CHAPTER EIGHT (Web 2.0, w/ ESL, LOW INCOME, AND GENERAL PROBLEMS)

                In the eighth chapter of the textbook, one reads about problems such as special needs students, English language learners and equal learning opportunities. Equal learning opportunities need to be addressed by understanding that not all students have an equal amount of access to technology that enables to them learn in the same format. This particularly applies to schools with a high minority population. Possible solutions suggested include the One Laptop per Child essentially is a program that provides students with laptops for academic purposes. These laptops will operate via satellite power, thus not requiring a broadband connection (Solomon & Schrum, 2007). While many of these laptops are destined for third world countries, areas in the U.S. are also going to be eligible for this program (Solomon & Schrum, 2007).

                

               One paragraph that I found to be of interest and one that I should also take into consideration is the ESL paragraph. According to the text there are 5.4 million students classified as LEP (limited English proficient)  and by 2025 they will account for 25% of students here in the United States (U.S. Department of Education, 2006, n.p.). From working on campus and in a non-profit setting I've seen the increasing amount of students from oversees and the difficulty that some of them have with the English language and I've observed how some of them grasps skills w/ a combination of interactive technology and traditional language lessons. David and Husin (2004) found that the use of a computer program helped ELS students grasp the basic skills to communicate while learning the english language. While I am not a foreigner,  I can somewhat related to this from the perspective of somebody studying a non-english language. I’ve taken Spanish classes where I had to go to a language lab for an hour a week, we were able to enrich our skills via interactive games and audio tapes. 

            Earlier I was discussing how schools in which the demographics show a high minority population do not have the same access or amount of technology  as a more upscale or prestige school. The same also applies to schools with more cultural and language diversity and rural schools. According to the text Female students and students who are physically challenged may also face unequal access. There is an existing tension between those who have comfort and experience using technologies sand those who do not, and from my experience this does not always have to do with a language barrier. From my experience it's more of an age thing. I've found that older students, and those who are reentering school after a long period of time are the ones who have the toughest time. This also ties into the expectation that assignments be completed using technology (p. 116), if the student [in this situation we will call them adult learners] does not understand the manipulation of these tools, how will they complete the assignment.

           There has been an attempt to reduce this divine w/ web 2.0 tools, but then comes the problem that not everyone had access to the internet in their homes. According to Solomon & Schrum, nearly 70% of While (Non-Hispanic) and Asian-American children have both computers and Internet access at home; On the other hand, less than 40% of African-American, Native American, and Hispanic children have access to both computers and the Internet in their homes. Instructors need to look at these stats when they decide to incorporate blogging into the course. I've found that a public library or computer lab can be a great alternative to those who do not have a sufficient internet connection in their own homes, if one has a near by local library or lab they can access, one can blog from that location as well as use their web 2.0 tools. This may be an inconvenience for some, so I feel that the laptop programs that individuals are coming up are a great idea, and I would like to see more of that down here in my hometown because I know many (in my family alone) who do not have a computer in their own, let alone any internet and do not have the transportation to go to a library, so laptops connect from a satellite location  at a fairly inexpensive rate would allow for them to blog and network thus keeping contact with school staff and peers, which is the purpose of the web 2.0 error after all, collaboration.

(NATION EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS FOR TEACHERS (NETS*T)

IV. Assessment and Evaluation

Teachers apply technology to facilitate a variety of effective assessment and evaluations strategies. Teachers:

A. apply technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment techniques.

B. use technology resources to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice and maximize student learning.

C. apply multiple methods of evaluation to determine students' appropriate use of technology resources for learning, communication, and productivity

ETHICS AND SAFETY (CHAPTER SEVEN)

                Chapter Seven is the internet safety guide of this text book.  We read about internet safety and what strategies parents and administrators are taking to ensure that their child or student has an enjoyable and safe experience utilizing the internet.  With that being said, I was quite surprised at the percentages that I read, for example 94% had taken steps to try to ensure their children’s online safety.  ¾ (75%) of that group limited home internet to an open space in the room. To be honest, we don’t hear about that. W/ so many teens having their own laptops, I thought that actually monitoring a child’s internet use had become taboo. I have never had my own computer growing up, and did not get a laptop until I was almost 21 years old, and I’m just about to be 25, so having full internet privacy is still a fairy new thing for me as well. I was also not aware that more than 55% of parents were installing software to limit or block their child’s online activities.

                This was a tough one to find a paragraph to say I identified with more than others so I won‘t state a particular one. This will be more of a rambling of the facts displayed in this chapter.  To answer the question. Is it okay to download music on a file sharing program just because it is available? The answer is no! I remember seeing a commercial way back w/ several artists contributing to the commercial stating that taking music you did not pay for is STEALING! To download a full album on a free P2P file sharing software is the same as going to a music store and stealing the album. According to poll conducted in the spring of 2006, while many teachers admit that downloading music or DVD’s for free is illegal, they do not feel the same way about making copies of these products to share with friends and family. To that I have to respond that if it were truly okay, major companies (SONY anyone) would not have had put copy protection software on their albums. I am not sure if they are still doing this or not, but from 2004-2006, Sony was putting this software on their CDs that would hinder one from easily making a copy of these albums. For example, they would not play in certain computers or certain media players. Which brings me to what come of the copy protection was. The software would appear in the form of this music player called mediamaxx, which was  not a very good player, it was quite slow and nearly impossible to close, it’s said that this would alter the format of some of your other media files, disabling them from operating the way that they should, killing your dvd drive. In some cases, CD and DVD drives literally disappeared. Spyware was installed, and this caused many to boycott the company.  It was believed that they cared more about their product than their consumer, even though as a consumer you are legally allowed to have a backup copy of an album for your car, however, that was almost never the case. Another complaint was that this software made the album completely useless to those who like to rap music to their iPods or mp3 players.

                The code of ethics such as testing accuracy y of information and identifying sources should be common sense, in my opinion. Giving credit to wherever you get your information is necessary in order to avoid copyright issues. Even in video blogs where you may have a song playing in the background can result in an accusation of infringement.

My Own Commentary

 One never knows who they are fooling with online or who is watching. Don’t think just because you have a page blocked  that nobody can retrieve what you post, if someone really wants to see what you have stated, they are going to find it by any means necessary even if it means hacking. Also, if a webcam is not in use, do NOT leave it plugged! There is always the risk that it can be turned on from a remote location. Even w/o hacking, w/ products like Skype, iChat or ooVoo one may easily access a camera and catch one w/o their knowledge. If you get a message from someone you don't know, that's obviously inappropriate, please report it!

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/cruelcam_costs_kid_life_gKIl4DmNjUdOJ4ZMdNy12N#ixzz110vBL5Lo

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/19/national/19kids.ready.html?pagewanted=all

National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators (NETS*A)

VI. Social, legal, and Ethical Issues—Educational leaders understand the social, legal, and ethical issues related to technology and model responsible decision making related to these issues. Educational leaders:

1. Ensure equity of access to technology resources that enable and empower all learners and educators.
2. Identify, communicate, model, and enforce social, legal and ethical practices to promote responsible use of technology.
3. Promote and enforce privacy, security, and online safety related to the use of technology.
4. Promote and enforce environmentally safe and healthy practices in the use of technology.
5. Participate in the development of policies that clearly enforce copyright law and assign ownership of intellectual property developed with the district resources.

NEW TOOLS (CHAPTER SIX)

Previously I blogged about professional development and why we need it in classrooms and business settings and I provided some examples with smartphones and iPads being integrated into the educational setting depending on the subject matter. Chapter 6 of the new tools text is a discussion on how to implement the professional development.  Wesley Fryer (2006) asserts that in order for the development to be successful, administrators need to have a vision as to how it’s going to occur. He also believes that discussion about such issues such as technology integration should not only occur along administrators, but between administrators and teachers as well.  While I am not a teacher, I can see why this would be difficult. While we need to realize that students today are a part of a digital generation, that even when I was in high school, I did not have this much experience with technology. The only real social networking tool that we had was MySpace, Podcasting was virtually unheard of. So in that since, I can see why teachers and administrators would be overwhelmed with having so much technology thrown at them in such a short period. There is also the possibility (and this most likely will occur) that students will not utilize the technology in the ways that they are supposed to. That is while the school system may have a vision to enhance the students learning experience; students may have other ideas that get them carried away.  

                I found the passage on leadership in the 21^st century to be relevant to my experience in my education career thus far. I’ve stated that in my past blogs that in grade school our computer usage was limited to the computer labs and the library. The only other exception would be computer literacy or typing classes. According to Levin & Arafeh:

School administrators-and not teachers- set the tone for Internet use at school. The differences among the schools attended by students [surveyed] were striking. Policy choices by those who run school systems and other factors have resulted in different schools having different levels of access to the Internet, different requirements for student technology literacy skills, and different restrictions on student Internet access. (2002)

While this applied to my educational experience, (i.e. any website that was not set by an administrator was pretty much blocked w/ no questions asked), I’m sure that this is the norm in many schools today. Despite the trend to incorporate these newer forms of technology (such as electronic gadgets, another thing that was not even allowed on school premises when I was in grade school) in the class today, there are still several educational institutions that have a professional development mindset. Web 2.0 tools like twitter, and Skype had not been around at the time, the closest that we had to Skype or ooVoo was Yahoo Messenger and AOL Instant Messenger. While they had web cam ability, the quality was not very good, images were rather foggy. Google docs had not been used; we were still using floppy disk! (I did not get introduced to the jump drive until my sophomore year of college). So, again, I relate to this passage the most because, I am kind of in the midst of this transformation from web 1.0 to web 2.0 and I’m still learning as time goes by.

NETS*A (National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators)

I.                    Leadership and Vision – Educational leaders inspire a shared vision for comprehensive integration of technology and foster an environment and culture conducive to the realization of that vision. Educational leaders:

A.      Facilitate the shared development by all stakeholders of a vision for technology use and widely communicate that vision.

B.      Maintain an inclusive and cohesive process to develop, implement, and monitor a dynamic, long-range, and systemic technology plan to achieve the vision.

C.      Foster and nurture a culture of responsible risk taking and advocate policies promoting continuous innovation with technology.

D.      Use date in making leadership decisions

E.       Advocate for research-based effective practices in use of technology.

F.       Advocate, on the state and national levels, for policies, programs, and funding opportunities that support implementation for the district technology plan.

http://voices.yahoo.com/youtube-videos-social-2325456.html

http://www.classroom20.com/forum/topics/leveraging-youtube-for-science

http://www.teachscienceandmath.com/2010/04/30/how-to-integrate-podcasting-into-science-and-math-classes/

http://net.educause.edu/section_params/mentoring/M06_%20PDP.pdf

http://dpi.wi.gov/tepdl/pdp.html