Of Mice and Middle Years…

One of the most valuable concepts I take from this course is the social “backchannelling” discussions I have had with my classmates in this EC&I 831 course. After Chris Lehmann posted his course information that allowed those with student numbers to access grades from classes, we had some interesting and thought provoking discussions on communication with parents/students/teachers. In the end, I really believe we as educators have a responsibility to keep in touch with parents no matter what the size of class/classes we teach. I remember as an intern at Mount Royal High School in Saskatoon spending my prep and after school calling parents in regards to attendance!
Chris’ example is one answer, especially for those teachers with large and multiple classes to connect to parents, and what better way to move teachers toward moving to new technologies than to begin with this challenge. Improved parent communication/ accountability are resounding issues in our school systems. I believe one lends itself to another.
I also value the new ideas each presenter contributes to my learning journey. I finished reading Chris’ reference to the article entitled Neil Postman: Five Things We Need to Know About Technological Change
Please read! I provided a brief summary below (most of it directly) from the text. I hope it is enough of a teaser to arouse your interest!
Five Things We Need to Know About Technological Change
Idea Number One, …culture always pays a price for technology.
Idea Number Two: …technology favors some people and harms others, these are questions that must always be asked. And so, that there are always winners and losers in technological change.
Idea Number Three: …every technology has a philosophy which is given expression in how the technology makes people use their minds, in what it makes us do with our bodies, in how it codifies the world, in which of our senses it amplifies, in which of our emotional and intellectual tendencies it disregards. This idea is the sum and substance of what the great Catholic prophet, Marshall McLuhan meant when he coined the famous sentence, “The medium is the message.”
Idea Number Four: Technological change is not additive; it is ecological….A new medium does not add something; it changes everything. (think of the first printing press and the ramifications on European society)
Idea Number Five: …technology tends to become mythic; that is, perceived as part of the natural order of things, and therefore tends to control more of our lives than is good for us.
His concluding statement: We need to proceed with our eyes wide open so that we many use technology rather than be used by it.

By the way Rob, many people have influenced much of my thinking in educational technology. Richard Schwier, Seymour Papert and the many professors, colleagues and friends I have met over the years. Indeed, I hope that thinking never remains static.

Maybe it could carry my Imac around the school with me…

See the full article here with the links….

Boston Dynamics keeps working on their BigDog quadruped robot, which will probably grow to be the future AT-AT of the Pentagon. Its evolution since the last time we saw it is nothing sort of mindblowing, and a bit spooky….
It looks like an actual biological quadruped. Seeing it climb through rubble, snow, jumping over obstacles like a wild goat, and saving a near-fall on iced ground at the last second (fast forward to the middle of the video) defies belief….

I remember as a boy in the mid seventies watching the T.V series called Space 1999 . The premise of the series was that a horrible nuclear explosion caused the moon to drift away from the earth into deep space. At night I would stare in wonderment at the moon and imagined what it would be like to be looking up from earth and see that terrible event occur. One night I dreamt that this actually happened. I remember looking up and hearing someone yell “BOOOOOOM!”. There was no sound effect, just someone yelling “BOOOOOOM!”. At the time it frightened me because in my mind that was what it would have sounded like. I had no idea what that sound would be like, no concept that in actuality there would be no sound. I was young and that was that. Funniest thing I remember from my childhood.

As I sat Wednesday night in our session in EC&I 831 that focused on the order of closure on an educational blog by Al Upton in Australia, and my previous post on the recent events that surrounded the near expulsion of a student at Ryerson for his use of Facebook I recalled that dream.

I remembered the dream because in a very real sense it parallels the lack of understanding that these administrations of their respective institutions have in relation to these technologies. So instead of investigation and consultation to develop an understanding of these social networking tools and their applications, they come to their own rash and uninformed conclusions and act accordingly. They yell “BOOOOM!”.

It was very soon after (maybe a couple of weeks) I had that dream I recalled how silly it was to hear that yell. I wonder if these institutions are still yelling the same sound and how long it will take them to come to that same realization that I did those many years ago.

After listening to Brian Lamb and D’arcy Norman’s presentation Tuesday night, I took some time to read the article they had posted entitled Social Software in Action (No Real Software Required). I think the article does a terrific job in summing up the message that both gentlemen conveyed in their presentation; knowledge need not be housed or conveyed to only the select few in our society through traditional or “proprietary” (and expensive) avenues… it can be open to all and distributed through the collective efforts of a social network using a variety of inexpensive/free tools.

I must admit, I had some struggles in regards to free access to knowledge in regards to whether there was a question of that knowledge bearing academic validity and integrity. After picking Rob’s brain (local calls are really cheap) I came to the conclusion that I was actually muddling these concepts. We in EC&I 831 are introduced to presenters who facilitate insights and knowledge (academic validity and integrity) through an expensive program such as Elluminate, yet that same presentation is then sent out to Ustream where all can view and (by the grace of the instructors) participate (free access to knowledge). Our Wednesday night discussions are delivered effectively through free online tools (Ustream and Skype) In a sense, I was preoccupied with the “milk” and the “driver” and not on “truck” itself.

Do they even still have milk trucks?

Although he will not be expelled, the Ryerson student has still been found guilty of academic misconduct, will receive a zero on ten percent of his course, and have to take a course in relation to academic misconduct. View the CBC article here.

If anyone has more information as to why he was found guilty and yet not expelled, I would be interested to know why.

Your thoughts?

Angie’s blog inspired me to “play” with my blog. I borrowed the Voki! I was so impressed with how she used the Voki to speak to her students…. I never would of thought of that! You all have such innovative ideas. Just to think in January I thought blogs were a waste of time.
Crow tastes awful.

As with all projects, the hardest and most important step is the pre-planning and planning stages. With my project, developing screencasts to help teachers/students with digital applications has been nothing short of exasperating. If the adage “three is a crowd” is true, then that is the crowd that encompasses the total amount of collaboration I have been able to muster in the development of this project.

So, my “collaborators are as follows:
First, the principal thought it would be a great idea to develop a series of videos explaining how to use our online report card system. I agree that would not only help our staff but would extend to the other schools in the division. (as an aside, I always seem to be developing projects that are division wide throughout this course…this happen to anyone else?) But (gulp) not having to use the program for the past couple of years may prove to be a small challenge…

Secondly, Mind42 will be my second set of screencasts in order to help staff and students use this tool as an alternative to written reports/essays and brainstroming techniques. This was suggested by a teacher as well.

My third screencast, if I can muster the time, will be to help younger students begin to use a simple typing program called Ten Thumbs. I really want this project to target both older and younger grades.

I am still trying to get around the issue of screen size and volume using Jing. By the way, Jing is a FANTASTIC and easy tool to use!

When does this course end????

I once enter the world of programming many years ago with my Vic 20 and my COCO 28 (Radio Shack). Did some work with LOGO at the high school. Then GUI came along…. praise the Mac Classic.

Then Mr. Downes shows his customized tools for collecting feeds of various types, organizing, creating, etc. and I wonder why I left the coding world. However I take comfort in his belief in open source and that knowledge should be free to all….. I just hope his plan to release his “reader on steroids” is a little more user friendly for us illiterate coders.

I found his slideshare presentation on networks vs groups excellent and thought provoking. My sister-in-law and brother-in-law work in the area of business, and often refer to their attendance at conferences and lunches as “networking”. Yet when they collaborate on a project with their peers, they work in groups.
Institutions, such as schools and businesses, thrive on the group model, assigning roles and tasks to individuals; part of our best practice in teaching.
So what about networked collaboration when there is a time frame involved? Personal learning certainly is affected because of these constraints, do they not?
1.) Is networking or groups the best approach to problem solving in terms of effective, time based outcomes, or for personal informal learning experiences? Does the concept of timed outcomes within a network destroy the concept of a network?

2.) Can a group model maintain some of it’s positive aspects (time frames, for example) and still maintain some characteristics of a network? If so, what would it look like?

I hope I have expressed myself clearly. I may be attempting to re convey my meanings in the next short while!
Thoughts.

I write this post with some sadness this evening. I will be unable to join the EC&I class in Second Life Wednesday night due to Parent Teacher interviews. I have some experience in this area. Virtual environments, where participants create personalized avatars for interaction on a multitude of levels, is in my opinion one of the most fascinating aspects of an online computing experience.

Millions of people are involved with these environments. Many are our students.

Although online, these types of experiences often are so powerful that they have been known to extend into “reality”. The following quote is from a paper I wrote in ECMM 802 a few years ago:
“Over the summer, Mr. Maggio followed a blog about goings-on in Second Life and was intrigued by what he read: Participants in the community strive for social acceptance, hire private investigators to spy on virtual spouses, hurl harassment charges at each other, and debate whether a virtual marriage ceremony performed by a minister’s avatar is – well, real. In one scandalous case, two virtual characters reportedly developed such a strong connection that their human operators ditched their respective spouses and moved in together.”
Foster, A. L. (2005). Avatars of Research. Chronicle of Higher Education., 52(6), 35-36.

I was clicking through the channels tonight, and (this is completely true) I stumbled upon Southpark. I despise the show, but the episode involved the characters and their experiences in Warcraft, one of the most popular online games at present.
The satire was hilarious, centering around the point that for many gamers, this MMOG (massive multiplayer online game) is often very real to the player (as illustrated in the above quote). One quote from a character in the show (paraphrased)…”My goodness, this could destroy the world…..of Warcraft.” The gameplay in the episode was authentic (according to my son). Blizzard, the creator of Warcraft, is prominently displayed throughout the episode. They are not ignorant: they know their demographic is a large part of the Southpark audience… We must not forget that aspect…these are businesses that want these “free accounts” to entice players to derive the benefits of membership. For that, you, the player, must pay!

Anyway, enjoy Second Life all. I will be with you in spirit. Try not to lose your Linden dollars in the experience!!