In the west we strive to build our own little kingdoms, we erect our fences, install our security systems, ensure we deadlock our door's and essentially make our lives more private, protected and disconnected than any other period in history. Yet isn't it ironic that in these same houses we connect straight into a network more public than any environment we have encountered in the physical realm, a network which can multiply our information faster than a virus, potentially sharing it with an audience we may never have intended.
What fence do we build around the information we share in our networked community? How do we padlock our digital identity? What security system do we entrust to ensure that more sinister net users can't steal our virtual embodiment? The reality is that most of us on facebook don't think twice about clicking 'accept' to invitations from 'friends' that we don't really know as traditional friends in the true sense of the word, the majority of online users often trust the website and never read the screeds of terms and conditions when signing up online, we click the little box which says 'I agree to these terms and conditions'. But what are we agreeing to, who are we connecting with, and perhaps more importantly who is watching us?
The problem we have is a breakdown from reality to virtuality. In reality we accept that privacy is actually a personal responsibility, which leads to a right. We don't open our homes, our worlds and our personal matters up to the world, yet online people feel compelled to... why?
Disconnect.
When we spend so much time online we lose reality of the potential audience we can reach through our online activity, and are oblivious to the potential surveillance over us. We forget we are essentially creating a digital passport which we will carry for life, one which can reveal all sorts of information about us.
Both articles we had to read this week, the first by Samantha MacConnell, 'Don't overestimate privacy of online information' and Beware: the Internet could own your future by Husna Najand, raised some interesting points about privacy. Najand's article concerned me the most as it highlighted the abuse of power that capitalist corporations such as Facebook have over people. The ability for them to change their terms of service contract to a stance which saw them ultimately owning all the information of their users online is a grave concern for some, and a major abuse of power. For many users this may not be much of a concern as MacConnell points out, 'Of course, if you do not have photographs or information posted that could be incriminating, there probably is no need to worry.' But the following short clip from The Wall shows why we all need to have some concern...
Are you taking the responsibility to protect your privacy?
Our reading has taken us to an article, 'Protect Your Digital Footprint' by Fields Moseley, who appears to offer very little innovative thought other than... be careful your digital footprint may catch up with you when it comes to job interviews. A second reading, 'Your online reputation can hurt your job search' also failed to stimulate my brain much, although it did offer some good solutions to ensuring your online character is upheld in a positive light... basically remove the negative and promote the positive.
So in need of something a little more 'meaty' I searched around and found a few interesting read's. One of the major issues with our digital footprint is that it is not a footprint in the sand or mud, it is more like a wet-paint footprint... the key here is that the paint never dries, it is open to being reformed, redistributed and reconstituted. I was watching a great movie last night called doubt, in it the Catholic priest preaches about rumors. He gave the analogy of a rumor being like a feather pillow split open on a roof top, the feathers spread everywhere become almost impossible to pick up. In a similar way once we post or do something on the internet the 'wind' picks it up into the cloud, where it is almost impossible to retrieve. Scared?
A good read about some of the legal issues surrounding internet use can be found at Internet Attorney, a site focusing around legal issues on the internet, with specific regard to American citizens. Basically we need to be aware that the internet has no internal law, it is governed by the local governments from which the user accesses the site, therefore there are serious issues about what is acceptable and what is not as their is no norm. It was also interesting reading the Wikipedia article on internet privacy, to find out that the E.U. has passed a law that allows police throughout the E.U. remote access to anyone's personal computer without a search warrant! This raises serious issues about personal privacy and state control. Although it seemed a little out-dated the Australian 'Office of the Privacy Commissioner' has some good explanations on why you need to be careful online, and the different ways in which people obtain data on your activity, which all construct our digital footprint.
So what really is the issue here?
If we are 'doing stuff' and 'posting stuff' on the net that is not acceptable and this is coming back to bite us shouldn't we have thought first about what we were doing? The real issue is that most users are not aware of the visibility of what we are doing, in my mind this is the key issue...
Increased connection = Increased visibility.
If we want to be connected, we have to accept our actions can be seen by a wider range of people, this is reality. With any job position or career that is highly visible, people learn this quick. However, with a private computer hidden in a room in your house we are fooled into thinking we are not visible.
So what does this have to do with schools?
We ask our students to go online, we ask them to blog, we ask them to create in collaborative spaces, but are we ensuring they understand they are creating their own digital footprint throughout this process? Could these processes potentially harm their identity on the net? Are we putting them at risk with displaying their work to the world?
There is no doubt in my mind that if we expect students to participate online that we must teach them how to do this safely. It has to start with the schools 'Acceptable Use Policy', which must not just be a policy that protects the school, but protects the student. By focusing on protecting the student it will most likely meet the goal of protecting the school. It is our responsibility as educators to guide students in creating positive digital footprints and enlightening them of their visibility online. If we fail to do so we fail to protect the child, which is yet another role for the school to absorb!
It is quite fascinating looking back to what people wrote over ten years ago about the possibilities of technology in Physical Education (See McLean, D. 1996, 'Use of Computer-based Technology in Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance'). Specialised software, multimedia enhancement, computer assisted instruction and use of the web were some of the major suggestions made by McLean. But the big question still remains: Have we really moved much beyond the these suggestions? Are we changing our profession and modernising the way we teach Physical Education? Has Physical Education entered the 21st Century?
Before we answer that question we have to ask why change? Why actually go to all the trouble to integrate technology into our lessons? Is there any research out there that suggests it is a good thing to integrate? There sure is a heck of a lot of resistance supported by a view that technology takes away practical time. Possibly it does. But I would argue that although we may lose practical time we maximise 'learning time', increasing the chance that our learners will become 'life long learners', motivated to gain in knowledge, understanding and application about what this actually means in a 'Physically Educated' sense.
Research isn't that easy to find and most web-sites offer limited scope on how one can integrate technology into PE. The most current trend being implemented is that of pedometers and HR monitors into PE (e.g PELINKS4U), primarily to assist in measuring effort (the whole concept of an effort grade is one that still bothers me... do we give an effort grade in academic subjects?). When used appropriately I have seen HR monitors and Pedometers improve participation and in some cases where there has been sufficient teaching, it has also lead to a greater understanding amongst the students of what is occurring during exercise in their bodies. But take caution! Research from McCaughtry, N., Oliver, K.L., Dillon, S.R., & Martin, J.J. (2008). (Teachers' perspectives on the use of pedometers as instructional technology in physical education: A cautionary tale), highlighted that the use of pedometers does not necessarily mean better learning in our classrooms, nor does it motivate all students to participate better.
But what about other technologies? Are we utilising digital video footage? Web 2.0 learning opportunities? Online feeds such as You Tube (have a look at the endless sporting videos online). What about software like the fitnessgram, Polar's PE Manager, are these promoting better learning? PDA's are useful in recording assessments, but are these enhancing learning? Are they giving the teacher more time to provide meaningful feedback within the class?
I think we have to test technology integration with three critical questions....
Does this integration of technology increase the participation of the student in physical activity in and/or out of the classroom?
Are students LEARNING better about being a physically educated person as a direct result from implementing this technology?
Does this technology remove barriers to participation?
I think when we can honestly look at our technology integrations and say yes to each of these questions then we are doing the right thing, if not we need to seriously question what we are doing.
So I have been geeking out... I have played with google docs and saved myself a huge amount of time in the long run... how?
By using Google Doc's I have created a registration form for our upcoming Panther Run Series, check it out below, and if you are not doing anything on the dates below come and join us and run in the panther run series!
Plug in, switch on, connect, roam, SMS, 3G, wifi, GPS...
...At the center of the development of technology is a pressure to be 'connected'. Connected to what? who? how?
Connectivism is a modern phenomenon, so modern my spell checker is showing the word as incorrectly spelled. In order to understand this theory it is worth considering the principles that underlie it as suggested by George Siemens (2004):
Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions.
Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources.
Learning may reside in non-human appliances.
Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known
Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning.
Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill.
Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities.
Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what to learn and the meaning of incoming information is seen through the lens of a shifting reality. While there is a right answer now, it may be wrong tomorrow due to alterations in the information climate affecting the decision.
It all sounds good on the surface, People of diverse backgrounds connected, sharing new technology, experiencing lifelong learning together, this is a dream for most educationalists, including myself. So what on earth is the problem?
Can I disconnect?
I hear this time and time again; how can I disconnect? To survive we almost need to become hyper-connected. Staying current, nurturing connections, processing information, decision making ...it all takes time. As we master one skill, a new technology requires a new shift, as we advance our social network and PLN we require more and more time to maintain the networks we are creating.
The result... Disconnection... with REALITY.
I know that in the short duration this course has run that I have felt more disconnected from reality than connected. I see it regularly. In youth today I see more and more connection online with a corresponding disconnection with the immediate reality in their lives. In the 'Hanging Out' section of the MacArthur Report the result of this is that we are '...constructing new social norms' are the new norms better than those preceeding them? Mizuko also raises the 'hypersocial' (MacArthur Report 2008, p.14) process which teens use to create their identity. Am I just too old fashion, too stuck in the past to see that this is the way of the future? I know for sure that as a Health and Physical Educator I am concerned.
I want students to use technology, please don't think I am suggesting technology is not a good option. I think the use of technology in sport and physical education not only can improve performance, but can assist in students gaining a deep understanding of their health and well being, which can inspire them to be more active over their lifetime; a goal most PE teachers would share. I am more concerned about the impact that such hyperconnectivity has on our student populations, and in particular how it disconnects them from what is really important. My challenge is to teach children to live a life of balance, one in which technology can assist them in relationship building and identity formation, but one in which they are still firmly connected to who they are without technology.
So this is my final reflection for the COETAIL course one I have been taking... late, but as I often (too often) say, better late than never! I have found this course really interesting, and can say now, looking back on it that I have used a lot of technology and learnt a lot in doing so. I have picked up a variety of skills that I feel have culminated in my final project.
I know I have picked up some great IT skills that will eventually save me time, and help me to develop more as an educator. Using GoogleDocs is a huge time saver for registration of athletic events not to mention surveys for kids and collaboration prospects in the classroom. Blogging on Blogger has been an easy technical skill to master, although I still struggle to blog regularly. Using my Google Reader has taught me a great deal in how to manage the endless amounts of information continually arising on the web and participation within the class wiki on wetpaint, has been a great chance for me to understand through participation what a wiki can do, and the collaborative potential it holds.
I have gained an understanding of a few of the issues that are surrounding the integration of IT into education, and needless to say I am concerned about some of the outcomes of diving in deep into Information Technology. I am more firmly grounded on a few key principles:
IT is one of many tools that assists learning.
When IT begins to draw us away from reality we are becoming too hyper-connected, this is a dangerous state.
IT has to help our lives. It has to free us up more to do the important things in life.
I see a great potential in integrating IT into Physical Education and I am looking forward to researching more and continuing my blog to help enlighten any willing readers to understand ways they can integrate IT to improve student learning in PE. I can't wait to implement my multi-cultural games unit to my grade 8 students and see them collaborate with a class from another school. This has huge potential for inter-cultural understanding and appreciation.
Thanks to Kim Cofino and Jeff Utech who have been our mentor lecturers during this course, you have done a great job with a class of over 50! I have been challenged, extended, frustrated, excited and dismayed, but most of all I have learned.
Elements coloured in black are recognised and existing verbs, Elements coloured in blue are new digital verbs. So honestly, what is the difference?
I have only been in education for ten years and already I am seeing things re-packaged, re-worded, re-branded and regurgitated. Is this stuff completely revolutionary?
My opinion: No
I also tend to disagree with some of the words used under each of the headings in Bloom's Digital Taxonomy, which are explained more in depth in Andrew Churches article 'Bloom's Taxonomy Blooms Digitally'. I don't think that Bloom would place video editing as a higher order thinking skill (HOTS)... the reality these days is that many of the tasks appearing on the surface as HOTS are not. Technology has made these skills accessible to a wider range of people via a more user friendly platform, what we do looks more 'flashy', but the reality is that we do much of it without using many HOTS.
I also struggle to agree with Anderson's new Bloom's taxonomy. The change from using noun descriptors to verbs makes much sense. However, the swap at the top doesn't ring true to me... I struggle to see how one can evaluate before there has been some form of creation/synthesis. By placing creation at the top it almost assumes we have an endpoint in the thinking process, this is counter productive to further development of the thinking process. Evaluation above synthesis/creation inspires us to maintain our learning.
In saying all this, I see value in integrating the different digital tools and skills in 'Bloom's digital taxonomy map' in order to promote higher order thinking skills amongst my pupils, some do have merit and it is a good starting point when it comes to the integration of technology across curricula.
What fence do we build around the information we share in our networked community? How do we padlock our digital identity? What security system do we entrust to ensure that more sinister net users can't steal our virtual embodiment? The reality is that most of us on facebook don't think twice about clicking 'accept' to invitations from 'friends' that we don't really know as traditional friends in the true sense of the word, the majority of online users often trust the website and never read the screeds of terms and conditions when signing up online, we click the little box which says 'I agree to these terms and conditions'. But what are we agreeing to, who are we connecting with, and perhaps more importantly who is watching us?
Posts
