  A Predictive Profile of Youths’ Web 2.0 Outside-School Activities with my adviser, Dr. Joan Hughes, and colleague, Sara Jolly Jones. This has been a work in progress and started as a course assignment for me.  It has undergone a great deal of change as we found more and more variables that impacted whether middle-school age children were likely to be or not be Web 2.0 “users.”  Join us Saturday, April 5 at 2:45-4:15 PM, Convention Center, Terrace Level, Terrace IV to learn more!

Abstract:  This quantitative study used multiple regression to identify predictors of middle school students’ Web 2.0 activities out of school, a composite variable constructed from 15 technology activities. Three middle schools participated in the study and 6th and 7th grade students completed an online survey. Independent predictor variables included school, gender, ethnicity, grade level, computer limits at home, assigned computer-based homework at school, total gadgets at home, Web 2.0 activities in school, traditional technology activities in school and three interaction variables. Results reveal a model explaining 25% of the variance, with statistically significant predictors including: school, ethnicity, grade, total gadgets, and the interaction of school and in-school Web 2.0 activities. Knowing what students do outside of school, and how in-school and out-of-school variables may impact such activity may assist educators in planning for technology in instruction and learning that both leverage what students are already doing or may wish they were doing, making learning motivating and connected to real life.

Dissertation Draft Complete

I’m happy to report that after a year plus long process, I have submitted all five chapters of my dissertation to my co-chairs for review.  I know some changes will be forthcoming, but this is a moment to celebrate in my eyes.  Here are three word clouds I created in Wordle to illustrate my writing.  It truly captures the essence of what I wrote. With the exception of the “instructional design” aspect, as I suppose I didn’t use that particular phrase often.  It is however, an online professional development, and it is about using the element of modeling for developing metacognition in the design of that professional development to facilitate teacher change in their knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, self-efficacy, and practice.  I think that is captured.  Below are a couple of other options. Gotta love Wordle!

Waldorf School of the Peninsula…

A reviewer for an AERA proposal I submitted this past summer, directed me to these schools as a counter argument to the participation culture/gap and digital inequalities issues that I feel rather passionate about.  In our submission, my colleagues and I looked at factors predicting the Web 2.0 status of middle-school aged students.  Like many PEW reports, we found that students own a great number of gadgets.  Students are, at times, frustrated that schools are utilizing technology more for instruction and learning.  We also found that the schools with larger numbers of at-risk students and lower average incomes do less with technology than do others, which is all the more concerning, since these are the very children who likely cannot afford their own.

None of this is particularly surprising, however.

What we were trying to find extended beyond at risk and low socio-economic status.  In fact these factors were not included. Instead, we looked at gender, age, # of technology tools owned, etc.  We wanted to know what made a child a Web 2.0 user when the most enabling/disabling factors were taken out. The submission did highlight the need for educators to evaluate the Web 2.0 status of their own students and to take action accordingly.

The reviewer wanted to point out that not all schools feel that technology use by students was appropriate before high school.
The Waldorf schools are an elite set of private schools which follow the century old curriculum of Rudolf Steiner.  There are approximately 160 schools ranging from nursery through high school.  Tuition costs are: Well, you can imagine.

This last paragraph should immediately give one pause for thought.  The children who go to these schools have advantages most public school children do not have.  If they don’t own a mp3 player, it is because Papa or Mama won’t allow it.  Often Papa or Mama are executives from Google, Microsoft, or Apple.  They feel today’s children are over-exposed and the arguments on technology dependency hit home with them.  But what about the rest of the children?  In particular, what about the children Jenkins is specifically referring to when he discusses the participation gap?  What about the college students who make it to college, but lack technology skills because they had no exposure as children as Harigittai discusses.

The Waldorf children are going to college.  They are excelling in academics.  They aren’t worrying about where tomorrow night’s meal is coming from, or if they are going to get beat up on the way home.  Waldorf parents and the school are trying to instill basic foundational knowledge without the hazy mess of technology.  They’ll get that technology later in high school.  But for children who do not have that advantage, they need to use the technology tools provided by their schools.

My immediate thought when reading this article was, “Here’s another example of digital inequality.”  Not necessarily in the traditional form.  This one is exabberated by the wealth threshold.  Waldorf children will get it eventually, even if for now, they can afford not to.  The socio-economically depressed children from the other side of the tracks, might never be able to afford it. They also can’t afford to not have it.

Many of our public school children can’t wait for minimal exposure in high school. Public schools, particularly the ones serving under-privileged students, only have so much technology to share between students.  They have to start younger, so that these students have amble exposure to technology that even comes close to equaling what these children will ultimately get in high school.  I agree that foundational skills, basic study skills, are very important for children to develop; however, I also believe that children who do not have exposure to technology skill development through their schools until high school, and only minimal exposure thereafter, will be at a HUGE disadvantage when it comes to life beyond high school.  In fact, maybe Waldorf’s decision to eschew technology for their students until high school, will give our other children time to cross that digital inequality bridge.
I still say that school, particular public school,  is where we need to attempt to build that bridge and guide those students across who may find themselves left behind, technologically speaking.

Danger in the clouds…

On August 1st, reports emerged stating that Dropbox had confirmed a security breach that led to a spam storm, which hit many of its customers. As it happened, an unidentified number of names and passwords were stolen from various users on other sites and were used to sign into Dropbox accounts. Specifically, data was taken from one Dropbox employee containing users’ email addresses—thus, the spam. International users including those from the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Germany, seem to be a primary target.

Dropbox reminds its customers to use unique passwords for each site they use requiring one, and to make the password complex. If you use the same password repeatedly, it only makes a hacker’s job easier if you become the target. They pick up your password at Facebook, and then use it at your bank.

As a note, Dropbox is upping their security features to require a two-factor authentication process.

This hit home for me, because I realized that I was one of those who used some variation of the same password for each of my sites. In fact, I can honestly say that on more than one occasion I’ve used the phrase “the usual” as my password reminder. I often justify that with thinking, “who would want my identity or my files anyway?” Unfortunately, I learned a long time ago that things don’t just happen to other people. Things happen to me too.

All people, especially PK-16+ teachers and instructors, need to be careful about what they are choosing to place in the cloud. It is critical to consider if you are possibly putting yours, a child’s, or student’s FERPA protected information, or otherwise confidential, private information, within reach. For educators, you must know that this includes identifying student information such as their social security number, and even their graded material. Personally, you probably should refrain from storing electronic copies of legal documents and anything containing your personal information such as your social security number, your driver’s license number, your bank account information, etc.

Dropbox isn’t the only one to be hit recently with security breaches that allowed hackers to gain access to a customer’s personal information and in some cases, their personal files. LinkedIn, a professional social media site, was hacked in June 2012. And, unfortunately, this isn’t the first time Dropbox has been hit. In June 2010, an update of some sort allowed anyone to log into any account with any password. This problem persisted for nearly four hours.

The main purpose of Dropbox is to store or preferably, backup, your files in the cloud. (Relying on anyone’s server as sole storage is risky.) Secondarily, it also offers a “sharing” aspect that allows users to share access to files. So, if one person is hacked, files belonging to others which have been shared with that person, are also compromised.

The use of unique passwords is important without doubt. It can be difficult to use different passwords on different sites, but there are ways of storing your passwords—perhaps not in the cloud. There are many software apps, both free and commercial. KeePass, for example, stores anywhere and is itself password protected. LastPass is a recommended tool that installs on your computer and works with you as you enter each password protected site. It is saved both locally and on their server. The basic service is free, and a premium service allows you to add the feature to mobile devices. And, then there is the good ole spiral notepad. Yes, fires happen, but if you can’t remember a password there is always password reset options. Eeek.

It is also advisable to research the security measures taken by various cloud storage service providers. For example, Box.com (previously Box.net) claims to offer encryption even at the personal account level. Unfortunately, there is some question on whether that encryption is only on transfer (avoiding middle-man hacking), or if the data remains encrypted at rest on their server. You could always encrypt your files yourself before uploading.

Finally, contemplate what you really want people to have access to in your cloud space. The cloud is a wonderful idea for storing files, backing up data, etc. so that you know it is safe should something happen to your computer hard drive, or any external hard drives you use. On the other hand, the cloud is a server in which some employees likely have access and which can be targeted and hacked.

The bottom line is: if your document could get you in deep trouble legally, financially, professionally, romantically, or any other way if someone else found it, make a conscious decision about whether or not you should put it up there. Just like your own computer hard drive, the cloud isn’t safe proof. Only you can assess the risk. You probably ought not put the map to your uncle’s multi-million dollar treasure up there either.

Dropbox Reports User Accounts Were Hijacked, Adds New Security Features

LinkedIn Confirms Hack And Leak Of “Some” User Passwords

http://techlogon.com/2012/03/09/box-com-security-issues-for-personal-accounts/
http://download.cnet.com/LastPass-Password-Manager/3000-18501_4-10889725.html
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html

Trying out the new Facebook Timeline…time to reflect

Michelle Read’s new Facebook Timeline.

Trying the new Facebook Timeline today. I have to say that as much as I dreaded it, I rather like it. But it is also a time to reflect–especially to reflect about what you want others to know about you and about posts you may have made years ago.  I’ll talk more about that in a bit…

In reading others’ blogs and comments, it appears that some don’t like the layout, but if you think of it in terms of a timeline as it is intended, it makes sense. The timeline itself runs down the middle of the page, with events, status updates, etc. positioned throughout. Right now, Facebook is letting you initiate it and then play with it for 7 days before publishing. Or, if you are ready you can “Publish Now.” Warning! You can’t go back to the regular layout. Here’s a screen shot to give you an idea of what mine looks like.

You can get Timeline by logging into Facebook and searching for “Introducing Timeline.”  Then choose “Get Timeline.” Facebook provides a Tour, which you can replay by pressing the “Restart Tour” button that shows you what the elements of the page are and what you can do with it. Essentially, the timeline goes backwards from present day to your birthday, if you are so inclined.
Three pods appeared fixed at the top: A quick update pod, your “Friends” pod and “Recent Activity” pod. I did wonder initially why there appeared to be two areas for friends. One appears in the timeline and shows all your friends (rotating their images and providing a link, like before to see all of them).  The o ther appears in your basic information area.  This smaller widget seems to show (from the viewpoint of someone else) any friends you have in common, as a number is displayed.  Below these, the pods are directly tied to the timeline and you can change their position by editing the date. In each pod are a star button and a pencil button.

For updates made directly in Facebook, you can change the date and location. You can also “Hide” this pod from the Timeline and “Delete Post” all together. If you simply “Hide” the post, it will still show up in your activity log, which only you can access anyway. For shares made at external sites, you don’t seem to currently have the ability to change the date.; however, you can “Hide from the Timeline” and “Unlike.” With the star button, you can make one of your status updates, likes, shares, or life events a “Feature” meaning it will enlarge and cross the timeline bar rather than sitting on one side or the other.

A still easy feature is adding a status update. In the same area you can add a photo, place or now a life event. Nifty for adding things to your timeline that doesn’t show—likely because it happened before you got on Facebook! Most of the Life Event categories is prefilled with background info you already provided. However specific events are included in each category such as “New Child,” “New Pet,” or “Loss of a Love One“ under “Family and Relationships.” What is really cool is that you can click on the timeline itself to add a status, photo, place or life event. A smaller bar, sans pods, appears on the right of the screen and shows the years for which things have been dated in your timeline. You can easily navigate to that time by clicking on it. If you’ve hidden your birth year, it simply shows “Born.” ☺

It is a good time to talk about the things one will need to consider with these changes. Of course, privacy is always a concern. Make sure you check out your privacy settings to make sure you are happy with who can search you and see your contact info (these are combined at present—should be separate, I think), who can post to your wall, who can see post made by others on your wall, default status privacy from external apps, tag control, apps, etc. Additionally, it is now rather easy for someone to see what you posted several years ago. You should peruse your own timeline before publishing to make sure you are still happy with all of your posts. What I don’t readily see, that used to simply appear in the old left column under Friends, is a pod for Family. Perhaps I’m just missing it. You can look for it by clicking the “About” button.

Overall, I’m happy.  I’m sure more changes are forthcoming. Meanwhile, I went ahead and published mine.