EDU 6433 Citizenship, Cell Phones, and Credible Sources

Citizenship, Cell Phones, and Credible Sources

ISTE standard four stresses the importance of promoting and modeling digital citizenship and responsibility. The overarching idea of global citizenship encompasses a variety of issues, ranging from engaging students in global literacy skills, to teaching students how to validate the credibility of sources and then use said sources to back and generate new ideas. 

As every year passes by, we are bombarded and indoctrinated with the belief that each new technological gadget is a magical carpet we must jump aboard lest we be left behind in the dust. While some of these technologies are beneficial, certainly not all are as valuable as others, and there lies the importance of understanding the validity of resources, not just those in print form. Therefore, as educators we must teach our students how to navigate the dense technological world in front of them, so they are capable of weeding through those resources and technologies that may not actually serve them. As discussed in the Vialogue this week, the CRAAP test can be used to analyze the veracity of a website or other source of material. Such a system allows the user to analyze the timeliness of information, importance and relevance to their research needs, the source of the information, the reliability of the information, and the reason the information actually exists. 

Figure 1: CRAAP checklist for source veracity.

Similarly, the WWWDOT framework, as discussed by Duke (2016) also provides educators and students with a step-by-step checklist for authenticating the credibility of a website or other source. 

·         W – Who wrote it? What are their credentials?

·         W – Why was it written?

·         W – When was it written/updated?

·         D – Does it help my needs?

·         O - Organization of site

·         T - To-do list for future, including cross-referencing sources cited by website/source

With such frameworks established, which share all the similar features, it should be easy for educators to promote and model good habits for online sourcing etiquette and research strategy. However, what about students that do not use technological resources appropriately, despite teaching? If students are allowed to have and use resources in certain contexts (e.g. perhaps in high school, but not elementary), how should educators handle those students that take advantage of the use of these resources? Taneja et al. (2015) note that students will use technology for distracting purposes if they infer they will not get in trouble for doing so. Therefore it could be suggested that teachers, administration, and even districts in general, should form coherent and collectively-enforced policies about the use of such technology. If it is established as the norm and expectation that technology (cell phones, lap tops, iPads, etc.) is a tool, not a toy, with consequences for the latter, then there would potentially be less cyber-slacking. Regarding technology as a vehicle for cyber-bullying (which could certainly result from idle hands and minds of cyber-slacking) Gimenez Gualdo et al. (2015) note that even though teachers often desire to prevent such attacks, there are often not holistic policies or programs implemented to deal with such issues. With standards in place for teaching technology K-12, perhaps issues such as cyber-slacking and cyber-bullying would become lesser problems? 

To further address the issue of cyber-bullying, teachers need to place continual emphasis on modeling productive and positive global citizenship. They must promote the idea that the rapidly expanding world can only benefit from mutual cooperation, as discussed by Dwyer (2016), and that global literacy is necessary for this. Global literacy includes providing students with enough knowledge of the community and the world that they may begin to have their own discussions, and make their own informed opinions and decisions, both of which would ideally be aimed at the good of the whole. Through promoting global literacy and the idea of promoting the collective good of the planet through use of ever-growing technology, in addition to teaching students proper ways to use technological devices, as well as collect credible sources, we can set them up for success in the increasingly digital world.

Reference List:

Duke, N. (2016). “Evaluating Websites as Information Sources”. https://www.edutopia.org/blog/evaluating-websites-as-information-sources-nell-k-duke

Dwyer, B. (2016). Teaching and Learning in the Global Village: Connect, Create, Collaborate, and Communicate. The Reading Teacher, 70(1): 131-136.

Gimenez Gualdo, A., Hunter, S., Durkin, K., Arnaiz, P., and Maquilon, J. (2015). The emotional impact of cyberbullying: Differences in perceptions and experiences as a function of role. Computers & Education, 82(2015): p. 228-235.

Taneja, A., Fiore, V. , and Fischer, B. (2015). Cyber-slacking in the classroom: Potential for digital distraction in the new age. Computers & Education, 82(2015): p. 141-151.

EDU 6433 Digital Storytelling with Sway and Snow White

https://sway.com/VhCOYif3C7axRNDm

The link above redirects to a Sway digital storytelling presentation titled "Writing a Summary Paragraph for Fiction Selections". The ability to write a clear, coherent, and concise summary paragraph is a middle school literacy standard, and a foundational building block toward writing essays and research reports. The TSWBSW summary strategy presented helps students maintain clear and focused writing.

Previously, this lesson was taught with the aid of a Powerpoint presentation and an accompanying handout with the sentence starter prompts (as seen in the Sway above) for the summary paragraph component sentences. While the adjustment from Powerpoint to Sway is not incredibly significant, and there are benefits and drawbacks to either, the use of Sway does allow for the use of technology to augment instruction, with reference to the SAMR model for technology integration. When used as a teaching tool for the instruction of writing a summary paragraph, that is, the Sway serves to augment; although, if students were able to use Sway to present their summary paragraphs, this could certainly advance to modification and even possible redefinition. Normal practice would be necessary first, obviously; Sway could serve as a vehicle for final publishing.

Regarding the first ISTE technology standard, or the need to facilitate and inspire student learning and creativity, this presentation and associated direct instruction fulfills the standard requirements. While it is a bit ironic to use digital storytelling as a means to present and teach how to summarize fictitious stories, or story-tell, it is also quite engaging for students. Not only does the concept of the narrative captivate audiences and students alike, whether in book, movie, poetry form, etc., the use of technology in conjunction with instruction to further draw attention allows for further student engagement. Furthermore, the presentation is set up to have scaffolded, explicit instruction regarding each component sentence of the summary. Then, there is a practice example that incorporates the use of Disney's Snow White, a well-known story that most students know, thus broadening active engagement through common background knowledge. The final portion of the presentation and associated learning activity allows for students to practice - accompanying direct instruction would emphasize the practice can be with another, well-known Disney movie, another fiction movie, or any fiction book of interest. This choice allows for inspirational and creative thinking, especially since the topic of choice is one actually known and desirable to the student. After students write their own summary paragraphs, they may pair or group share. Alternatively, sharing may also be done sentence by sentence. Either of these sharing strategies adds a final component to the learning experience to incorporate each part of the "I do, we do, you do" sequence.

While I feel the experience I have thus sustained with Sway to still be quite rudimentary, I do feel I could pass this knowledge on to students. As said above though, using Sway to publish work, for example, would be a final step, only after pencil/paper practice. As a digital storytelling aid for use in conjunction with instruction, it does seem useful, and could likely be used in various ways to inspire student learning and creativity.

EDU 6433 #ya #technolugy

#ya #technolugy

Cool! A hashtag, bro! … Here's one, bro: #Spellcheck. Alas, I SO judge thee...and you, dear reader, judge thee (and so would Shakespeare)… 

It’s wonderful to begin to incorporate the new digital age technology around us into education, such as blogging, tweeting, and a cornucopia of other shiny apps, downloads, and magical web-unicorn glitter poop, but the bottom line remains - as discussed in the second blog post – that “old literacy” should never be simply replaced by “new literacy” with technological [doodad] emphasis, even as has been alluded, as in Richtel’s “Blogs vs. Term Papers” (2012). Foundational, so-called “old literacy” is necessary. Without it, even with the best technological advances, students will not be able to put these to good use with technology throughout their educational career, and later in life as productive citizens. Everybody laughs, for instance, when the President of the United States has to retweet because of glaring typos.

Such critical analysis is necessary when learning of the bountiful new technologies before us. Are they simply just dazzling doodads, meant to entertain and maybe learn from, as discussed by Su and Rodriguez (n.d.) regarding educational games, or are they actually promoting higher-level thinking and cognitive development? Are these new technology bandwagons actually promoting the deepest of the SAMR model levels? Are they incorporating various combinations of all three important ideas of the TPACK framework? Or are they just bright, fancy entertainment (engaging nonetheless), but lacking actual educational purpose? There is certainly no need for such technologically advanced beings such as humankind to go acting like lowly Procyon lotor now is there (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkTzDh8IKNU )? And in all of this fancy new technological innovation, where is the direct instruction? Some of these examples seem to simply provide activities to do, and doing is good, but teaching kids good is good to do too. With technological integration obviously, but the mash-up is key. Finally, as brought up in class discussion before, there is always the important issue of access. Without 100% student access to technology in school and at home, as many examples for engaging school technology activities (Jackson, 2013) or communication devices (Knutson, 2016) promote, there will still be major flaws to simply embracing new technology in education.

This is all important to consider, such critical analysis and questioning, when dissecting standard three, modeling digital age work and learning, which contains four key ideas summarized below:

1.       Demonstration of fluency in incorporation and transfer of new digital technologies.

2.       Collaborate with school community using digital tools to promote student success.

3.       Communicate relevant information and ideas effectively to school community using various technologies.

4.       Model effective use of technology to aid in student research and learning.

Regarding the second idea, it should be addressed first and foremost that it would be foolish to assume 100% student and overall school community (the collective students, teachers, administration, support staff, parents/guardians, and various levels expanding from local community) access to any digital tools in question. Collaboration and communication with technology cannot happen without access to technology. Regarding the fourth idea, now here lies a tie to direct instruction, as well as an opportunity for growth in incorporating technological innovation in education. Are there technology standards that are employed to provide a scaffolded incorporation of technological skills and research strategies for students to practice at each grade level for what is necessary of them in the real world, evolving as fast as current technologies?

In researching the trigger question pertaining to ways for using technology with collaboration of the school community to increase student success it became clear that many suggestions simply seem to provide razzle-dazzle, dime-a-dozen, downloadable apps and programs for potential communication, but remember, however decent: 100% access! Then, even if access weren’t an issue, are the programs educationally stimulating? There is no use in employing a whoop-de-do, new technology if it actually does not engage on a deep, cognitive level – no matter the bells and whistles! And even those games that do promote educational growth rather than simple engagement (Su and Rodriguez, n.d.), do they provide actual direct instruction? Does any game provide direct instruction? It’s not listed as a benefit in the literature review by Su and Rodriguez (n.d.), for example. That’s a major drawback to suggestions such as, “One hot trend is “flipped” classrooms…” (Jackson, 2013). While it may be engaging to watch a video for class, is that really the same as direct, explicit instruction? And what was that about requiring students to pre watch a video or pre reading? Remember access to resources! Not to mention…all students actually reading for homework so that engaging class activity can then be collaborative? How does student collaboration work if half the students didn’t pre read/watch for the collaborative activity prep?

Figure 1: While the "flipped" classroom provides, “time engaged in projects” (Jackson, 2013)...well, that's all there really is. Do all students do pre reading? Do all students have access to the technology base necessary for the video process described here? A resounding NO and NO…Maybe in the school districts where there are E pluribus unum Abies procera, or the elusive Noble Fir laden with guilded bars struck with “E pluribus unum” – context is important. 

Furthermore regarding the trigger question, it must again be noted that the ideas of the “old literacy” (Richtel, 2012) should be emphasized when incorporating technology to promote engaging student activities and school community collaboration and communication alike; it’s great we have twitter, but it’s not great to not teach children proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, sentence fluency, writing structure, and countless other foundational skills needed to not tweet like a tw…POTUS… Here is exactly where there must be direct instruction, where simply relying upon new technologies and/or games to “teach”, communicate, and collaborate with students and communities will fall far short. Instead of having students simply whip out cell phones (remember: access, and actual educational utility) and tweet discussion about the latest 7^th grade literature reading (context), perhaps a simulation of tweeting with white boards and dry erase, as described by Marcinek (2013) as the fun and engaging “Post on my Wall” activity, could be a foundational strategy leading up to actual technological use and application. With this hands on activity, students emulate the sparkly technology (that they already may know how to use or not even have), but gain the benefit of direct instruction, practice both written and vocally as they may engage in discussion, and editing/revision practice. Alas, those are but simple “old literacy”. Bottom line is, we need that foundation, old or not, to make generations of literate students to inevitably gather up a crumbling civilization.

#FoundationFirst #IntelligibleEvidenceBasedTweetingSecond

 Reference List:

Jackson, Sarah (2013). How Technology Can Encourage Student Collaboration. Common Sense Education. https://www.commonsense.org/education/blog/how-technology-can-encourage-student-collaboration.

Knutson, Jeff (2016). 6 Tech Tools That Boost Teacher-Parent Communication. Common Sense Education. https://www.commonsense.org/education/blog/6-tech-tools-that-boost-teacher-parent-communication.

Marcinek, Andrew (2013). Building Classroom Community Amongst the Machines. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/blog/building-classroom-community-amongst-machines-andrew-marcinek.

Richtel, Matt (2012). Blogs vs. Term Papers. The New York Times.

Su, Bude and Rodriguez Cathi (n.d.). Effective Features in Computer Learning Games. California State University Monterey Bay.