Listen to the Music

Reading through this article at Read/Write Web, it is apparent that many of the traditional elements of the learning process are being enhanced, or flat out replace, with the advances of Web 2.0 and all it’s capabilities.  The range of applications listed in the article, as well as in this article at Online Education Database, and their wide reaching uses make it apparent that that Web 2.0 students will need to know more than just how to jot down a few ideas on an index card.

Students will need to be computer savvy beyond the level that many seem to already be.  While it’s great to have all these aides, they are nothing more than electronic versions of the tools we’ve been using without the student’s ability to integrate them with each other.  This also means that students are going to have to be evaluating consumers, thorough investigators, and critical thinkers to sort the gimmicks from the real tools and the useless blogspeak from the real nuggets of information.  As I see it, our job as educators has just gotten more complex as a result of Web 2.0, not simpler.

I produced the following podcast as an assignment for one of my VHS Best Practices course.  It’s a little more than eight and a half minutes long, and it takes a closer look at the make-up of “Weird Al” Yankovic’s parodies.

Sorry for the minor electronic garble effect during the spoken parts.  It was either that, or a whole lot of white noise.  I hope you enjoy it.

“Weird Al” Yankovic – The Method to the Madness

For those of you that are interested, I created this podcast on a PC using the free audio editing program Audacity.

While there has been much debate about the accuracy of entries in on-line, editable reference sources like Wikipedia, but as noted in a number of articles including this one in the New York Times, not even the benchmarks for reference of text-books and commercial encyclopedias are perfect.

The end of the Nature.com article referenced in the above NY Times article, mentions that the powers that be at Wikipedia were developing a “stable” version of the on-line, editable encyclopedia. The idea is that once an entry has reached the point were it is determined to have a certain amount of validity or legitimacy, it will be marked as “stable.” At this point the “stable” version will be locked, and a duplicate “live” one will be open to continued editing. If, at some point in time, the “open” version is deemed to be an improvement over the “stable” version, it will become the “stable” version, and the process begins again.

At first one might think, isn’t locking an entry completely contradictory to the purpose of a Wiki? Yes, but remember, there still will be a version available for editing. O.K., but how is having users determine, in a sense, when an entry is “stable” any better than allowing them unrestricted access to edit the entries, kind of like “giving the fox the keys to the hen house?” While that is a concern, it is a “free market,” and the consumers (users) will vote with their wallets (visits/votes). In the end, I think “stable” entries can only make Wikipedia a better, more valid and usable, tool.

As an educator, it is important that we teach students how to be discriminate consumers. Just as we teach them to gather “the facts” and male decisions for themselves, we need to teach them how to properly use and validate what the find on-line, whether informally as individuals or in a formal group setting, as suggested in Andy Carvin’s article . Also, the very nature of a free, editable reference site provides students with a real-world lesson that they need to be aware of the things they say, do, or print in (a) public (forum), because somebody is always watching.

IM…Not Ready

IM…texting…instant communication. It seems that with every passing year students need more and more instant gratification in their diet, and why should we be surprised. Take a look at TV, movies, vieod games, they’re all fast paced and contantly changing to get and hold people’s ever shortening attention spans. Before I digress into a chicken and the egg debate about that, let me get to my point, Instant Messaging in the classroom.

As noted in 7 things you should know about… Instant Messaging forms of instant messaging (IM) are finding their way into all sorts of (computer) applications, and into education. While I agree that IM can be used very successfully for “virtual office hours,” without strict guidelines, expectations of being “always connected” and demands can quickly get out of hand. Also, as the article points out, there are some significant security issues that come with IM. For example, most IM software lacks an anti-virus component, and as teacher and non-participant in a conversation that is taking place during school, how can I monitor or keep a record of every conversation to spot harassment. There have already been examples of students texting each other messages during the day about fighting after school.

The Disruptive-Technology article notes that many schools have blocked IM programs, and given the potential hazards and current supervision issues, I can see why. We have to keep in mind that when students are in school, we are responsible for them, and that is a big responsibility. Before we can unleash them on this new technology we need to take the time to educate them.

Although, as the article said, playing is a source of learning for digital natives, I think many students still see IM as a game or a social tool, because that’s the way they’ve always used it, and this is when it becomes a distraction to the instructional process rather than an aid. The research presented by Kinzie, Whitaker, and Hofer seems to support that. While students are capable of carrying on multiple conversations, it is far more difficult to simultaneously take in new instruction/information, process, and communicate on it.

Now I know what you’re thinking, what about those kid that I see sitting at a computer, playing a game, listening to music, and IM/talking with their friends that are also playing the game (some in the room with them). None of those activities require quite the same active reflection in order to process the new information. There are moments in the game, for sure, where more concentration is required, but at those moments students will disengage from the other activities to focus on the game.

As the research suggests, I think students would benefit more from sequential uses of IM, rather than simultaneous. Allow them to IM to build knowledge consensus during non-instructional (quiet work/reflective) class times, or outside of class. Again, though, we have to be careful of what is said or done within the walls of the school. Of course, many of those don’t present themselves as much at advanced or colligate levels. We can also use IM right now is to connect the class as a whole with outside sources and experts that it might be impossible to physically bring into the classroom (7 thing you should know about…).

Right now, I just don’t think we’re quite ready for IM at the K-12 level on an individual basis though.

Blogs, in the classroom…what do I think?

1. How could you use blogging in your instruction?
   I think blogs could be useful in my high school Music History & Appreciation course where I could use them to replace the standard pencil method of reflecting I have students do in response to listening examples. If I went a step farther and posted the listening examples on-line it could open up a whole world of possibilities.
2. Would this practice benefit your students?
   I would think so. Students would not be constrained by the limits of class time. Students who are normally shy (in class) might feel more comfortable sharing from “behind the (computer) screen.”
3. What hurdles might stand in the way of using blogging in your instruction?
   Right now blogs and similar sites are blocked at our school. Also, the common, accepted, style of writing most students associate with on-line dialoging is very informal, to say the least, so I see overcoming that as a bit of a hurdle.
4. What would it take to remove the hurdles?
   Educating students, parents, administrators, etc. as to the real dangers involved with being on-line at all, and the proper to go on-line and be safe. We would also need to have a plan for how we’re going to use blogging, including rules for the students, what we are going to do keep our students (and their information) safe, and how we are going to deal with and “violations.”
5. Is it worth the fight?
   Yes, but I’m not sure if we’re ready yet. I think we’re just a little behind the curve in some areas, so we have a little work to do to get everything ready and everyone on board.