Brendan’s Blog

Chapter four is a great part of this book, because it brings-in many of the practical examples of the new technologies mentioned in previous chapters, and illustrates their implementation in real school settings. I have to say that I am often frustrated by the lack of practical consideration on the part of ed tech visionaries, but some amount of “darned be the torpedos” is necessary if we are to realize creative solutions. In a previous post I talked about the lack of attention to privacy concerns that is a problem in the ed tech community. I believe that it is because popular web 2.0 apps are not designed for education, just like traditional technologies such as PowerPoint. Hence, proponents find themselves trying to hack new technologies to make them work in schools. An example here is Blogger. I’ve seen many Blogger pages used for K-12, but I always thought that was a bad idea because of the “Next Blog” button that goes at the top of Blogger pages. Is it appropriate for educators to present their students with this little Russian roulette link to an unknown blog? Come on now. (It was because of this problem that I had to utilize Blogger’s “publish to your own server” option that used to be offered, which by the way, made my blogs better, but cost me a lot of time for configuration.)

These kinds of concerns represent a major barrier to the diffusion of web 2.0 technologies, and for many reasons, products and their supporters do not often acknowledge this fact. What I mean to say here is that regardless of reasons why-we-should-not use a particular technology should not necessarily become reasons for failing to imagine the why-we-should. This feeling of mine comes from experience I have had in trying to innovate with technology in my own classrooms. There is a lot of overhead involved in innovation. But the cost of doing things the same old way is far too high for us not to continually push toward new and better solutions. Meanwhile we have to be cognizant of the fact that any innovation portends a disruption of the status quo - often in ways that innovators themselves are not always aware of.

For all its merits, I would have to point out one weak spot in Chapter four — the section on language learners and new technologies (p. 95). Whereas the idea of “social software” that the authors cite from Clay Shirky seems appropriate for content areas like math and science, it is equally important for language classes. That the authors fail to mention any of the social applications available for language instruction indicates to me that they are not aware of the potentials of “social software” to aid in education for this at-risk group of students. On the other hand, there isn’t all that much out there. There have been some prototypes, but no systems that have scaled. One example Pod Pals. A more commercial example is e-Pals. I would have liked some mention of technologies that express a better reflection of TPCK in the area of TESOL.

To be sure, students should not only use their iPods as a means of interacting with their teachers and those in their own classrooms, but they should also be utilized between students in different classrooms. The exciting thing about social software for language learners is that the potential exists for broader and more meaningful learning partnerships between students in geographically separate locations. So, for example, the ESOL classroom can be linked to the world language classrooms (Spanish, French, Chinese, etc.) for the purpose of a podcast exchange, and in that exchange students learn their second language with the help of a peer expert who is a native speaker of that language. The greatest potential for social software in ESL is the ability to simulate bilingual exchange environments. Experimental ESOL models that have language learners mixed in the same classroom with their peers in a structured collaborative bilingual design have proven very effective in not only the English language development of the language learners, but the development of foreign language proficiency for those learning the native language of the ESOL group. But the most important aspect of social software for ESOL applications must be considered in terms of not just language development per se, but overall academic achievement. Long story short: ESOL professionals believe that the recipe for success among ESOL groups involves no small measure of linguistic and academic interaction with the mainstream areas of the school. While time and space constraints of our popular school models may make it difficult to implement effective ESOL models, social applications of technology can help narrow the distance between students in ESOL programs and their academic success.

Another aspect of teaching English that isn’t mentiond in Chapter 4 regards reference sources and their value for ESOL. One of the most valuable technologies for ESOL is the bilingual dictionary. Paper versions are expensive; there are countless high quality dictionaries available on the web. This doesn’t really go to the concept of web 2.0, but a digital bilingual dictionary is not only a feasible thing to implement, but an accommodation of extremely high value.

Chapter two is something of a hit parade of currently popular writers and educators who like to prognosticate about how today’s generation of students is remarkably different than yesterday’s, especially with regard to their technological proficiency.  This is a popular argument in IT that inevitably leads to a plea for more technology integration.  Scrhum and Solomon quote Prensky as he claims that today’s students are “all ‘native speakers’ of the digital language of computers”.  Prensky is wrong, and he couldn’t have used worse wording.  In fact, only *some* of the current generation are native speakers of the digital language of computers, whatever that is.  Presnky is more accurate when he points out how older people might have to struggle to keep pace with the change that has come as a result of the spread of information technology.   But to be sure, many many students cannot afford computers, or do not have a way to learn how to use them effectively.  This idea that all children are texting and IMing their days away and living online in Second Life is complete bull.  The authors cite feed readers as one of the ways that information flows to them, rather than the other way around.  I asked my 22 year-old sister which feed reader she uses, and she looked at me like a was crazy.  How is that for “digital native”?

On the other hand, there is a valid point made in chapter two.  The authors point out that broadband access to the internet is almost completely in place in our schools, but that effective integration of the web has not really happened.  Home use of social networking technologies seems to outweigh school use.  The argument that this imbalance should be of concern is a valid one, all things considered.

In chapter three, Schrum and Solomon discuss some of the exciting new online tools that consititute what has come to be known as “Web 2.0.”  Many capabilities have converged to allow for these tools’ emergence.  I believe that the underlying capabilities of the web have merely become more effectively applied to real-world situations.  For example, the Internet is, by its nature, a communications medium.  Therefore, it seems natural for “social networking” to emerge as an online phenomenon.  Twitter is a means of communication, a sort of semi-synchronous one.  People socialize, and the Internet is a perfect place to do that, thanks to its speed and scope.  And, as the authors point out, it is not just abject socializing, but the next level of it, collaboration.  Chapter three highlights collaborative tools as one of the highlights of Web 2.0, such as shared documents and calendaring.

Without much hedging, the authors seems to be enthusiastic about freely available tools and the open-source model.  But as they point out, there are certain pitfalls to applications developed in the open source community.

With regard to these tools’ integration into classrooms, I believe it may be a bit premature, at least for widespread use in K-12.  That is to say, these technologies could well transform the classroom as we know it.  However, in my opinion is is not yet advisable to do so.  All of these applications, due to their social nature, have inherent privacy concerns.  When it comes to open-source, open-content, and open-everything, we have to ask, do we want an open classroom?

I personally don’t believe that the major stakeholders in K-12 are willing to embrace the concept of an open classroom.  It has the potential to expose children to unpredictable and unreliable information, not to mention exposing students’ online selves to a world of strangers.

But in the future, when society is a bit more comfortable with a degraded notion of privacy, tools like these will probably be commonplace.  Learning in distributed, networked communities might become the norm.

When I was an English teacher, I used blogs and podcasting with my students.  The kids really enjoyed it, and so did I, but it amounted to little more than a demonstration project or proof-of-concept.  The experience led me to believe that it will take a long time for the norms of classroom techniques to truly map to the technological affordances of the internet.

My favorite social bookmarking site it del.icio.us. I prefer it to the others, however it is unusual for me to adopt a product outside of the Google products suite when there is already a Google option (i.e., Google Bookmarks).  Del.icio.us is better, even if it is from Yahoo

My del.icio.us username is brendandowney.  See you there!

Here is a link to my twitter account, which I don’t use very much:

 0 Comments