:KDW7HDFKHUV1HHGWR.QRZ $ERXW(GXFDWLRQDO7HFKQRORJ\ 3UDFWLFHV3ROLFLHVDQG3URFHGXUHV edited by Je! Stanzler and Kristin Fontichiaro
Each chapter in this collection is copyright ! 2013 by the individual authors and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivs 3.0 license. To learn more about this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/.
This book was published non-commercially, with copies printed on the University of Michigan Library's Espresso Book Machine at cost. For a free download of this book as a formatted-for-print PDF, visit Scribd.com.
This book reflects the contributors' understandings about educational technology policies and procedures and should not be interpreted as legal advice.
Cover photo by Alex Mendiola.
2 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
For Our Mentors
Table of Contents
Introduction
Let's Build It 9 Kristin Fontichiaro and Jeff Stanzler
Legislation
Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) 15 John Spisak III and Elijah Smith
Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) 25 Kathlyen Harrison and Peter Benson
Filtering 32 Mikolaj Orzelski and Hussein Beydoun
The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) 37 Musetta Reed and Preston Woodward
Intellectual Property
Copyright 47 John Brady and Erin Christine
Fair Use 55 Rachel Miller and Tasha Rios
Social Media and Communication
Chatspeak 65 Kaitlin Johnson and Stephen Hart
Facebook and Social Media 72 Alyssa Johnson and Christine Smith
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 5
Learning Resources
Google Scholar and Scholarly Databases 80 Michelle Cox and Asha Kancherlapalli
Wikipedia 95 Colleen McIntee and Jack Tamm
Digital Textbooks 101 Alex Mendiola and Rebekah Terry
BYOD: Bring Your Own Devices 110 Carrie Beattie and Shaza Katrib
Digital Behaviors
Media Literacy 119 Abby Boggs and Rayhan El-Alami
Cyberbullying 126 Lakeza S. Ball and Katherine Strong
Reading Online 135 Grahm Hannah and Saskia Warren
Instructional Strategies
Gamifying the Classroom 145 Shelley Catalan and Dylan Rustenholtz
The Flipped Classroom 151 Colleen Kartheiser and Lauren Rovin
Learning Management Systems 159 Matthew Foran and Chelsea Moszczenski
One-To-One Computing 167 Paula Veverica Gentile and Matthew Pierson
6 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Budget and Finance
Millages 177 Sarah Guzick and Ryan Said eRate 186 Kevin Galvin and Rachael Machiele
Common Core State Standards
Technology and English Language Arts, 6-12 197 Abigail Genise and Lisa Montez Sullivan
Technology and Math 205 Michael Biro and Michael Gilmartin
Conclusion
List of MAC Alumni Editors 210
To Learn More About the University of Michigan School of Education 211
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 7
Introduction: Let's Build It Kristin Fontichiaro and Jeff Stanzler
In our university classrooms, our students have new equipment, smartphones, and a filter-free, reliable, high-speed wireless connection. The same cannot be said for the future classrooms in which they will teach. Some will join schools with 1:1 implementation, where working digitally is as easy as pencil and paper. Some will enter classrooms that are as sparsely wired as they might have been twenty years earlier. District filters will block offensive content but frequently thwart access to useful tools, too. The landscape that they face is uncertain and unpredictable. Having learned in their university studies that they are the strongest influence over a student's achievement, their efforts to use technology to innovate, strengthen classroom community, and even streamline bureaucratic tasks can be stymied by policies, regulations, and restrictions that are unfamiliar to them. These are the barriers that are often hidden to preservice teachers but that ultimately impact their abilities to implement dynamic, technology-rich teaching. Helping our students to be cognizant of these barriers, while equipping these future teachers to thoughtfully navigate and hopefully surmount them, is a core motivation for our work.
From its inception over twenty years ago, the Master of Arts in Educational Studies with Secondary Teacher Certification Program, better known as MAC, has set the goal of not only helping to support the development of excellent teachers, but of helping to nurture future teacher leaders. Of course, setting a goal like this requires a programmatic vision of what this means in practice, and it also provides a challenge to the teachers of every MAC course to think about how work done in their course will serve this larger goal.
This is our third year of co-teaching the Education 504 (“Teaching with Technology”) course, a course that spans virtually the entire MAC Program year. We take the title of the course very seriously, and so although the students look at and work with new technology tools, the Education 504 course is not a tech tutorial course. Rather, it is a place where we start by looking at our teaching, and our teaching goals, and
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 9 then as we unpack those goals we do some investigation into how, or if, technology might help us to attain those teaching goals. In the broader view, we are also interested in helping our students to craft a vision of themselves as professionals, and this in turn leads us to focus significant attention on the ways in which web-based technology can help to support teachers, whether through facilitating meaningful connections with peers, or through the cultivation of dynamic communities of practice. To this end, our students examine how teachers blog about their practice, and use Twitter to facilitate “just in time” professional consultation. The students also attend a statewide conference on technology and teaching, and they write and submit to professional publications articles about the teaching affordances of new technology tools.
There’s at least one other piece of this puzzle, and that starts with seeing one’s work as an educator as extending beyond your own classroom. We want our students to know about the kinds of resources (both human and informational) that are available to them in various professional communities, but we also want our students, from the outset of their professional careers, to see themselves as being able to contribute to such communities. So, for the 2012-2013 program year, we decided to remove an oral presentation related to technology policies and procedures and, instead, to experiment with the publication of a book—this book—that represents an attempt to further our students’ professional development by engaging them in an effort to address the needs of busy classroom teachers. It is our hope that by having them put their work before an audience of accomplished professionals, rather than simply turning in their work to their profs, that we can model an approach to authentic learning that might spark the creativity of our students as they start their teaching careers, and reflect on their teaching and learning goals.
m
10 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Kristin Fontichiaro is a clinical assistant professor at the University of Michigan School of Information. Contact: [email protected].
Jeff Stanzler is a lecturer at the University of Michigan School of Education. Contact: [email protected].
Together, they teach Education 504 (“Teaching with Technology”) at the University of Michigan School of Education for the Secondary MAC Program.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 11
Legislation
Children's Online Protection Act (CIPA) Elijah Smith and John Spisak III
Page One, Chapter One…Technology has become a part of everyday life for educators and students: it is used for administrative functions, student education, and interaction with other educators and students. Computers are increasingly abundant in schools, with more and more schools are switching to a one-to-one system that will put a computer in every student’s hands. Some schools are even allowing students to bring their own computers to class, and the right to bring a computer to class may be a part of Individual Educational Programs (IEPs) for students with special needs. Furthermore, mobile communication devices have become an indispensable part of everyday life for many people. This trend is not only true for educators, but also for students; most students now have cell phones, and many have smart phones with Internet access. The influx of computers and smart phones provide students with instant and constant access to the Internet. This increased Internet access can provide great new teaching opportunities, but it also creates a whole new list of challenges for educators to overcome.
As new technologies advance, more and more content is becoming available online. Much of the new content is both educational as well as helpful in everyday lives; however, constant Internet access is problematic and can even be dangerous to students. Utilizing the new technologies in educational settings can be distracting and counterproductive at times and exciting and game-changing at others, and creating a balance that ensures the proper and safe application of available technologies is crucial. The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) seeks to ensure that the Internet can be used to benefit student education while balancing the risks of Internet access. In this chapter we will explain what CIPA is, the educational issues associated with it, and how schools can make sure they are compliant with it.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 15 Children’s access to inappropriate Internet material at school has been a major concern of parents and educators since the Internet was first introduced to the educational scene. In order to deal with this growing issue, Congress enacted the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) in 2000 and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted the act early in 2001 (FCC 2011).
The Children’s Internet Protection Act states that public schools and libraries must set forth safety measures for Internet access by minors in their institutions. These safety measures must include the filtering and blocking of online images that are obscene, depict child pornography, or are considered harmful to minors. Educational centers, such as schools, have two additional requirements in order to be in compliance with CIPA. First, monitoring online activities by minors must be a condition of the educational center’s safety policy; and second, as required by the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, education about online behavior must be enacted. Appropriate behavior standards must include interaction within social network websites and chat rooms, and education on cyber bullying, including how to recognize and respond to it (FCC 2011).
CIPA is not a law that must be followed in order to avoid legal action; it influences school and library practice because adoption is required in order for these institutions to receive E-rate funding. The E-rate incentive program, designed to reduce the cost of communication services to public institutions, offers reduced prices for Internet access to public schools, libraries, and other public institutions, and, once Congress passed the Children’s Internet Protection Act, any public institution where minors had Internet access was required to be compliant with CIPA in order to qualify for E-rate Internet pricing. (Editors' note: To learn more about E- rate, see pages 194-203.)
There are a few issues of public concern in relation to CIPA. The first is the definition of what is harmful to students, and how schools should determine what information to block from their students.
16 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Harmful materials are defined by CIPA as:
Any picture, image, graphic image file, or other visual depiction that – (i) taken as a whole and with respect to minors, appeals to a prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion; (ii) depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or a lewd exhibition of the genitals; and (iii) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors" (United States Code n.d.).
While the first two parts of this definition seem clear, as they address pornography and other sexually explicit materials, controversy can arise. For example, the current Web has many wildly popular crowdsourced sites. Should a site like YouTube or Flickr be blocked because of a remote possibility that pornographic content has slipped through the filter? Should these sites be blocked if, in additional to high-quality content posted there, there may be materials deemed to be in poor taste that fall short of having "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value as to minors”?
There are many online resources whose primary purpose may be interpreted as non-aligned with those values but which can be used by teachers for positive classroom activities. For example, Facebook—a popular social networking website—was not designed to be an educational tool and has been blocked by many schools; however, many teachers have begun to use Facebook as a way to interact with students and keep them updated on classroom procedures. Facebook has also been used by governments and political entities to release political information; it was used by the Egyptian revolutionaries to spread information in their overthrow of the Egyptian government in 2011 and 2012 and by Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi to pardon revolutionaries on October 8, 2012 (CNN News Staff 2011). This makes Facebook one of the battlegrounds in the argument over what online resources should or should not be allowed in school. Those opposed to including websites that
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 17 can be used for educational or non-education purposes claim that students are more likely to use these resources as non-productive distractions from schoolwork than they are to learn from them. They also argue that access to social sites like Facebook increase the threat of cyberbullying among students.
There are currently no government-sanctioned lists describing which online resources are acceptable and which are not. It is up to educators, administrators, school boards, and community members to decide which resources are educational for their children and which websites should be blocked. To complicate this matter, new web resources are being created at a rapid rate, and it is the responsibility of the school to keep up with the changing Internet landscape. It may be the instinct of educators to err on the side of caution and block any controversial site, but it is imperative that schools not limit student learning opportunities by being too cautious. It would behoove any policy maker to take in the opinions of his or her community and the teachers in his or her school(s) when determining whether or not to block new Internet resources.
Another controversy created by the implementation of CIPA is the right of adults to turn off the Internet filter. This can be a concern, as students who are eighteen years or older may claim that they are legal adults and ask to have the filter turned off. If a school is operating strictly under CIPA guidelines then those students do, in fact, have a legal right to use the Internet without a filter. This issue can be easily avoided, however, by creating a school policy that requires the use of Internet filters for all students.
CIPA clearly states that adult educators have a right to unfiltered access, especially if that access is required for bona fide research. The problems arise when educators choose to turn off the filters and show students content that would otherwise be blocked for minor access. It is easy to see how this could be an issue, as the purpose of the filter is to prevent students from viewing inappropriate material, and many would argue that, if an Internet resource is deemed inappropriate for any reason, it should not be allowed to be shown to students. A counterargument can be
18 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
made that some material that is inappropriate for students’ personal use may not be inappropriate in a classroom setting. For example, a school may choose to include YouTube—a website that allows using to upload videos and view the videos uploaded by other users—in its list of blocked websites because students may use the site to view counterproductive or inappropriate material. While this site can most certainly be inappropriate for students, it can also be a great tool for teachers who want to show clips of films, newscasts, or political information like the State of the Union address or Presidential debate. Part of becoming CIPA compliant is deciding whether or not to allow teachers to use blocked websites as an educational tool.
When becoming CIPA compliant, schools must address the issue of educating minors about appropriate online activity when interacting with others with an emphasis on preventing cyberbullying. The first item to be dealt with when providing this education is creating a definition of cyberbullying. Unfortunately, CIPA does not give a definition of cyberbullying, and it is up to schools to decide how they will define it. This may seem like a simple issue to address, but schools must be very careful when defining cyberbullying. If punishments are given to students for participating in cyberbullying then the school must be able to show that it has a clear definition of what cyberbullying is and be able to prove that the student was adequately informed of that definition and what actions would constitute cyberbullying. It is often wise for schools to use an adapted version of their anti-bullying policy to describe cyberbullying in an effort to remain consistent.
A much more complex issue arises around the issue of where cyberbullying occurs. It is often difficult to tell if a student was at school and using school resources or Internet access when participating in cyberbullying because cyberbullying occurs in an online domain. Information concerning where Internet material is posted is obtainable by using Internet IP addresses, but this process is very time consuming and costly. For this reason, it may be in the schools best interest to block websites that allow student-to-student interaction altogether in an effort to avoid
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 19 the problem, but it is up to each school or school district to decide what is best for its students.
There is also the issue of the cost—in both time and money—of educating students about online interactions and cyberbullying. If this education is done outside of the classroom then it will require the time of an educator (and in some cases money to pay that educator), a space in which to teach students, and the students' time. One possible way to educate students is during freshman orientation if the school offers it, though one issue with this is that students who transfer into the school after their freshman year will have to be educated separately. If the school does not offer freshman orientation or decides not to educate students about online interaction during that time then it is best to set aside school time to educate students, as this can be done with minimal additional costs. One possible way to do this is to have teachers cover online interaction education in a class period; another way is to set aside time for students to go to a special class or assembly that teaches them how to interact online. Regardless of how a school chooses to educate its’ students, it is imperative that students sign an acceptable use policy regarding the use of Internet resources. An acceptable use policy is not only necessary in order to be CIPA compliant, but it also gives the school written proof that students attended the online interaction class. The acceptable use policy can also be used to keep track of which students have attended the class and which still need to be educated.
We have seen that schools that wish to receive federal E-rate discounts on communications technology must be in compliance with the Children’s Internet Protection Act. This section will address what schools must do in order to be in compliance with CIPA. The priority of CIPA is to ensure that schools have proper filters on their computers to protect minors and prevent them from accessing harmful materials. Any school without a filter will be seen as being non-compliant with CIPA’s regulations and will not receive E-rate discounts. CIPA compliant web-filters—such as the one offered by the company OpenDNS.com—exist and have already been certified as filtering out harmful materials. CIPA also calls for two additional certifications for schools; they must have an Internet safety
20 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
policy that includes the monitoring (but not tracking) of online activities for minors, and they must educate minors about appropriate online activity including individual interaction and cyber bullying.
CIPA mandates that an Internet access filter is expected to block or filter websites and images that are obscene, contain child pornography, or are considered harmful to minors. The filter only applies to minors and it is a good idea for schools to have a process in place for unblocking the filter for adults, as CIPA says that the filters put on computers can be turned off for adult users for “bona fide research or other lawful purposes” (FCC 2011). This can be a somewhat vague definition, particularly “other lawful purposes”, and in reality this generally means that if an adult asks for the filter to be turned off then the filter is turned off. It must also be noted that the filters may not be turned off for minors even with parental consent; a minor may not use an unfiltered computer at school no matter what his or her parents say.
CIPA calls for a very specific Internet safety policy for Internet usage in schools, and requires that every student’s parents sign an acceptable use policy. The Internet safety policy and corresponding acceptable use policy must address the following five items:
• Access by minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet.
• The safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms, and other forms of direct electronic communications.
• Unauthorized access, including so-called "hacking," and other unlawful activities by minors online.
• Unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personal information regarding minors.
• Restricting minors' access to materials harmful to them (particularly, obscene images). (FCC 2011)
Item one mentions access to “inappropriate matter on the Internet”, but there is no set definition of what Inappropriate Matter may be. CIPA
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 21 states, “a determination regarding what matter is inappropriate for minors shall be made by the school board, local educational agency, library, or other United States authority responsible for making the determination. No agency or instrumentality of the Government may – (a) establish criteria for making such determination; (b) review agency determination made by the certifying school, school board, local educational agency, library, or other authority; or (c) consider the criteria employed by the certifying school, school board, educational agency, library, or other authority" (U.S. Code). This means that schools will be able to determine for themselves what is inappropriate in their Internet usage policy, but they must make a clear policy defining what will be considered inappropriate matter.
Once a school writes an Internet safety policy that addresses the five items specified by CIPA it must hold at least one public meeting or hearing to address the proposed policy, and adequate notice of the meeting must be given in advance. This meeting is a great place for school policy makers to learn more about public opinion on Internet safety and make changes to their school’s policy in order to make the policy work for their own, unique community. Properly addressing public concern can help avoid many issues related to online access, cyberbullying, and educators’ ability to share blocked information for their students.
Schools must provide education for their students about appropriate online activities. CIPA does not lay out a guideline for how this is to be done, it just states that, “schools’ Internet safety policies must provide for educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and response" (FCC 2011). It is up to each school to decide how to educate its’ students, but it must cover these items in order to be compliant with CIPA.
CIPA certifications must be made by the relevant school, school board, local educational agency, or other authority with responsibility for administration of the school, and is to be submitted using FCC Form 479 if the Administrative Authority is not the billed entity or FCC Form 486
22 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
if the Administrative Authority is the Billed Entity. If the Administrative Authority is the Billed Entity the form (486) is submitted to the FCC directly, and if the Administrative Authority is not the Billed Entity then the form (479) is submitted to the Billed Entity, who in turn submits the form to the FCC (Universal Service Administrative Company Any school that wishes to receive E-rate discounts must certify with CIPA every year.
Becoming compliant with the Children’s Internet Protection Act can be a challenging task for school administrators, but the money saved by receiving E-rate discounts and a the implementation of a more comprehensive Internet use policy make it well worth the effort. Schools trying to comply with CIPA must work to create a comprehensive list of what websites are to be blocked and what websites will be allowed for student use. These schools must also worry about factors like adult Internet usage, educating students about appropriate online interactions, and creating an acceptable use policy. This may seem like a lot of work, but there is no such thing as too much work when it comes to improving student safety at school.
m
Elijah Smith is a student in the Secondary Master of Arts with Certification program at the University of Michigan, and received a Bachelor of Arts in History from Oakland University in 2010. He currently resides in Ypsilanti, Michigan, and is pursuing a career as a high school history teacher.
John Spisak III is a student in the Secondary Master of Arts with Certification program at the University of Michigan. He is a professional soccer referee and holds an undergraduate degree in Finance from Eastern Michigan University. He lives in Ann Arbor, Michigan, with his wife and three children, three cats, dog, and horse.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 23 References CNN News Staff. 2012. "Egypt’s President Pardons Protesters,” CNN.com, October 9. Retrieved October 19, 2012, from http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/08/world/africa/egypt-morsy- pardons/index.html .
Federal Communications Commission (FCC). 2011. "Children's Internet Protection Act." Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://www.fcc.gov/guides/childrens-Internet-protection-act .
United States Code. n.d. "47 USC 254-Universal service.” Cornell University Law School's Legal Education Institute. Retrieved October 19, 2012, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/254#l_2
Universal Service Administrative Company. 2001. "Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) and Form 486." Retrieved October 16, 2012, from http://sl.universalservice.org/reference/cipafaq.asp.
24 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) Kathlyen Harrison and Peter Benson
What is COPPA? Lest we scare you away, let’s be clear about what COPPA is not. First, in case you have heard otherwise, it is not something that should worry you. And if all of your students are older than 12, it does not apply, so read no further.
If you are still here, and the web is one of your classroom resources, you should be familiar with how COPPA affects you as a teacher. You have likely encountered COPPA, even if you are not familiar with its details. Anytime you visit a website that mentions limitations or concerns about usage by children under 13, the site is referencing COPPA rules that apply to the site operator.
COPPA stands for the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and has been a law in the US since 2002. According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) COPPA “applies to the collection of personal information from children under 13 years of age.” Personal information is defined by having [at least] one of the following criteria aimed at children under 13: name, home address, email address, telephone number, or any other information that would allow someone to determine the identity of the child (COPPA). A common example of a site that requires the personal information of its participants is Facebook. As you may know some sites, like Facebook, do not allow children under 13 to be a part of their site, whereas other sites do allow children under 13 to be a part of their site with the stipulation that the site must abide by the COPPA guidelines. Don’t worry, you haven’t missed anything: we haven’t delved into the guidelines, yet.
The guidelines state that for-profit websites that target children (as the consumer) must post a privacy notice to parents that tells them explicitly what information will be collected, how it will be used, and who will be using it. This notice must be displayed prominently on the website and
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 25 must not contain any information that could be confusing. There is a sample privacy notice in Appendix A article 1. (COPPA).
Why Should You Care? There are many misconceptions about who must abide by the COPPA guidelines and who can be seen as violating them. The only people or organizations that can violate COPPA are those that run websites that are for-profit and target children as the consumer. All other websites and/or programs cannot violate this act. Consequently, there is no way a teacher can be found in violation of this act unless said teacher hosts a for-profit website. (Slideshare).
Typically, teachers think about COPPA when it comes to having students work on projects or work on interactive websites. There may have been cases in which you changed your plans for a lesson because you feared that you would in some way be violating this act.
You should also keep COPPA on your radar because any changes to the act could affect the licenses and subscriptions that schools have with certain companies. This can also affect the access you may have in the school to certain websites that need this personal parent and child information to be on the site. It could become more difficult to get around some of these barriers and may require or even limit the use of some educational websites. It will be important to keep up with this act as the different changes are proposed, passed, or vetoed.
Your School's Relationship with COPPA Buried deep on the FTC’s FAQ page about COPPA you can find out how this act does or does not affect your school. Here you will find that schools can, but are not forced to, “act as agents for parents in providing consent for the online collection of students’ personal information within the school context.” This means that those privacy policies can be either accepted or declined by schools and parents may not be given the chance
26 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
to have a say over a particular website being used. Now, to take care of this issue, and to ensure that parents are still informed, the schools create acceptable use policies (AUPs). AUPs are designed to inform students, parents, and guardians of their rights about websites. The AUP is a contract between the family and the school as to what is and is not appropriate when it comes to being online on school grounds. Another question that you may be thinking about is how sites like moodle, powerschool, or any other online interactive site that uses the student’s personal information. Since these types of sites hold contracts with the school “solely for the benefit of the students” the operators of these websites do not have to provide a privacy policy. (COPPA).
Sites That Gather Information on Children Under 13 Perhaps there is a site you’d like your students to use, and you know it gathers information about them. Based on your school’s AUP and your own judgment, you may wish to draft a letter to parents that details the website, the content, and why you want the students to have access to this site. In this letter you can then let parents decide if they want their children their children’s information to be stored and known by the site and its operators.
Sites that Prohibit Children Under 13 Why might a site not allow children under 13 to enter the site? It may be the site operators do not want to have to deal with writing and posting a privacy notice for parents and what this entails. Or perhaps the site is not appropriate for those under 13. As an educator, it is your job to determine the reason. We suggest you explore the site in depth. If there is nothing inappropriate about the site, then you have some options.
If students don’t need their own account, you can create one account with your information and have the students use that account for the website. In this case, there is no reason why you would need to write parents a letter.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 27 In some cases, students will need their own account to be able to save work and information on their particular project. Now a parent letter is probably appropriate. In the letter, you can ask the parents to create the account with their student. You can suggest that they use the parent’s email address, the student’s existing email address, or create a new address with a free service such as Gmail (http://gmail.google.com).
Of course, you could decide to not send a parent letter, and create these accounts in class. It is important to note that you are not violating COPPA if you choose this route. However, you may be violating the Terms of Use policy between the user and the website that all people agree to before creating accounts on that site (Moran n.d.).The only other possible “contract” that you may be side-stepping or violating is the Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) at your school. These policies can vary from school to school so we encourage that you take a look at your school’s AUP. The AUP generally applies to students and their behavior on the computers at the school. It may also address the use of school property for personal use by students and teachers.
Finally, you can advocate for changing the website. Dulcinea media founder Mark Moran (n.d.) suggests that you “write to the company that provides the Web service.” This may change the operator’s mind about their policy to allow students under the age of the 13 by creating a provision that enables them to do so only under the supervision of a teacher.
Among these suggestions there may be some that are more agreeable than others, but we leave the decision up to you as to what will be best for your students, school, and even parents.
Problems with COPPA There is plenty of debate about the validity, strength, and the effect of COPPA. One of the largest opponents of COPPA as it is currently written is the Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA). Ken Wasch, President of SIIA, wrote to the FTC to talk about the problems of
28 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
COPPA (the full letter can be viewed via the link in the References). Wasch’s key theme was that COPPA’s guidelines are too broad, and without specificity, the act would ultimately prevent innovation when it comes to online education and online resources. Although Wasch fights for the use of more specific and defined terms, he does not disagree with the intention of COPPA. But he is not alone in having issues with COPPA.
Changes to COPPA Some new changes to COPPA are being proposed which include allowing website operators to keep all personal information that is collected from children automatically instead of deleting everything, and granting website operators the ability to ask parents for a form of government ID or part of the their social security number to ensure they are the parents (Adhikari 2012). This seems to go in the opposite direction of the initial intentions of COPPA. As such there is more opposition to these proposed changes. Indeed, the ACLU and Consumer Watchdog both wrote letters to the FTC about these proposed changes in September 2012. These changes “will invade” children’s privacy instead of preventing it, which was the original intent of COPPA.
Conclusion There is quite a bit of information in the COPPA guidelines as set forth by the FTC. Do not become overwhelmed by the amount of information or the confusing language. The most important takeaway is that as an instructor using other sites for the education and benefit of the students, there is no way you can violate COPPA. There may be different ways that we each go about getting around “banned” sites, but no matter what we choose, we will not be in violation of this act. And remember that as a non-profit, your school’s sites and site subscriptions do not violate COPPA.
m
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 29 Peter Benson is married and lives in Ann Arbor, MI. He is the father of two college students and a 10 year-old force of nature. He flew jet fighters and earned a PhD in operations research from the University of Michigan in his misspent youth. He spent most of his career as a software developer and financial quant on Wall Street. Currently, he is working on his Master’s degree in Education as a Woodrow Wilson Teaching Fellow. He aims to be teaching math and physics in a high-needs high school in the fall of 2013.
Kathlyen Harrison was born and raised in Kentucky. She attended the University of Kentucky, where she received her Bachelors of Science in Mathematics. She is completing her Master’s Degree from the University of Michigan in Secondary Mathematics Education. She is also a Woodrow Wilson Teaching Fellow for the 2012-2013 year. Currently, she is working towards learning more about the Algebra Project and how it works in high need schools as well as how this can play a role in differentiating instruction. She believes that learning about these things will help her to become a better mathematics teacher in a high needs school in the Fall of 2013. She has two dogs, Tramp and Winston. Tramp is a King Charles Cavalier Spaniel and Winston is a Maltese Poodle. Her favorite book is Dante’s Inferno, and she has two nephews and two nieces.
References Adhikari, Richard. 2012. "Technology News: Privacy: FTC Wades Deeper Into Online Child Privacy Thicket." TechNewsWorld: All Tech - All The Time. Sept. 28. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://www.technewsworld.com/story/FTC-Wades-Deeper-Into-Online- Child-Privacy-Thicket-76281.html
Federal Trade Commission. 2008. COPPA. October 8. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/coppafaqs.shtm#schools .
Moran, Mark E. (n.d.). COPPA and Over 13 Age Restrictions. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://www.slideshare.net/sweetsearch/coppa-and-over-13- age-restrictions .
Wasch, Ken. 2012. "COPPA Rulemaking Goes Far Beyond Congressional Intent; Will Harm American Innovation." Software & Information Industry Association - SIIA: Software & Information Industry Association. Sept. 24. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from
30 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
http://www.siia.net/blog/index.php/2012/09/siia-says-coppa-rulemaking- goes-far-beyond-congressional-intent-will-harm-american-innovation/
Update As this book was in press, the Federal Communications Commission clarified corporations' responsibility regarding COPPA. For a summary of the updated policy, visit http://bit.ly/nytimes-coppa .
Sample Privacy Policy Business Link. (n.d.). Sample privacy policy. Business support, information and advice | Business Link. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1076142085 &r.i=1076142035&r.l1=1073861197&r.l2=1074448560&r.l3=1076141950 &r.s=m&r.t=RESOURCES&type=RESOURCES
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 31 Filtering Mikolaj Orzelski and Hussein Beydoun
The breakneck pace at which society has advanced technologically has given rise to a plethora of teaching and learning opportunities that were previously inconceivable. Social networking has connected educators, their students, and their peers like never before. The Internet has opened doors for students and teachers alike to engage in unique instructional opportunities that are engaging, informative, and fun. Essentially, today’s young learners have spent their entire lives being nurtured and raised in an environment entirely dependent on the world wide web, and it is unsurprising to see that most, if not all, schools have taken to integrating these societal realities into their sphere of influence.
Naturally, not all is quiet on the Western front of integrating technology into the classroom. Many of the web tools and sites students frequent daily - sites like Facebook, Twitter, or even iMessage on their iPhones - often act as more of a distraction in the classroom setting. Indeed, such ventures serve as yet another roadblock educators must overcome as they try to transmit learning opportunities to a student body presented with more outlets to allow their minds to wander than ever before.
To combat this, most school districts have instituted various filters and firewalls that allow them to control the content accessible within a school’s internal network. Indeed, as a definitive solution, the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) was signed into law on December 21, 2000. This decision, ultimately ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2003, required the use of filters and other measures to help protect children from harmful online content. In theory, this is a sensible solution to prevent Internet misuse in the school setting. YouTube, social networking sites, and pornographic content are typical web domains “blocked” by the data networks of most schools, in adherence with CIPA. While the blocking does seem to offer substantial
32 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
benefits for teachers trying to grasp and keep the attention of their students, these sorts of web restrictions introduce a whole new host of problems for educators to face. (Editors' note: For more on CIPA, see pages 15-24). For instance, while preventing the use of YouTube amongst students at school seems prudent, a school network filter that also prevents teachers from utilizing YouTube deprives everyone involved of the unique learning opportunities present within such mediums.
So how exactly does one strike a balance between inhibiting misuse and promoting creative outlets on the Internet? Should schools decide to be more restrictive in their filtering policies, or should there be an unrestricted transmission of information at everyone's disposal? And what role, if any, can teachers play in controlling such decisions in their classroom setting?
The argument for more restrictive filtering measures is quite convincing and the evidence that has been accrued of too lax filtering measures at schools having dire consequences on the students, the school and the community is almost enough to make the most ardent supporters of less restrictive filtering measures think twice about their stance on this issue. To begin, the argument for more restrictive filtering measures we must understand why more restrictive filtering measures are sometimes necessary in order to maintain a healthy learning environment. One example of lackadaisical filtering measures taking a toll on students, the school, and the community in general we can take a look at an incident that occurred in Pittsburgh in January of this year where a plethora of students were suspended for using programs to bypass the filter of their school’s Internet system (Schaffhauser 2012b). The article indicates that some 100 students were suspended. These students are not only faced with suspensions but also an inability to access school technology such as computers for nine weeks as well as other strict penalties for bypassing the schools Internet filter (Schaffhauser 2012b).
All of these reprimands could have been avoided if only the school’s Internet filtering system had been impermeable to workarounds and, perhaps, less restrictive of access to useful sites. Due to the incident, many
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 33 students are now unable to have the access they possibly need to excel in the classroom, a hindrance that could cost them an optimal educational future. Indeed the article (Schaffhauser 2012b) presents the case of a senior honors student who was one of those punished for bypassing the filter, who said, “I thought it was just a way to get my schoolwork done. I didn’t know the severity or the consequences of using this."
As we can see, even some of the most academically successful students can be hamstrung by such an irresponsible approach to Internet security at schools. In this student’s case, they were not even doing anything inappropriate, just searching for an avenue to complete their schoolwork, and because of ineffective filtering, students who otherwise are excellent and promising pupils now see their future educational careers put in jeopardy.
Indeed, one parent voiced their concern over this issue by saying, “Kids should not have been punished for this; they should have punished the person in charge of security; they should have been doing their job” (Schaafhauser 2012b). As we can see, even the parents of many of these students share the sentiment that the students are not at fault here. It is the school’s responsibility to maintain an effective security system around their filtering program and we can see the devastating consequences it can have on students and the community they come from when school’s fail to keep their filtering strong and secure.
It is our opinion that schools should have a more secure and restrictive filtering system so that events like these do not occur, where students’ academic futures are put in jeopardy because of the failure of the school to securely cordon their filtering system. Not only will students be prohibited from accessing sites that waste time and distract such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, etc., as well as inappropriate content, but also shameful events such as the ones above will not occur and students who are not necessarily at fault will not be punished.
Arguments have been made for the lowering of schools' Internet filters, however, and some of the information presented is quite intriguing. The main argument presented is that blocking sites like YouTube, that
34 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
sometimes have rich educational material on them, can be seriously impinging upon letting students' explorations and discovery of content (Schaffhauser 2012a).
Current and pre-service teachers, regardless of their stance on the use of technology in the classroom and the idea of filters in general, should make it a priority to familiarize themselves with their school’s Internet policy. The presence of technological liaisons is an increasingly common sight in schools, and it is important for teachers to acquaint themselves and seek their feedback on any issues related to technology use in their classroom. The vast majority of schools today, however, may still yet operate without any formal tech personnel for teachers to reach out and speak to. Luckily, professional development opportunities for teachers in the realm of appropriate Internet usage is amply available and one hopes that school administrators would encourage all educators under their employ to attend to it.
The issue of Internet filtering in the classroom setting is a fickle one, as the Pittsburgh example discussed previously provides an interesting opportunity to illustrate. On one hand, the school was well within its rights to reprimand the parties involved and showed strict adherence to their policy on appropriate Internet use. On the other, however, there is a clear disconnect between school policy and how much teachers, students, and parents understand and adhere to a set of rules that they clearly are not very well versed in. It would seem prudent going forward for administrators to make sure that all parties affected by such policies be better rehearsed in filtering policies and procedures. A seemingly rudimentary measure, sure, but it is imperative to establish concise awareness in order to avoid messy repeats of the Pittsburgh controversy.
If the main goal is to promote a richer, more expansive learning experience, than the ultimate solution would be to have teachers more involved in the filtering process. Currently, they often act as bystanders within a system they do not quite seem to know where to turn to when things go wrong - or, worse yet, when they want to share a multimedia learning experience with their students and are prevented from doing so
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 35 by the school’s Internet filter. Empowering teachers with unfettered access to websites they deem beneficial, or at least giving them an outlet to petition for the use of a website and receiving a prompt response, would seem to be a prudent solution to the issue of filtering in the school setting. As the Pittsburgh example demonstrated, students tend to utilize creative ways to bypass restrictions and filters placed in front of them. Teachers should be able to utilize creative ways to maximize their students’ learning opportunities as well.
m
Hussein Beydoun and Mikolaj Orzelski are graduate students at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor.
References Schaffhauser, Dian. 2012a. “It’s Time to Trust Teachers with the Internet: A Conversation with Meg Ormiston,” T.H.E. Journal, 1 Dec. Retrieved October 15, 2012, from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2010/12/01/Its- Time-To-Trust-Teachers-with-the-Internet-A-Conversation-with-Meg- Ormiston.aspx?Page=1 .
Schaffhauser, Dian. 2012b. "Mass Suspension at Pittsburgh School for Bypassing Filter." T.H.E. Journal, 18 Jan. Retrieved October 12, 2012, from http://thejournal.com/articles/2012/01/18/mass-suspension-at-pittsburgh- school-for-bypassing-filter.aspx.
36 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) Musetta Reed and Preston Woodward
What is FERPA? The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (also known as the Buckley Amendment after one of its principal proponents, Senator James L. Buckley of New York) was passed into law in August, 1974. This Federal law delineates the privacy rights of parents and students respecting student records. That is, FERPA establishes the rights and limits of parents and students pertaining to student records, while specifying the rights and limits of schools and third parties with respect to the disclosure of these records as long as the school in question receives funding under any program administered by the Department of Education itself.
These limited rights reside with a student’s parents until transference of the rights to the student upon his or her eighteenth birthday (or earlier, should the student attend a school beyond the high school level, at which point the student is termed “eligible” to obtain records from the school). Under the law, parents or eligible students have the right to access all records kept by the school regarding the student, either by on-site inspection or—if there are inhibitors to on-site viewing such as living at great distance from the school—via a photocopy provided by the school, for which the school can charge a fee.
The parent or eligible student, in cases where records are understood as inaccurate or misleading, has the right under FERPA to request that the record be amended. If the school does comply with this request, then the parent or student has the right to appeal to the school’s formal hearing panel. If this appeal is denied, then the parent or student has the right to have placed with the record a statement expressing his or her views about the information in question. Broadly, the school must have written permission from the parent or eligible student in order to release records to third parties, with notable exceptions.
These exceptions include schools to which the student is transferring; officials specifically listed in the law for purposes of audit or evaluation;
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 37 parties involved in the student’s financial aid; organizations conducting studies for, or on behalf of, educational agencies or institutions; and accrediting organizations. The provider or creator of a record such as a transcript or a letter of recommendation is entitled to access the records in order to determine their authenticity. The following government agencies are authorized to access the records: the Comptroller General of the United States; the Attorney General of the United States; the Secretary of the Department of Education; the Veterans Administration; and state and local educational authorities.
Law enforcement may access the records under the provisos of the Patriot Act, and courts have access by subpoena. The Campus Security Act of 1990 permits higher education institutions to disclose to alleged victims of any crime of violence (murder, robbery, aggravated assault, rape, burglary, motor theft, etc.) the results of the institution’s conduct proceedings against the alleged student perpetrator with respect to the crime. Records may be accessed by parents of a student under 21 years of age who is found in violation of drug or alcohol law or school policy. Additionally, FERPA does not control law enforcement unit records and security videos. This means, investigative reports and videos of students done by a school’s specified law enforcement unit are not considered educational records. Therefore, any information in these records can be released as law enforcement units see fit.
Without the consent of the parent or eligible student, schools are permitted to disclose directory information such as a student's name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. The disclosure, however, must be communicated to the parents or students with ample time for them to request that the disclosure not occur. Annually, schools must notify parents and students about their rights under FERPA, though the form of this notification is left to the school’s discretion.
FERPA emerged historically from a context of public concern around privacy issues. In response to the Cold War and to the civil rights and anti-war protest movements of the 1960s, the government collected
38 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
information and stored records on individuals and groups perceived as acting contrary to national interest. Computerization of these records exacerbated concern. An investigation by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare of 1973 found a facilitation of access of such records between organizations. The committee established a set of principles, called the Code of Fair Information Practice, that presages many tenets of FERPA, including that the very existence of records not be kept secret, that individuals be able to find out what records exist and how they are used, that this use be subject to the person’s consent, and that the person be able to correct or amend the record. Amid rising concern about computerization of records and intrusion on privacy by FBI, IRS, the Army, and others, the Federal Privacy Act of 1974 came into being and laid the way for FERPA, as the school-specific component of this broader legislation designed to protect privacy, while simultaneously preserving the government’s right to obtain, keep, and control information on citizens (Shiley 2012).
FERPA’s Health and Safety Exceptions The 2007 Virginia Tech shooting changed the way FERPA was interpreted in universities. The Department of Education, as a result of these shootings, published new regulations that would define more specifically when schools were able to release student information based on health and safety emergencies. This tragic event demonstrated the ambiguity within the law pertaining to what constitutes a health and safety concern regarding students. Schools are legally permitted to release student records that show the student having health issues, or that indicate said student is a danger to himself or to others. However, the requirements for labeling information as being indicative of a health and safety issue were very rigid. Therefore, to avoid breaking the laws under FERPA, Virginia Tech administrators did not share details about Mr. Cho's prior behavior with authorities or his parents.
The new regulations that were put into effect in 2009 broadened the definition of a health and safety emergency. The department created
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 39 health and safety exceptions that allowed school administrators to release information about a student with respect to health and safety emergencies that would impact the student and their fellow students. Therefore, “under the new regulations... an articulated threat by a student against himself or others is covered by the health-or-safety emergency exception” (Bernstein 2008).
What does this mean for teachers and administrators? These new regulations give teachers and administrators more room to evaluate which aspects of student records hint at potentially harmful behaviors, and allows them to act in accordance. School staff and administrators want to protect the rights of students and they want students to know that their personal information will not be shown to anyone and everyone; however, these same individuals do not want to risk student safety for fear of unwittingly breaking the laws put in place to protect the privacy of students.
Although this is specific to an eligible student, these new exceptions also apply to students under the age of eighteen. If a situation in a public K- 12 school is severe enough and meets the requirements of a health-or- safety exception, then the school can release pertinent information without consent from the student’s parents. As an educator, it is important that all incidents that threaten student safety and health be reported. In many cases, secondary educators may observe or know of behavior that is dangerous, and may wish to disclose this information to an official; this is not prohibited by FERPA. FERPA does not apply to information acquired through observation or personal knowledge (U.S. Department of Education 2007).
What if an educator is not aware of specific information that pertains to their students? If the educator has a “legitimate educational interest”, then administrators are able to release corresponding information about a student without consent from the parents (U.S. Government Printing Office 2013).
40 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
FERPA and the K-12 System Unlike the situation above, the majority of the students in the K-12 system are not eligible students, and therefore their parents are afforded the rights granted by FERPA. Many K-12 schools are using dot.com and dot.edu businesses to give students access to technology. They are typically websites that provide a specific service and require a participant to give personal identifiable information. The services received by the schools are free but they do require the school to agree to share “market- related personal information from students” to aid them in their marketing (Willard 2000). As stated above, to make sure the school complies with the guidelines, the specific information that will be released to these businesses and organizations needs to be approved by parents, who also need to know what this information will be used for. With this in mind, as a K-12 educator you need to be aware of the students who do not have parental consent to share their personally identifiable information before you have students use sites that require such disclosures.
Often schools do not have agreements with dot.com businesses, but teachers come across sites that they feel would be great to use in their classroom. Some of these sites require students to fill out personal information (name, birthday, email, etc.) before they are able to access the site. If this is the case, make sure parents are informed of the specific site, and that they know what information is requested, and have access to the site’s specific privacy policies. If parents do not consent to the release of their student’s information, then the student cannot use the site in question. Although FERPA does not say this explicitly, it is important to realize that these students are not eligible students and do not have control over what is in and what happens to their educational records and personal identifiable information. Being aware of this ensures that you are acting “in accord with the spirit [of FERPA]” (Willard 2000).
We conclude that the trajectory of FERPA, from its origins in the context of public concern about governmental intrusion and control, to the present-day blurring of lines between private and publicly accessible digital information, is one of diminishing control by the student of his or
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 41 her school record. Student appeals to correct their record is an in-house matter; prospective recommenders and alleged victims of student crime have access to the complete record; and web-based artifacts subsist in a gray area that leave student, teacher, and school vulnerable to the breach of broader privacy rights and its consequences. The crucial message for educators, therefore, is not to take for granted the protections that FERPA was designed to put in place, but only unevenly delivers. Teachers should be highly attuned to student privacy concerns and know pertinent law, like FERPA, for everyone’s protection.
m
Musetta Reed grew up in Ann Arbor and attendedthe University of Michigan for her undergraduate studies, where she double-majored in Spanish and English. As a Secondary MAC student, she is studying to be a Spanish teacher and will receive certification in both Spanish and English. Her study abroad program took her to Peru, where she was able to explore and pay homage to the weaving community that is losing popularity with the younger generations. This trip sparked her love of international travel, and she cannot wait to travel to Spain and Puerto Rico. She is excited to have her own classroom and share her love of language with her students. She loves spending time with her friends and family, whether it is over dinner or out to see a movie.
Preston Woodward is an Adjunct Lecturer in German at Eastern Michigan University and Master's Student of Education at the University of Michigan. Schooled in Ann Arbor, he holds a Bachelors and a Master's degree, both in German, and both from the University of Michigan. He has also attended Middlebury College, the University of Paris, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His teaching majors are Latin and German, with a minor in French. He is a devoted husband and father of five school-aged children.
References Bernstein, Elizabeth. 2008. “Education Department Reworks Privacy Regulations.” The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 9. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122878222728889843.html
U.S. Government Printing Office. 2013. "Title 34: Education, Part 99 - Family Educational Rights and Privacy." Electronic Code of Federal Regulations.
42 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Retrieved March 5, 2013, from http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- idx?c=ecfr&rgn=div5&view=text&node=34:1.1.1.1.33&idno=34 .
Shiley, Courtney S. 2003. “Putting the Rights into the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act: Enforcement and the Private Right of Action.” Bachelor's Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Retrieved October 18, 2012, from http://stuff.mit.edu/people/cshiley/Thesis/DANCE-DANCE- FERPA.pdf .
U.S. Department of Education. 2007. “Balancing Student Privacy and School Safety: A Guide to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act for Elementary and Secondary Schools.” October. Retrieved October 16, 2012, from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/brochures/elsec.html .
Willard, Nancy. “Capturing the ‘Eyeballs’ and ‘E-wallets’ of Captive Kids in School: Dot.com Invades Dot.edu.” Updating School Board Policies 31(4), Sept.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 43
Intellectual Property
Copyright John Brady and Erin Christine
The issue of copyright in the classroom is so confusing (Harvard University Office of General Counsel 2012) that, if a teacher truly wanted to stay on the right side of the law, he or she might resort to using only content and materials created before 1923 — the year that safely ensures that items are in the “public domain” (Cornell University 2012).
As citizens and consumers, we all have a general concept of copyright. We share a common, if perhaps incorrect or incomplete understanding, that the law provides an author — or in today’s world, any creator of “content” — with protection from others profiting from his or her work. That may be the spirit of the law, but it’s not the final word.
How Do We Read This? If one takes literally the varying copyright statements found on materials, it might seem as though no classroom use is ever acceptable without explicit permission from the author or publisher.
For example, the copyright on one nonfiction, printed text reads: “No part of this book shall be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission." Another reads: “No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission.” These statements raise many questions:
• Does this mean that if a teacher wants to read aloud a selection or an entire work, permission must be obtained in writing? Is reading aloud a “performance”?
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 47 • Does it make a difference if the purchase of a text or other content was intended for either the teacher’s personal library or the classroom?
• What if the school library owns a single copy of the resource, but a teacher wants to use the work with 150 students?
As we consider these questions, let’s turn our attention to a machine found in every school…the photocopier.
Is The School Photocopier An Accomplice? The area where teachers may be in most danger of violating copyright is in reproduction of materials ("Reproduction of Copyrighted Materials" 2012). Sure, it’s best for students to have that passage of text in front of them as the class reads together. Of course, students sometimes benefit from worksheets, but is making copies for your students breaking the law?
In one text we examined, lessons written for teachers are followed by worksheets, which expressly say at the bottom: “May be photocopied for classroom use.”
Unfortunately, it’s not always this clear.
How Does Copyright Work In The 21st Century? Copyright concerns for teachers become even more complicated with the infusion of digital media in education (Star 2010). Teachers of today are able to utilize technology and resources that were only dreamed of ten years ago. They can connect to a nearly endless supply of instructional text, video and audio in a matter of minutes. However, many of these works are copyrighted, which can lead to legal problems if the matter is not handled correctly.
48 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
In 2002, Congress recognized the need to amend copyright law to address the new reality of computers in the classroom and passed the Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act in order to make legal for teachers the instructional use of many more materials (Copyright Clearance Center 2005).
The TEACH Act lifted many copyright limitations from the “distance learning environment,” which is a lesson taught over the Internet to a student who may not be able to attend physical classes, but the act also extends existing copyright laws to apply to situations when teachers and students are using technology — which, more and more frequently, is a component of everyday lessons. Everything mentioned in this law is also applicable to the physical classroom.
The Value Of The TEACH Act The TEACH Act affords protections to educators in two important ways. First, according the Copyright Clearance Center, educators are allowed to use copyrighted materials when teaching over the Internet. This could include instruction through live video chats, e-mail, and home instruction, as long as the copyrighted material is only available for a limited amount of time appropriate for educational use (Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act 2001). While the sharing of copyrighted materials over the Internet, even in a closed forum, is usually restricted, the TEACH Act allows for the password-protected distribution of materials necessary for instruction, such as a text that a lesson plan is based on. The regulations on what constitutes a distance- learning environment were also relaxed. This new provision helps to minimize the risk of copyright violations for teachers because students can now participate in online learning from nearly anywhere (ibid).
Second, the act allows educators more freedoms concerning the works they are allowed to digitize, store and copy. The limitations that remain focus on books, videos and audio recordings that are sold specifically for the education market, because unauthorized distribution of these materials would directly affect the abilities of the companies producing them to
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 49 make a profit. Other than these restrictions, most works will not prove to be problematic to use in the classroom, as long as there is limited access. This means the copyrighted materials cannot be accessed by others who are not students (Copyright Clearance Center 2005).
What’s The Fine Print? While the TEACH Act does provide additional protections for the 21st- century teacher, there are some details educators should be aware of. These mainly concern audience, amount, alteration, accreditation, and aim.
In terms of audience, the use of copyrighted materials must be limited to the students enrolled in a specific classroom. Teachers cannot distribute the materials to any students who are not enrolled in their classes and cannot make a number of copies that exceed the number of students in their classroom. The TEACH Act also requires the materials to be used in either live or asynchronous class sessions. Therefore, teachers cannot simply post things online for students to utilize at their leisure (Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act 2001).
As to the amount, or the extent to which educators are allowed to use, and especially duplicate, copyrighted material, the law restricts educators from using entire works, but allows them to use portions of protected materials that pertain to a lesson ("Teach Act Frequently Asked Questions" 2003).
Additionally, when it comes to making alterations to copyrighted material, it is important for teachers to note that while they may use portions of copyrighted works, they are not allowed to edit them into one work without the expressed permission of the owners. For example, movies cannot have several scenes edited into a single montage, excerpts of texts cannot be made into a course pack, and songs may not be edited. As always, though, there is an exception: copyrighted material can be altered to make an original creation, such as a parody (TEACH Act 2001).
50 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
In terms of accreditation, teachers must work at an accredited, non-profit educational institution. Educators employed by private schools that profit from tuition are not protected under the TEACH Act.
Of course, all of this applies to use for educational purposes. Teachers cannot use copyrighted materials for entertainment-oriented purposes in the classroom. The copyrighted material in question must be used as part of the lesson plan that aims to reach educational ends (Pennsylvania State University 2003).
What’s Really At Stake? While the likelihood of getting charged with copyright violation remains relatively rare for most educators, responsible ones should be familiar with the potential penalties. According to the statute:
Federal law provides that in a civil suit the copyright holder is entitled to recover actual damages and any profits made by the copyright infringer, or can elect to receive statutory damages from $750 to $30,000 for each infringement. In the court's discretion and if intent is proved, the upper limit can move to $150,000. If the court determines that the infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that the acts constituted an infringement, statutory damages of not less than $200 per infringement will be assessed. The court may also award costs and attorney's fees to the prevailing party. Criminal prosecutions of willful copyright violations can result in penalties ranging from one to ten years imprisonment as well as fines. (17 U.S.C. §§ 504, 505, and 506; 18 U.S.C. § 2319) (Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code: Circular 92 2012).
As the old saying goes, forewarned is forearmed.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 51 Who’s To Say? In the end, it may be safest to follow the dictum “when in doubt, get permission,” but even that may not be so simple.
One of us wanted to use (modified) exercises from a college textbook in a secondary school setting — and happened to know the author of the text personally. A firm believer in academic fair use, the author gladly gave written permission. Still, the copyright information in the book itself says no part may be used (we’re paraphrasing) without “written permission of the publisher” (emphasis ours).
What’s more, understanding the length of a copyright is very confusing. If a work is created and the author/creator is known, the copyright lasts from the document’s creation until 70 years after the author’s death. According to the U.S. Copyright office,
For works made for hire and anonymous and pseudonymous works, the duration of copyright is 95 years from first publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter (unless the author’s identity is later revealed in Copyright Office records, in which case the term becomes the author’s life plus 70 years)” (U.S. Copyright Office, "Duration of Copyright," 2011).
And, while works over 95 years old no longer hold copyrights, performances of those works can. This means that even though Shakespeare’s work may be considered public domain, a theater troupe’s videorecorded performance of Hamlet would still be copyrighted.
The best course of action is to get approval to use a work or to check with your administration concerning whether using a document is appropriate.
So What do Teachers Need to Know about Copyright? -Copyright is something you should be thinking about (Star 2008).
A good place to start is to determine what licenses your school or district has in place. For-fee services (such as the Copyright Clearance Center: http://www.copyright.com/) provide databases of material covered by
52 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
usage licenses (Copyright Clearance Center 2005). Copyright is also something you should be talking about with students when they are making multimedia projects (Global Grid for Learning 2012). Many free resources exist online that provide searchable material for which permission has already been granted through Creative Commons licensing. When in doubt, get permission!
m
Erin Christine is thrilled at the prospect of teaching grammar to adolescents. Compared to the demands of a one-year Master’s program in Education at the University of Michigan, nouns and verbs and teens (oh my!) have got to be easier, right?! In addition to geeking out on language, Ms. Christine enjoys sailing on Lake Erie and reading aloud with the four children she’s been blessed to have in her life.
John Brady is a candidate for a Masters Degree in Education at the University of Michigan. He has Undergraduate Degrees in Political Science and English from the University of Michigan. He hopes to obtain a Master’s Degree in Special Education next year, with a focus on children with Emotional Impairments. John would like to teach English and American Government after graduation. He studies politics and finds the American political system fascinating. When not in classes, he enjoys playing piano, recording and mixing music, and painting.
References Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. 2005. "The TEACH Act: New Roles, Rules and Responsibilities for Academic Institutions." Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://www.copyright.com/media/pdfs/CR-Teach-Act.pdf.
Cornell University, "Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States, 1 January 2012." Last modified 2012. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm.
Georgia Tech: Office of Information Technology, "Reproduction of Copyrighted Materials." Last modified 2012. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://www.oit.gatech.edu/reproduction-copyright-materials-fair-use.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 53 Global Grid for Learning, "What is GGFL?: Overview." Last modified 2012. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from: http://www.globalgridforlearning.com/what-is-ggfl/overview.
Office of General Counsel, Harvard University, "Copyright and Fair Use." Last modified 2012. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://www.ogc.harvard.edu/copyright_docs/copyright_and_fair_use.php.
Star, Lawrence. Edutopia, "Teachers Should Know Copyright from Wrong." Last modified 2008. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://www.edutopia.org/copyright
Starr, Linda. Education World, "District Liability and Teaching Responsibility: Part 5 of a Series on Copyright and Fair Use." Last modified 2010. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr280e.shtml
Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act 2001, S.487.RH, 107 Congress, 1st sess., Congressional Record 107-687 (September 25, 2002) S. 487.
The Pennsylvania State University, Teaching and Learning with Technology, "Teach Act Frequently Asked Questions." Last modified 2003. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://tlt.its.psu.edu/dmd/teachact/teachactFAQ.
United States Copyright Office, "Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code: Circular 92." Last modified 2012. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html
United States Copyright Office, "Duration of Copyright." Last modified 2011. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf.
54 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Fair Use Rachel Miller and Tasha Rios
Navigating copyright rules and regulations can be a major headache, but by educating yourself, you can model best practice for your students (and fellow teachers). Copyright laws do not only affect major companies that are trying to protect their multi-million dollar investment; ordinary people like teachers and students are also affected. Teachers often feel they have the right to provide their students with any and all useful information they can get their hands on. However, merely being a teacher does not give you permission to distribute copyrighted materials. Copyright law gives that privilege to the copyright holder -- the person who created the work. Copyright is established at the moment of creation and does not require a copyright notice to be attached.
What's a teacher to do to behave legally and ethically while providing maximum information access to students? Luckily, copyright law does provide guidance in terms of what materials can be used without permission. This guidance is known as Fair Use. When asking yourself if it's OK to duplicate others' materials or use other people's multimedia elements in presentations, the four factors of Fair Use come into play. If your actions were ever challenged by the copyright holder, these four elements would be weighed in court:
1. The purpose and character of your use;
2. The nature of the copyrighted work
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used
4. The effect of the use on the potential market (Stanford University Libraries 2012)
Let's look at each in turn.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 55 Purpose and Character of the Use Purpose and character of the use is the first consideration determining fair use. It asks, "Why are you using copyrighted material? For what purpose?" People are allowed to use quotations and pieces of a text for commentary and criticism purposes. This is, historically, what allows students and scholars to quote others' work in their papers and presentations.
Parody is another purpose that qualifies under the "purpose and character" criteria. This is what permits television shows like The Daily Show to use network news clips. It is important to make sure students understand what parody is, how to use it, and when it is acceptable to use it. Parody and commentary/criticism are considered transformative use and are thus considered fair use under copyright guidelines.
A third section under the category of purpose and character of use is whether the material is spontaneous or planned. For teachers, and others, this subject is less concrete. For example, a teacher might be videotaping a lesson they plan to share in an online documentary. During the lesson, their cell phone accidentally goes off and plays a copyrighted bit of music. Is this OK? According to copyright law, the use of the ringtone is fair use. In this type of scenario, the debate over fair use can be complicated. While the teacher did not plan for his or her phone to go off, they did plan to post the video online. Some may say the ring tone was not spontaneous: it should have been taken out. Though the teacher is not likely to face any consequences, a record executive may stumble across the video and decide the teacher was profiting from the use of the ringtone! If this were to happen then the record executive may ask for $10,000, a fairly small amount compared to other recent cases, even a few seconds of copyrighted material. This may seem absurd, but there are numerous cases that have set a precedent for what seems to be incidental use but is not (Ramsey 2005; Center for the Study of the Public Domain 2006).
56 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Nature of the Copyrighted Work The second factor to consider is the nature of the work being used. If a teacher is using published work and work that is factual, nonfiction, or pieces of news, this would tilt the case more toward a fair use exemption. This information is released to the world, so the author is aware that a large number of people will be seeing the work and cannot expect much privacy. Unpublished work and pieces of creative work are usually not considered available for fair use. In these cases, creators did not release their work into the public for widespread consumption. Unpublished work is of a personal nature and the potential market is undetermined, therefore it is more difficult to prove fair use.
Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used Many fair use cases are determined by the amount of material taken from a copyrighted work. Teachers strive to keep content relevant for students, which often means looking to popular media and culture for inspiration. Teachers must be careful how much content is taken from any given source. For example, it is more fair to an author to copy a portion of a short story than it is to copy the entire thing. If a teacher were to copy entire works for his or her classroom, he or she must generally have permission to do so.
There are exceptions to this general rule. Parodies may use a substantial amount of material in order to be understood as a parody. Imagine trying to parody a character from a movie and not being able to say his or her catchphrase. Another circumstance in which using something in its entirety is allowed is when it is considered “time-shifting.” This which means if some television show or movie is playing for free on TV, it would be acceptable to record it and play it at another time. The idea is that one is simply shifting the time the work was played, not changing the content.
Sometimes fair use is determined by whether or not something is incidental, meaning it is so short it is not considered important. Again this is subjective. What seems incidental to one person, might not seem so to a judge (or TV executive, record executive, etc). The best course of
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 57 action when creating audio or visual material for a classroom is to blur out any recognizable copyrighted material and bleep out or silence any copyrighted songs. Also remember that for something to be incidental, it shouldn’t be central to the meaning or purpose of the copyrighted work.
On the other end of the quantity spectrum is a term called “de minimis,” which means that the amount taken is not enough to warrant a fair use trial. This has been used to deflect a fair use trial concerning photographs briefly seen in a movie. Since there was no mention of the photos and they were barely recognizable, there did not have to be a trial to decide fair use (Stanford University Libraries 2012). In the classroom, this term would be used to justify quotes on a classroom wall.
Sometimes it doesn’t matter if the portion taken is just a few words. If the portion taken is considered “the heart” of a text or piece, then that is not fair use. It would not be fair use to copy or display the most important part of a copyrighted work, even if it is small. This determination, like many aspects of fair use deliberations, is highly subjective. “The heart” of a work may not be easily determined, but good advice would be to come up with a checklist of determining factors before proceeding with any copyrighted materials. This dilemma might be hard to avoid in the classroom because the “heart” of a work is often what a teacher wants to show his or her students.
Effect of the Use on the Potential Market The last factor used to determine if it is fair to use copyrighted material is the potential impact on the marketplace. Part of what copyright does is help creators earn a living from their creative output. If your duplication or sharing would reduce their income, the law may not be on your side. something is fair use or not is its effect on the current or future market of the original. Of course, it is not fair use to copy even a portion of something and then sell it for profit. Let's extend that idea, though: is it fair to post a Sherman Alexie story online for free? You aren't profiting ... but Alexie may not be, either.
Going back to the book example, if a teacher copies an entire book, or even a portion of the chapters, and then gives each copy to his or her
58 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
students, then that is not fair use because the book would otherwise have to be purchased (thus contributing to the current market). Often the lessons or materials purchased for our classroom will tell you if they can be reproduced or not. If you have class workbooks or other "consumable" materials purchased from a publisher, they are very likely not duplicable, as the work was designed to be used just once per student.
Sharing materials is good in principle, but it shouldn’t infringe on the copyrights of someone else. There are a few cases not covered by this consideration. If a teacher creates a parody that ultimately takes the place of an original work, one might think he or she is infringing on the market. In this case, he or she is exempt from the market rule because his or her work is a parody.
Misconceptions After outlining the four factors used to determine fair use, it is important to clear up any misconceptions. Although disclaimers seem to be an easy way to avoid copyright issues, disclaimers do not deter a judge from using the four factors listed above to decide fair use. Disclaimers may demonstrate that a teacher is not intending to be malicious or careless, but in the end this defense might not stand up in court.
Another common misconception is that if a work does not have any copyright signals or symbols denoting its owner, then one is free to use it as one sees fit. This is not the case. All works in fixed format are copyrighted automatically from the moment of creation, regardless of the presence of a copyright symbol of statement. The burden of fair use is not on the creator, but the person using the copyrighted material.
Finally, giving credit to the author does not mean there are no consequences. Again, it may show the judge there was an effort not to plagiarize or be careless, but that is not the criteria for fair use. Giving the author/artist credit does not authorize use of their work.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 59 Conclusion Fair is not all frustrating rules. There are many resources online that can help teachers find great content that is completely legal to use, share, put in multimedia presentations, copy, and promote in classrooms. One option is public domain content. Any work created before 1923, or created by the U.S. government, is automatically in the public domain. Public domain means that the copyright has expired and the "ownership" of the work now belongs to the world's citizens. Online repositories can help you find public domain images, texts, and video. Consider these:
• Project Gutenberg (http://gutenberg.org) for public domain texts
• The American Memory Project of the Library of Congress (http://memory.loc.gov) for public domain texts, maps, photographs, images, audio recordings, and video recordings
• The National Archives (http://archives.gov) for public domain content similar to that of the Library of Congress
Another low-stress gateway to high-quality, varied content is to search for materials that have been licensed under a Creative Commons license. The Creative Commons (CC) organization (http://creativecommons.org) recognizes that many people want their work to be reused, shared, and redistributed and offers creators six different CC licenses that they can apply to their work. If your students find and use photos, video, audio, text, or other projects that have been pre-identified as having a Creative Commons license, then they don't have to worry about getting the creator's permission or running through the Fair Use principles, because the creator has already green-lighted reuse under the conditions s/he specifies.
While people can make their Creative Commons work available anywhere, the search feature of Creative Commons (http://search.creativecommons.org) is a quick starting point. Sites like Scribd.com and Flickr.com also have Creative Commons search options, as does Google Advanced Search. Just check that the type of CC license
60 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
chosen fits your needs, as some licenses do not allow commercial reuse or the creation of derivative works.
You can also do your own search online for materials. Consider keywords such as “open source,” “public domain,” and “copyright free.” Good luck navigating the fair use waters!
m
Rachel Miller is a graduate student at the University of Michigan working toward a master’s degree and secondary teaching certificate in English Language Arts and History. Rachel grew up in Beverly Hills, Michigan. Her favorite teaching quote is, “Education is not the filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire” by William Butler Yeats.
Tasha Rios is a graduate student at the University of Michigan pursuing a master’s degree and a secondary teaching certificate in English Language Arts. Tasha was born and raised in Lansing, Michigan. She believes in education and intends to “make a difference.”
References 107th Congress. 2001. "Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization Act of 2001." Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107s487es/pdf/BILLS-107s487es.pdf.
Center for the Study of the Public Domain. 2006. Bound by Law? Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/comics/.
Library of Congress. n.d. “Copyright and Primary Sources.” Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://www.loc.gov/teachers/usingprimarysources/copyright.html.
Milligan, Stuart. 1988. What Does Copyright Have to Do With My Teaching Activities? What is Fair Use? What is an Anthology? Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://search.proquest.com/docview/62959995?accountid=14667.
PBS Teachers. n.d. “Copyright & Fair Use.” Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://www.pbs.org/teachers/copyright/.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 61 Ramsey, Nancy. 2005. “The Hidden Cost of Documentaries.” New York Times, October 16. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/16/movies/16rams.html.
Stanford University Library. 2012. “Copyright & Fair Use.” Retrieved October 3, 2012 from: http://fairuse.stanford.edu.
Electronic Frontier Foundation. n.d. “Overview.” Teaching Copyright Web Site. Retrieved October 8, 2012 from http://www.teachingcopyright.org/curriculum/hs.
U.S. Copyright Office. The Library of Congress. 101 Independence Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20559-6000 Retrieved October 3, 2012 from:http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ21.pdf.
62 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Social Media and Communication
Chatspeak Kaitlin Johnson and Stephen Hart
“Beth Ann!”
“W u?”
“Your cell phone bill is what’s up. All this texting!”
“Omg. Inbd.”
“It is a big deal. Who are you texting fifty times a day?”
“Idk, my bff, Jill?”
“Tell your bff, Jill, that I’m taking away your phone.”
“Tisnf!”
“Me paying this bill – that’s what’s snf!”
Remember this Cingular commercial? It first aired on national television in 2007. At the time, this commercial was lauded by many for making fun of what seemed to be a popular trend among teens who, as the market for cell phones grew, began instant messaging less and texting more. As the commercial shows, texting was quickly becoming the norm; as was the lingo associated with chat rooms and instant messaging conversations. The outrageous fifty texts per day sent by Beth Ann was quickly outshone by the median of sixty messages sent and received per day by teenagers age 12-17, 75 percent of whom text, in 2011 (Lenhart 2012). Teenagers ages 14-17 alone went from a median of 60 to a median of 100 text messages per day in just two years. With this proliferation of text messages came the rampant spread of chat room lingo in the daily lives of teenagers everywhere. In less than a decade, chat rooms, texting, and, most importantly, chatspeak had become worldwide phenomena. While teenagers welcomed this new and seemingly easy language, parents and teachers alike began to wonder about the effects this “lingo” had on their
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 65 child or student’s ability to read, write, and spell. As David Crystal of The Guardian asked, “Has there ever been a linguistic phenomenon that has aroused such curiosity, suspicion, fear, confusion, antagonism, fascination, excitement and enthusiasm all at once as texting (Crystal 2008)?" As this new, abbreviated form of English emerged, heated debate arose surrounding whether or not it was an acceptable usage of the English language, or if it instead undermined it and threatened child literacy.
Many people believe chatspeak is the harbinger of death for the English language. John Humphrys of the U.K.’s Daily Mail wrote in 2007 that texters, the “SMS (Short Message Service) vandals,” are “doing to our language what Genghis Khan did to his neighbors eight hundred years ago” (Humphrys 2007). While this statement may seem a little outrageous, Humphrys’ sentiments have been echoed by many. As far back as 2002, critics of chatspeak hailed it as “penmanship for illiterates” (Guardian 2008). When asked in 2007, “Is chatspeak destroying English?” Linda Howard replied, “Yes… whatever we engage in for a long period of time will most likely become commonplace” (Howard & Monfils 2007). Proper writing skills, she argued, were important as students went on to college and were required to communicate and engage with others on a deeper level through writing. Chatspeak, Howard says, has no place in professional settings where language must be clear and concise. If teenagers spend too much time writing in this shorthanded English, they may soon find it too difficult to code-switch (the idea that a person is able to recognize when, where, and in what settings it is appropriate to use vernacular or other languages).
Alternatively, many people feel that the infiltration of chatspeak is being blown far out of proportion. David Crystal argues that despite the trillion texts that are sent and received on a daily basis worldwide, this is still just a small ripple in all communication when considering the “multi-trillion instances of standard orthography in everyday life” (Crystal 2008). Furthermore, many advocates say that just because someone uses chatspeak regularly does not mean they do not recognize the situations in which it is appropriate to use it. When answering the same question posed to Linda Howard, Greg Monfils responded, “the kids know the
66 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
difference…. Indeed, I’d go so far as to say that their command of chatspeak is directly proportional to their awareness that the fashion of chatspeak subverts traditional rules of written English” (Howard & Monfils 2007). Could teenagers actually understand more about English by using chatspeak regularly? If so, how do we incorporate this into their educational experiences?
While it is clear that chatspeak is used widely in many forms of communication, such as text messaging and instant messaging, it seems important to consider the powerful notion that chatspeak is a language— one for which young people are the gatekeepers. Kristen Hawley Turner describes these young people as “fluent in the language that rules computers, videogames, and the Internet” (Turner 2009). On one level, it seems that young people are using a basic survival skill—adaptation—in order to participate in an online world that consumes so many facets of American life. Yet, on another, young people are actually using a language to communicate in meaningful ways. And, when we consider the language itself, it is nothing if not impressive. Some shifts in the chatspeak language “may prove more meaningful” because young people who use chatspeak “revert to a phonetic language [and] spell words the way they sound” (Paul 2012). While some may attribute this to laziness on behalf of the student, or perhaps a shocking lack of spelling skills, these shifts could actually be revolutionary. According to Paul, “we might have fewer cases of dyslexia and illiteracy” and “students could spend their time thinking about the meanings of words” rather than laboring over their spelling (Paul 2012). By using chatspeak as a tool for scaffolding learning, it is possible that students may worry less about mechanical spelling errors and may focus more on concepts such as syntax and semantics. And, as educators, isn’t this deep, more meaningful learning what we are after? It is, of course, necessary for students to learn grammar and spelling, as chatspeak can by no means replace Standard English in the classroom, but shouldn’t we allow students the freedom to explore language in ways that are meaningful to them? Again, the answer may be complicated but it can certainly be argued that there is merit in allowing students to have and use their own language and voice in the classroom—whether or not it is grammatically correct.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 67 Moreover, if chatspeak is seen as a means of self expression, it follows that it is important to note that students using it may be able to express themselves in profound ways, ways they may not achieve using Standard English. Consider student writing in the classroom and the argument that chatspeak can enhance its authenticity. For example, allowing chatspeak in student assignments could be especially helpful in a rough draft of a writing assignment, a brainstorming activity, or an in-class response (Turner 2009). This allows students “to translate thought into writing,” a task that is often challenging for students (Turner 2009). Here, it becomes clear that chatspeak has its place in assignments--in the rough or brainstorming activities--but students are expected to use more formal language for final assignments. In this way, students can act as experts in the classroom by being allowed to use chatspeak but are also still held to the expectation of knowing and using more formal language. If our goal is student-centered and student-driven learning, it seems important to allow students to express themselves in unique ways by allowing them to use chatspeak on certain assignments.
Although there is positive potential for chatspeak in the classroom, the question arises if it should be allowed at all and if so, under what parameters. There seem to be several considerable issues to note, namely the idea that “the quality of writing by young Americans is being degraded by their electronic communication” (Turner 2009). That is, it seems possible that young people cannot produce higher quality writing because chatspeak is becoming so commonplace. Further, while it is true that chatspeak can serve as a shortcut with its use of phonetic and shorthand spelling, it is possible that students using it could be discouraged from knowing and understanding Standard English and its important formal uses. Indeed, many believe that chatspeak has “a real effect on the tone of professionalism” in student writing, as about two-thirds of teenagers say they “incorporate some informal styles from their text-based communications into their writing at school” (Huffington Post 2011). When we think about chatspeak directly linked to the formal, written essay, it seems to be a slippery slope. While we want students to express themselves in familiar language, it seems important to remind students that there are limits to using chatspeak, especially in writing. But is this
68 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
possible? Richard Sterling, emeritus executive director of the National Writing Project, argues that it is. Sterling suggests that these situations are an “opportunity for teachers to explain while that such usages are acceptable in some contexts, they do not belong in school work” (Lewin 2008). The key word here is “opportunity,” as educators are presented with a chance to discuss language. That is, even if an educator believes that chatspeak is a problem with regard to formal language, they should use this opportunity to teach students about “the nature of language” and the idea that language is constantly changing (Turner 2009). Chatspeak teaches students these concepts in a unique way, in that it shows students that language can be manipulated into abbreviations and phonetic spellings.
So what are some practical ways to bridge such a gap? It is first important to consider the opportunity for students to code-switch between formal English and chatspeak. It is possible to use code-switching activities in the classroom, such as “Flip the Switch,” an activity where students are given scenarios where they choose which type of language to use—formal, informal, or a combination of both (Turner 2009). These scenarios could include a conversation with a teacher or one with a friend on Facebook. Students are asked to translate the sentences given with each scenario into the language they would use with each person. For example, a student chatting with a friend on Facebook may be more informal and use elements of chatspeak, while the student would most likely use more formal language with the teacher. Students can then see the differences in language use and understand that they may code-switch in different situations. This allows students to explore language and determine when and where they may use certain types of language. More importantly, it embraces students’ “existing knowledge” in a way that “acknowledge[s] the legitimacy of [chatspeak] while bringing its use to the conscious level” (Turner 2009). Students essentially see that chatspeak is a legitimate type of language, but also see that it cannot be used in every situation. It is also possible to give chatspeak a place in the classroom by simply using polling activities where students use cell phones to text in an answer. In this way, students are allowed to use chatspeak, yet it has a specific place in the classroom--activities that involve cell phones. By using students’
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 69 knowledge of chatspeak, we can empower their language but also remind them that it cannot be used at all times.
Using chatspeak in the classroom can be a great tool, if used wisely and deliberately. Like any language, chatspeak has the potential to be powerful, as students can convey themselves in meaningful and unique ways. While it should be monitored, using chatspeak can help to create a dynamic learning environment—one that benefits teachers and students alike.
m
Stephen Hart is a master’s student at the University of Michigan - Ann Arbor studying Secondary Education. He hopes to teach high school economics and government at an alternative or liberal arts magnet school.
Katie Johnson is a master’s student at the University of Michigan studying Secondary Education. She hopes to teach English and writing in an urban area.
References Crystal, David. 2008. "2b or not 2b?" The Guardian. July 4. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/jul/05/saturdayreviewsfeatres. guardianreview.
Howard, Linda, and Greg Monfils. 2007. "Is Chatspeak Destroying English?" Learning & Leading with Technology 35(3), 8-9.
Humphrys, John. 2007. "I h8 txt msgs: How Texting is Wrecking our Language." Mail Online. Sept. 24. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483511/I-h8-txt-msgs-How- texting-wrecking-language.html.
Lenhart, Amanda. 2012. "Teens, Smartphones, and Texting." Pew Internet and American Life Project. Mar. 19. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Teens-and-smartphones.aspx.
70 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Lewin, Tamar. 2008. "Informal Style of Electronic Messages is Showing Up in Schoolwork, Study Finds." The New York Times. April 25. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/education/25writing.html.
Paul, Annie Murphy. 2012. "Why Chatspeak Might Influence English Language Learning." Wired Academic. July 31. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.wiredacademic.com/2012/07/columnist-annie-murphy-paul- why-chatspeak-might-influence-english-learning/.
"Professors Move to Eliminate Chatspeak." 2011. The Huffington Post, May 25. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/12/professors-move-to- elimin_n_533814.html.
Turner, Kristen Hawley. 2009. "Flipping the Switch: Code-Switching from Text Speak to Standard English." English Journal, 98(5), 60-65.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 71 Facebook and Social Media Alyssa Johnson and Christine Smith
Educators are constantly seeking new ways to make their classroom instruction relate to the lives of their students. In an effort to make learning more interactive and meaningful, some teachers have begun to utilize web sites like Facebook to reach students outside of the classroom, and to disseminate course information. Some educators fear associating school with Facebook, for reasons varying from unfamiliarity with the site to worrying about cyberbullying. Whether or not teachers choose to implement tools like Facebook depends on their own educational philosophy and whether or not they see Facebook as being potentially helpful or distracting. Regardless of whether teachers like the idea, though, some things are absolutely clear: the vast majority of students already use these social media web pages to connect with one another, and perhaps more surprising, the majority of educators and administrators are active on at least one of the online social media sites (Ferriter 2010-2011). So, if students and teachers are already actively using these types of sites, for some teachers the question is whether to use them in the classroom, and how they might do so. As educators, we must intentionally choose our methods, strategies, and tools carefully so as to optimize our students learning. Facebook and Twitter are widely used social media platforms that can have educational applications in the classroom, but proper online etiquette must be developed in students in order to use them effectively as an educational tool.
Ways For Educators to Use Social Media Many teachers and administrators have started using Twitter as a tool for professional development (Sapers n.d.). This may seem odd at first, but think about it: what we post on Twitter has the potential to reach thousands of people almost instantly, and educators can make use of hashtags (#) to categorize their tweets by topic so that readers searching
72 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
for that topic will see relevant tweets instantly. For example, when teachers have questions about how to enforce rules or suggestions on ways to teach a particular topuc they can use Twitter and have responses from other educators in minutes. Teachers already using Twitter say that it is more effective than a Google search because Twitter allows teachers to connect with other people, who can respond to questions more effectively than a search engine. To make sure that other education professionals see a tweet teachers simply put “#edchat” (Sapers n.d.) or other more specific hashtags in their tweets regarding education. Twitter gives educators access to a vast community of teachers, and can be especially helpful to new teachers who may be looking for more guidance.
Sites like Facebook and Twitter can also be seen in the world of education as a resource for teachers and administrators to connect with their community. Many schools that have embraced social media sites like Facebook have found that they are a quick, easy way to reach out to the community. Eric Sheninger, a high school principal in New Milford, New Jersey, has used social media to celebrate athletic victories, highlight student work, and spread the word on meetings for parents. Principal Sheninger has even used his social media accounts to post pictures of school events and links to newspaper articles related to student learning (Ferriter 2010-2011). In addition to being able to communicate effectively with parents, Facebook and Twitter allow Sheninger to engage in dialogues with his students. Using social media as a medium for discussion has involved more students than the traditional student government; more student voices are being heard at New Milford High School (Ferriter 2010-2011). Convenience may account for this increase in participation. Students are already on these sites, so why not take an extra minute to give their thoughts? In addition, Twitter and Facebook serve as an outlet for students who do not usually speak up in class to do so in a more comfortable way.
Another fundamental way educators use Facebook and Twitter is fairly obvious yet worth mentioning; Facebook and the like allow teachers to easily connect with their students. Because most students are already members of Facebook, it requires very little effort for educators to find
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 73 their students and collaborate with them online. In this way, Facebook differs from other possible Internet tools used in the classroom. Students are already members on Facebook, whereas wiki pages and class blogs require that students create a login username and password, and that they go to a website that they don’t ordinarily visit. Rather than asking them to take the time to join a wiki page, educators do not have to require any extra effort of their students. This avoids issues with students neglecting to join the class wiki page, or having difficulty navigating an unfamiliar interface. If a student does not have Facebook, or prefers not to use it, there are other viable options for that individual to attain class resources. In such cases students can rely on email correspondence, phone calls, and out of class meeting times to communicate with their teacher, as is standard practice in most educational settings. Facebook and other social media sites provide an additional resource for educators to use -- one which some teachers find to be extremely convenient and efficient.
How Can Social Media Be Helpful in Student Learning? In order to illustrate how sites like Facebook and Twitter are logistically incorporated into the classroom, let’s look at a case study of a secondary history teacher in South Redford, Michigan. Jason Brater teaches AP History courses and general World History courses for 10th and 11th graders. He creates a Facebook group for each of his courses, and names them accordingly (e.g., THS World History). He acts as the administrator of the group, and on the first day of class has his students request to join the class page. Every day the class page is updated with PowerPoint slides, handouts, homework assignments, and study guides from the class. Any papers are passed out to students in class are posted to the Facebook page that day. Thus, when a student misses a day of school, they simply check the page and download what they missed. In addition, students have ready access to all of the PowerPoint slideshows and study guide materials on the page. In addition, students can post messages on the class page for the rest of the group members to see. This serves as an excellent way for students to help one another with homework or study together. For instance, a student might post, “I don’t understand what the author
74 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
meant in question 9 on our homework.” It is typical for these types of posts to receive many responses, often very quickly, from different members of the class. In addition, if students are not able to help one another, Brater will respond to the posts directly. Students working together fosters a community spirit among the students, and builds skills that will prove useful in higher education, particularly collaborative study skills. Because it is commonplace for students to work together they are comfortable with each other, which leads to a safer classroom environment and, more open forum for students to communicate. In creating a virtual space for students to engage with one another, students are provided with another resource they can refer to for assistance and support. Thus far, Brater has been using Facebook pages for his courses for five years, with extremely positive results. Students respond well to the idea, and it requires minimal effort on the part of the teacher to post course materials. It should be noted that Brater does not employ Facebook for his personal use, and has an account for the sole purpose of creating Facebook group pages for his courses. In this way he avoids having to grapple with the issue of protecting his online identity and privacy. If, however, an educator with a personal Facebook page were interested in using Facebook a la Brater, it is possible to create a separate, private account to use when posting to course pages (Brater 2012).
There are many learning opportunities presented when a teacher uses Facebook and social media sites in their classroom. Students are able to practice a new form of widely popular literacy, that is, online social literacy. In addition, students and teachers are engaged in more readily accessible, and more frequent communication outside the classroom (Fewkes & McCabe 2012). Moreover, there are indications in educational research showing that students who are able to collaborate and work with one another on assignments enhance their learning strategies and overall knowledge acquisition from these social learning experiences (Fewkes & McCabe 2012). By incorporating technology into the classroom in a way that students are familiar with, educators are able to enter a realm of students’ lives previously untouched by school. The idea can almost be likened to meeting students on their turf by choosing a method to communicate important course information with them in a
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 75 way that is already part of their daily routines. For many students, it is no extra task to go on their Facebook and look at the course page, as many students are likely sitting on Facebook for some portion of time after school regardless. Yet despite what seems like an endless array of positive possibilities for educators, some remain wary of using Facebook with their classes. These concerns are addressed in the next section of this chapter.
Teacher Skepticism Concerning Social Media Many educators feel apprehensive about bringing Facebook into the classroom because it may create a relationship between teacher and student that too closely resembles a friendship. One teacher said that he would never make a Facebook account because the first thing students did each year was search for all their teachers online (English 2012). Similarly, teachers are concerned about privacy. However, sites like Facebook and Twitter have privacy options that allow a user to be unsearchable (in the case of Facebook) or have their postings visible only to friends or followers. To avoid security problems, many teachers who decide to use Facebook refrain from posting any personal information. Regardless of the potential benefits afforded by Facebook, people have shown concern over the blurring of personal barriers brought about by social media. The state of Missouri has banned the “friending” of teachers and students on social media sites (Varlas 2011), and in New York City teachers are not allowed to use social media to communicate with students at all (Schaffhauser 2012). In Clayton, Missouri a high school principal came under fire after being accused of creating a fake Facebook account to monitor student and parent online conversations (Schaffhauser 2012).
Cyberbullying is another factor that leads many teachers to shy away from using social media in school. While online communication may support community and learning, it also opens up a possibility for cyberbullying. Others argue that to prevent cyberbullying, students need to be taught about proper online conduct and need adult-mediated spaces in which to practice digital citizenship. An assessment of social media policies in Great Britain found that students had a better understanding of online safety
76 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
when they were given the chance to practice these behaviors in school. Conversely, students are at a higher risk for experiencing cyberbullying or online victimization when schools block social media sites (Varlas 2011), presumably because they are not learning proper online etiquette. If education professionals seek to eliminate cyberbullying they should model appropriate online behavior for their students. Finally, another teacher felt that using social media sites puts less emphasis on developing the kinds of writing and communication skills such that students need in order to communicate effectively (English, 2012). In response to this concern, some teachers requiring students to use social media maintain that their students use proper grammar therein, thus allowing students to practice their writing skills, but in a familiar domain outside the standard academic realm.
Another reason that teachers are weary of using sites like Facebook and Twitter concerns the issue of legality. Several pieces of legislation, namely the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), have made the use of social media within schools more difficult. COPPA protects children under the age of 13 from having personal information on the Internet without the content of a parent or guardian, and CIPA requires schools to filter online content so that children are not exposed to explicit content. COPPA is the reason why Facebook and Twitter require users to be 13 or older to join (Varlas 2011). Because kids do not turn 13 until they are in 8th grade, social networking sites cannot be used at the middle school level. Even within high schools there are still issues of access, because some students may not have access to a computer or the Internet. (Editors' note: For more information on CIPA and COPPA, please see the first section of this book.)
Lastly, there is the issue of distraction. Many teachers feel that Facebook, Twitter, and other social media are an outright distraction when used during class time, rather than tool (English 2012). While it is true that some students will abuse social media, educators must ask themselves whether the potential costs outweigh the benefits. If not, perhaps
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 77 Facebook and Twitter become domains that teachers use to communicate with students outside of the classroom.
A Final Word to Educators, Regardless of Your Facebook “Status” All educators have a responsibility to decide which tools will work for them in the classroom. That said, educators also have the responsibility to find tools that work best for their students as well. In the age of information and online social networking run amuck, using Facebook and other online sites like it for educational purposes is an innovative way for educators to keep school relevant and to create different venues for disseminating information. The risks involved with using Facebook will perhaps deter some educators from ever using it in their own teaching, yet the reason for giving it a try is simple: your students. As educators, we have to choose tools and resources that maximize learning opportunities for our students. In order to adequately determine whether or not a social media site like Facebook could be productive for students, we recommend that educators take the initial step of trying these new strategies within their own classroom environments. Facebook may not have been created with educational purposes in mind, but it can certainly provide educators a unique opportunity to engage with students in a practical and popular way.
m
Alyssa Johnson is currently a student in the University of Michigan’s Secondary MAC program and plans to become a history and psychology educator and is student teaching at Forsythe Middle School in Ann Arbor, MI. Prior to pursuing a master’s degree she earned a bachelor’s degree at the University of Michigan in history and psychology. Before attending college, Alyssa traveled extensively with her family, and she hopes to eventually teach at an international school. She enjoys cooking, arts and crafts, and spending time with family.
Christine Smith is currently a master's student at the University of Michigan with the intention of earning a teaching certification at the secondary level. Prior to starting her
78 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
studies in Ann Arbor, she lived in Chicago and attended Loyola University, where she earned a bachelor’s degree in history and music. She is currently doing her pre-service student teaching at Thurston High School in South Redford, MI. Born in Traverse City, Michigan, Christine is a Northern Michigan native and intends to return there in the future to teach after fulfilling her degree. She enjoys indie music, socializing with strangers, vegetarianism, art, taking abnormally long naps, philosophy, trashy celebrity gossip, traveling, and political satirists. Her cat, Wellington, keeps her world turning. She can be reached at [email protected].
References Brater, Jason. Personal communication with author, October 2, 2012.
English, Jon. Personal communication with author, October 2, 2012.
Ferriter, William. 2010-2011. “Using Social Media to Reach Your Community.” Educational Leadership 68(4), Dec.-Jan., 87-88. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational- leadership/dec10/vol68/num04/Using-Social-Media-to-Reach-Your- Community.aspx.
Fewkes, Aaron and McCabe, Mike. 2012. “Facebook: Learning Tool or Distraction?” The Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education 28(3), 92- 98.
Sapers, Jonathan. n.d. “Meet Your New PD Tool.” Administrator Magazine. Retrieved September 30, 2012, from: http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3756867
Schaffhauser, Dian. 2012. “Districts Struggle with Social Networking Guidelines.” T.H.E. Journal, May 7. Retrieved September 30, 2012, from: http://thejournal.com/articles/2012/05/07/districts-struggle-with-social- networking-guidelines.aspx.
Varlas, Laura. “Can Social Media and School Policies be ‘Friends’?” ASCD Policy Priorities 17(4). Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/newsletters/policy- priorities/vol17/num04/Can-Social-Media-and-School-Policies-be- %C2%A3Friends%C2%A3%C2%A2.aspx.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 79 Google Scholar and Scholarly Databases Michelle Cox and Asha Kancherlapalli
Introduction As preservice educators there are sure to be tons of ideas that you are eager to try in your first classroom. It is also more than likely that those plans include students using technology. When crafting a project that requires students to do research, you might want to keep the following in mind: most students are either unskilled or unmotivated to differentiate between popular and scholarly resources (Grimes and Boening 2001). After all, isn’t it easier just to “Google it”? In the following chapter, we’ll provide you with the tools necessary to help your students make the most out of Google Scholar and other credible database resources.
Curriculum Transition to Common Core State Standards Learning more about Google Scholar and other online resources may be especially helpful considering the impending nationwide adoption of the Common Core Standards (CCSS). Soon, all students will be expected to “know that different disciplines call for different types of evidence,” including scholarly texts, and must be able to “tailor their searches online to acquire useful information efficiently” (Common Core State Standards Initiative 2010, 7). They will also have to “use relevant evidence when supporting their own points in writing and speaking” (Common Core State Standards Initiative 2010, 7). In addition, there is an increased emphasis on the use of informational texts at all grade levels and across an array of subjects. Therefore, teachers will be expected to teach students both how to read and utilize these texts, as well as how to locate and identify them. In order to meet these curricular goals and objectives we must first be aware of students’ current use of online resources and their research abilities.
80 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
How Students Use Resources Today Anne F. Pierce (1998) conducted a study on high school students’ use of technology and found that despite their high opinions of their own abilities, students were quite unskilled in research techniques that effectively used Internet resources. Unsurprisingly, another study by Jillian Griffiths and Peter Brophy (2004) found that in general, students do not know how to effectively use search engines, tackling inquiries with an “I’ll know it when I see it” mentality. Similarly, when assessing a search engine’s “effectiveness," students in the study indicated that, as a whole, students seem to prefer a search engine’s perceived ability to “find results," and its “utility” across content areas, over “prolonged interactions” like trying different keywords, or using the advanced search option (Griffiths and Brophy 2005, 549).
As a consequence, students often do not utilize high-quality informational resources. According to Deborah J. Grimes and Carl H. Boening (2001), there is a large disparity between the quality of resources teachers expect their students to use and the quality of resources the students actually use. Overall, they found that students have trouble distinguishing between popular resources (e.g., popular magazines and daily newspapers) and scholarly resources (e.g., peer-reviewed journals) while conducting research (Grimes and Boening 2001). Let’s look at the main characteristics of both types of resources in order to better understand student confusion in differentiating between the two.
Popular Resources Popular resources are just that – popular. People tend to gravitate towards these pieces since they are purposely formatted to attract the interest of the public at large (Wittenberg University 2010). Whether online or in print, magazines and newspapers tempt consumers with tantalizing catch phrases and captivating photos, and are typically written simply, with the average reader in mind (University of Arizona Libraries 2009). This means that when asking your students to conduct research, it is more than likely that they will look first to popular publications such as Time or U.S. News and
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 81 World Report. The problem is that in appealing to the masses, some popular resources are less concerned about their informative credibility than they are with selling copies or accruing website hits.
Resource Credibility What does “credibility” mean, exactly? A source’s credibility can be determined by employing a formative process that considers the following qualities and their corresponding definitions: Authority, Integrity, and Reliability (please enjoy our creative acronym, AIR):
Authority –Is the author well-grounded in the specific field of study?
Integrity – Who is the author of this particular article? Is he knowledgeable on the topic? Can he be considered an “expert” in relation to this field of study? What are his credentials? Is there any bias in the article? Is the purpose of the article meant to inform or to sway opinion?
Reliability – Is the journal or resource refereed or peer-reviewed (i.e. articles are reviewed by other experts in a common field of study such as scholars, professionals, researchers)?
When determining the credibility of online sources, assessment becomes slightly trickier for students and teachers. However, there are a variety of databases composed of scholarly resources that provide credible articles to use when carrying out research.
Scholarly Resources Unlike popular resources, scholarly resources are likely to be more credible, as they are peer-reviewed prior to publication (University of Arizona Libraries 2009). They are tailored to address an informed audience, one that has previously acquired field-specific knowledge and that can comprehend its language. Professionals, researchers, and scholars, who have an association with that field of study, author scholarly resources
82 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
for the purpose of informing other professionals, researchers, and scholars in that same field (Wittenberg University 2010). Published scholarly articles are usually based on original research findings, a compilation of various studies (i.e. a “meta-analysis”), or new applications of another research article’s findings (i.e. “replication studies”). Most importantly, scholarly resources include long lists of bibliographies, citing authors who have conducted similar, or opposing, research studies that are relevant to the research of the main article (Wittenberg University 2010).
Why Do Students “Google” Everything? These days, students use the web for almost everything (Griffiths and Brophy 2005). When using the web, specifically when looking for information, students often sacrifice quality to take the “path of least cognitive resistance,” expending minimal effort and time (Griffiths and Brophy 2005, 549). When assessing the credibility of an online resource, students will usually judge its overall layout and how the page looks instead of going through a formative process, such as AIR. (Grimes and Boening 2001) Beyond entering in a few keywords in the search bar, students do not want to spend large amounts of their time evaluating search results or refining their search parameters and/or words.
Luckily for students, search engines like Google are beginning to “evolve to meet the behavior of the average web searcher” (Griffiths and Brophy 2005, 541). For example, when a student misspells a word in Google’s search bar, results will still appear on the next page, but Google will also provide a link for a possible revised search, with the correct spelling(s), as shown in Figure 1.
When students do online research, Google is the search engine of choice, as seen in Griffiths and Brophy’s study results where 45% of their student subjects “used Google as their first port of call when locating information.” (2005, 545)
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 83
Figure 1: Google Search Results for "Popular" vs. "Scholarly" Resources, showing Google's ability to guess correct spelling of search terms
Unfortunately, student preference for search engines like Google competes with the intellectual value of searching for scholarly articles. “Students have come to expect others to maintain quality” of the resources they find, but “there is no systematic monitoring of authority on the web” (Grimes and Boening 2001, 3) as there is at a school’s library. Students “have more and more opportunities to bypass the selection and quality control traditionally provided by librarians” and are now relying on search engines that only rank relevancy “rather than quality and authority of those sources” (Grimes and Boening 2001, 3). Students would rather trust a website than take the time to dig a little deeper and evaluate it. As reported in Grimes and Boening’s study on student online research skills, students go directly to the Internet even though libraries are generally well-prepared to assist students with research (Grimes and Boening 2001). Rather than ask a teacher, librarian, or media specialist for help, students too often turn first to their peers (Grimes and Boening 2001).
84 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Students, Meet Google Scholar Google Scholar may be an ideal tool that both accommodates students' preference for Google as a search tool with an instructor's desire for more scholarly sources. By combing both databases and the open web for content, Google Scholar has emerged as a one-stop shop for scholarly results. While some of the database content Google Scholar finds may still be firewalled and require a school or district subscription to access, other sources are available free online. This is why Noruzzi says, “Google Scholar is the scholarly research tool of the world's largest and most powerful search engine, Google” (2005, 171). Basically, if you can use Google you already know how to use Google Scholar and, as mentioned earlier, it has a better sense of your searching behavior than do other scholarly databases. Google Scholar allows researchers of all ages to locate a wide array of scholarly literature online, from scholarly journals and peer reviewed articles to dissertations and PowerPoint presentations. It is an incredible gateway tool that allows open access to scholarly material for anyone with an Internet connection.
The most important component of Google Scholar is its use of a citation index (Noruzi 2005). Google Scholar analyzes the popularity of an article based on its citations in other documents, displaying the most-cited documents first. This is slightly different than the relevancy results list used by the regular Google search engine. Google Scholar’s premise is that the more a document is cited in other scholarly literature, the more important, and therefore relevant it must be to a query on that topic. In addition to citation, the results list produced in Google Scholar also considers query relevance, the title and the full text, and the publication of an article. Another feature of this amazing tool is its ability to bring the researcher forward or backward in time to more recent articles citing the original document (Noruzi 2005, 171-2). Through its citation index, Google Scholar allows anyone to find the most recent citation of a previous article, making connections between several scholarly articles and resources that would have been otherwise undiscovered. Disciplinary and geographical boundaries are transcended by Google Scholar’s ingenious citation index, and Google Scholar is also able to find scholarly literature
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 85 anywhere online, allowing you to find documents that may not be available on other databases.
Simple keyword searches may not be sufficient to find exactly what you’re looking for, and sometimes include documents not considered scholarly like student handbooks or library tour handouts (Noruzi 2005). For this reason Google Scholar has advanced search options as shown in Figure 2. This advanced search query can be accessed by clicking on the down tab of the search bar.
Figure 2: Google Scholar Advanced Search options box
There are many ways to enhance the quality of your results by using search tips featured, for example, on this document (www.library.otago.ac.nz/pdf/Google_Scholar_Tips.pdf) distributed by the University of Otago in New Zealand.
Even though Google Scholar may seem like the answer to every teacher’s prayer, it does have its disadvantages. Due to inconsistent citation styles (e.g., spelling or incomplete citations), the same source could be listed multiple times (Noruzi 2005). Google Scholar results are not always able to include every single scholarly document since many scholarly periodicals and magazines are not indexed. Lastly, students at any level of education may become frustrated with Google Scholar since some links require subscriptions to a particular database or website. However, Google
86 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Scholar is still a Beta version working out all of its kinks, and is constantly evolving to improve its practices. Likewise, as educators, we should be aware of this potentially mediating technology when asking students to do research. Until that time, scholarly databases are the best resource when students need credible articles and other literature.
Scholarly Databases Apart from the need to align our pedagogical practices to the Common Core State Standards, teachers know how important it is for students to be able to use scholarly resources effectively. Knowing how to tell fact from fiction is essential in any career, and we all know how it is essential to have research skills before the first day of college, when students will be expected to cite journal articles and scholarly books. While Google Scholar is a great start, we must teach students how to use the databases available to them to find the most relevant and reliable resources possible.
The American Library Association's Reference User Services Association (RUSA) publishes an annual list of what librarians across the country deem the best reference sources available to the public (http://www.ala.org/rusa/awards/outstandingreferencesources). While some of these resources may be less suited to the K-12 curriculum, several others could be of great value in specific subjects, especially for students at the secondary level. In the hands of Social Studies and English Language Arts instructors, these resources could prove to be game-changers in terms of the quality of nonfiction literature available for classroom use:
• Competing Voices from the Russian Revolution: Fighting Words
• Encyclopedia of Political Science
• The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible
• The Encyclopedia of Literary and Cultural Theory
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 87 What About Free Databases? While you surely agree that it’s important to be familiar with the variety of high-quality, reliable resources available online, you’re probably also mumbling to yourself, “Yeah, but our school doesn’t have the money for that.” It’s a public school reflex, and for good reason. Still, a lack of funds shouldn’t hold educators back from teaching students how to do scholarly research. Every state funds its own version of an eLibrary, complete with scholarly databases, ebooks, magazines and newspapers, maps, and more. For example, the Michigan eLibrary (MeL.org) gives all Michigan residents freee access to 41 different databases, including several resources particularly useful for elementary and secondary students, including:
• Books & Authors
• CultureGrams
• eLibrary and eLibrary Elementary
• Gale Virtual Reference Library
• HeritageQuest Online
• InfoTrac Junior Edition (Middle School), InfoTrac Student Edition (High School), and InfoTrac Newsstand
• Kids InfoBits (Elementary)
• Opposing Viewpoints in Context
• SIRS Discoverer Deluxe (K-9) and SIRS Renaissance (High School)
Take a look at our Appendix A for a complete list of free databases for every single state, in alphabetical order!
88 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Searching Databases Effectively If you’ve ever tried to search a database, you’ve probably felt overwhelmed with the amount of information available on your topic. For example, a student writing a paper on Charlemagne’s conquests may perform a search for “Charlemagne map” in the Ancient and Medieval History Online database, which produces fifteen results. However, an advanced search of “Charlemagne” with the Maps, Charts, and Tables option checked produces only six results, only two of them relevant and only one specific to the research topic.
You might also instruct student users of the Gale Cengage database Academic OneFile or other student-oriented databases to use Advanced Search in order to limit their searches to certain Lexile reading levels. Elementary teachers, for example, may instruct 5th grade students to select only reading levels up to 1100L (this corresponds to 7th grade). Texts that are too difficult can take too long to read, be easily misunderstood or, in the worst case, overwhelm and discourage students from continuing their research. Students can also limit their searches by selecting a range of dates (this keeps them safe from outdated information) and displaying only peer-reviewed articles.
Some databases, such as PsycINFO, also use descriptors in advanced searches. Descriptors assigned to texts are extremely useful in limiting search results to appropriate articles; however, they can be tricky to use. In order to use a descriptor properly, students must use the “Thesaurus” option to ensure they select the correct word. For example, a student researching “Ethnocentrism” for a social studies paper would be advised, upon searching the thesaurus, to try using the broader term “Racial and Ethnic Attitudes."
So I Can’t Use Magazines like Time or U.S. News and World Report in My Classroom? No, that’s not what we’re saying! It is very important to use relevant events and topics that will engage your students to your lessons. But use popular resources with caution since, as educators, we have a responsibility
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 89 to teach our students, especially those who are college-count, successful research skills. Being able to differentiate between popular and scholarly resources, and utilizing efficient and effective research strategies are critical to the development of students’ higher level thinking skills.
Our Recommendations
You may wish to speak with your school librarian to advocate for the purchase of one of the ALA’s highly rated resources, but don’t be discouraged if you’re met with a “the district won’t go for that.” As previously mentioned, there are many free resources provided by each state’s official library that are often left untapped.
That being said, a misused resource is almost as bad as no resource at all. What are the other teachers in your school doing to ensure students get their information from reliable resources? Even if you teach your students to use Google Scholar and scholarly databases correctly and efficiently, without reinforcement from their other instructors, students may fall back into bad habits. Providing workshops in the use of online resources such as Google Scholar and databases for teachers is essential, and particularly early in the school year. Talk to your school’s librarian or media specialist about setting up a tutorial for the teachers in your school to make sure everyone is on the same page when it comes to reliable sources.
Likewise, the investment of one or two class periods to give students step- by-step instructions on how to use scholarly databases would yield far better results than setting students loose in the computer lab. Use a projector or Smart Board to demonstrate effective searching of Google Scholar and databases. You may even want to start out by demonstrating what not to do, comparing the typically questionable search engine results with database search results.
Be careful not to distract students from the task, though. Database searches, particularly those that use descriptors, can be a little tricky. Students with little or no background knowledge on their subjects may
90 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
need to conduct web searches for terms and phrases to use when searching databases. Please also be sure to let students set the pace for these tutorials, and reinforce their new skills with guided practice--students need explicit instruction on how to use databases effectively. While students these days are notably talented when it comes to circumventing school content filters, they’re not necessarily used to discerning relevant from irrelevant content, even when given specific guidelines (Scholz-Crane 1998). These digital natives may be familiar with Facebook and Twitter, but scholarly research can be confusing and intimidating. With clear instruction and expectations, however, students can gain the research skills necessary for college and career success.
m
Born and raised in Ann Arbor, Michigan, Michelle Cox is a graduate student in the University of Michigan’s Secondary MAC Program and aspires to teach English or Math beginning in 2013. She has a bachelor of arts degree from the University of Michigan with a double major in English Literature and Communication Studies. Staying active is important to Michelle, especially after playing on the University of Michigan’s Women’s Club Soccer Team all four years of college. Michelle continues to play soccer with friends and recently won a kickball championship in the Ann Arbor Adult Community Education and Recreation League. Michelle likes running outside, but only when the weather is nice!
Asha Kancherlapalli holds a bachelor of arts degree in Theatre Arts with a minor in Literature from San Jose State University and is interested in teaching English, Creative Writing, Debate, Public Speaking, and Drama at the high school level. She is currently completing her master's degree as well as her pre-service teaching at John Glenn High School in Westland, Michigan, where she serves as the sponsor for the student Debate Society. Asha previously worked as an after-school literacy instructor and curriculum assistant at CORAL, a free enrichment program on the east side of San Jose. She enjoys singing and cooking, usually at the same time. Asha is a graduate student in the University of Michigan's Secondary MAC Program.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 91 References Grimes, Deborah J., and Boening, Carl H. 2001. “Worries with the Web: A Look at Student Use of Web Resources,” College & Research Libraries 62(1), 11-23.
Leckie, Gloria J. 1996. “Desperately Seeking Citations: Uncovering Faculty Assumptions about the Undergraduate Research Process,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 22(3), 201-209.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. 2010. “Common Core State Standards.” Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://corestandards.org
Noruzi, Alireza. 2005. “Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes,” LIBRI 55(4), 170-180.
Pierce, Anne F. 1998. “Improving the Strategies High School Students Use To Conduct Research on the Internet by Teaching Essential Skills and Providing Practical Experience,” [Washington D.C.] : Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED4277 56.
Scholz-Crane, Anne. 1998. "Evaluating the Future: A Preliminary Study of the Process of How Undergraduate Students Evaluate Web Sources," Reference Services Review 26(3-4), 53 - 60.
University of Arizona Libraries. 2009. “Scholarly vs. Popular Articles - Guide.” Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://www.library.arizona.edu/help/tutorials/scholarly/guide.html.
Wittenberg University. 2010. “Scholarly vs. Popular Articles." Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://www6.wittenberg.edu/lib/help/schol-pop.php.
92 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Appendix A: Alphabetical List of State eLibraries by State
Alabama Virtual Library: avl.lib.al.us Alaska Statewide Library Electronic Doorway: sled.alaska.edu/databases Arizona Statewide Databases: azlibrary.gov/is/databases Arkansas: library.arkansas.gov/references/pages/onlinedatabases.aspx California Digital Library: archive.org/details/cdl Colorado Virtual Library: coloradovirtuallibrary.org Connecticut Re-Search Engine: iconn.org Delaware Libraries eBooks and More: lib.de.us/index.php/ebooks-more Florida Electronic Library: flelibrary.org Georgia GALILEO: galileo.usg.edu Hawaii State Public Library System Databases: librarieshawaii.org/serials/databases.html Illinois CyberDrive: cyberdriveillinois.com/departments/library/databases/home.html Indiana State Library INSPIRE: statelib.lib.in.us/inspire/authenticate.asp Iowa State Library Online Resources: statelibraryofiowa.org/services/online- resources Kansas State Library Online Resources: kslib.info/librarians/eor.html Kentucky Virtual Library: kyvl.org Louisiana Library Connection: lalibcon.state.lib.la/us Maine MARVEL! Virtual Library: libraries.main.edu/mainedatabases Maryland SAILOR Research Databases: sailor.lib.md.us/services/databases Massachusetts Libraries - Research and E-Sources: libraries.state.ma.us/pages/research-e-sources Michigan eLibrary: mel.org Minnesota ELM: elm4you.org Mississippi MAGNOLIA: magnolia.msstate.edu/magnolia Missouri MOREnet: more.net/content/online-resources Montana EBSCO Discovery Service: mymontanalibrary.org Nebraskaccess: nebraskaccess.ne.gov Nevada State Library and Archives - Databases: nsla.nevadaculture.org
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 93 New Hampshire State Library Databases: nhewlink.state.nh.us/about/vendors.html New Jersey JerseyClicks: jerseyclicks.org New Mexico State Library Online Resources: nmstatelibrary.org/onlineresources New York NOVEL NY: novelnewyork.org North Carolina Live: nclive.org North Dakota ODIN: odin.nodak.edu Ohio OPLIN: oplin.org Oklahoma Digital Prairie: odl.state.ok.us/prairie Oregon State Library: http://www.oregon.gov/OSL/LD/Pages/technology/sdlp/index.aspx Pennsylvania POWER Library: powerlibrary.org Rhode Island Ocean State Libraries: rilibrary.net South Carolina State Library Online Resources: statelibrary.sc.gov/online- resources South Dakota e.Library: e.library.sd.gov Tennessee Electronic Library: tntel.tnsos.org Texas TexShare Database Program: tsl.state.tx.us/texshare/databasepage.html Utah Public Pioneer: pioneer.utah.gov Vermont Online Library: vtonlinelib.org Virginia Find It: finditva.com Washington: See your local public library. West Virginia InfoDepot: wvinfodepot.org Wisconsin BadgerLink: badgerlink.net Wyoming GoWYLD: gowyld.net
94 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Wikipedia Colleen McIntee and Jack Tamm
It is the bane of many librarians and teachers alike. It is disparaged as inaccurate, unsupported, and a generally poor resource for proper academic research, but the fact of the matter is Wikipedia is not going anywhere anytime soon and educators must come to embrace it for what it is: an excellent starting point for students to become more acquainted with the subject matter they are researching so that they can navigate more complicated academic sources, which might otherwise be inaccessible because of students’ elementary knowledge of the subject area. Since its inception eleven years ago, Wikipedia has grown to over four million articles in English alone (Taraborelli 2012). It is a massive living encyclopedia that touches on nearly every subject imaginable. Just the sheer breadth of Wikipedia makes it a tantalizing tool that students prefer when they want to explore their many interests. It is, of course, not free from pitfalls and far from being the perfect source. That said, with proper guidance from a teacher or a librarian, Wikipedia can effectively be used without compromising academic rigor.
Teachers have some legitimate concerns when it comes to Wikipedia being used by students as an academic source. The fact that anyone can make an entry or edit an article is Wikipedia’s biggest strength and most frequently cited weakness. Despite a system to vet new material, intentional vandalism compromises Wikipedia’s credibility in a way that simply does not occur with its competitors. Secondly, the complex authorship of Wikipedia makes it tremendously difficult to verify the validity of citations and accuracy of articles. These two issues are so problematic that it is not uncommon for teachers to ban the use of Wikipedia from school projects altogether.
But just how inaccurate is Wikipedia? With anyone being able to write what they please and television celebrities like Stephen Colbert encouraging his audience to vandalize articles on a massive scale, it would
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 95 seem that Wikipedia is the Wild West of information. On Colbert’s show for instance, he referred to Wikipedia as wikiality. That is the reality that is created by merely having enough people agree with your article on Wikipedia. He went on to post that Oregon is “California’s Canada or Washington’s Mexico” (Spring 2006).
In 2005, however, a study by Nature concluded that Wikipedia’s scientific articles contained only four errors per article compared to three from Encyclopaedia Britannica (Taraborelli 2012). In a more recent study performed to take into account Wikipedia’s massive growth and development since 2005, researchers from Oxford University concluded, “Wikipedia fared well in this sample against Encyclopaedia Britannica in terms of accuracy, references and overall judgment, with little differences between the two on style and overall quality score” (Taraborelli 2012). Although the sample was too small to extrapolate the results more fully, Wikipedia should not be considered drastically more problematic of a source than other more founded publications like Britannica. In fact, Wikipedia, perhaps in an attempt to publicize the fact other publications are in no way flawless, has a massive page dedicated to errors in Encyclopaedia Britannica that have been corrected by Wikipedia. As for the issue of posts by obvious tricksters like Colbert, they are reviewed by a team of Wikipedia editors and purged.
With so much negative press, how many students are even using Wikipedia within the realm of higher education? Recently a survey was carried out at six American colleges to assess just this question. The authors found that Wikipedia is extremely popular among students despite professors explicitly telling them not to use it as a source. Clearly there is a disconnect between what students feel Wikipedia has to offer and what teachers find acceptable. This could be at least partially explained by how Wikipedia is used by students. The fear of teachers is that students are using poorly supported documents as sources, but in actuality, 8 out of 10 students say they use Wikipedia for background information (Head and Eisenberg 2010). This means that instead of merely reading Wikipedia as a source to be cited in an essay, students read Wikipedia to build a knowledge base so they can improve the focus of
96 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
their academic research. Therefore, even if there are problems with the validity of the Wikipedia article, the student should become aware of these contradictions during the more thorough academic research. Wikipedia, despite its perceived downsides, can become a tool that empowers students to perform their research on a broader range of topics with a higher degree of independence.
So, what do teachers need to know to use Wikipedia effectively in their classes? We propose a few simple principles to adopt when considering the use of Wikipedia in the classroom: view Wikipedia as a pre-search tool, recognize the limits and merits of the tool, be open-minded about open knowledge, converse with students about authorship, neutrality, and reliability, and be the guide for students.
View Wikipedia as a Pre-search Tool According to a professor quoted by Head and Eisenberg (2010), Wikipedia is “a great place to start, but a horrible place to end”. We could not agree more. Students can use Wikipedia to preview their research process by getting background information, learning about other important aspects of their topic, and discovering what they already know, and need to know, about their topic. Reading relevant sections of Wikipedia articles often leads to reading related articles, evolving a student’s knowledge. Most importantly, Wikipedia guides students to find keywords that they may not have previously considered once they start the academic research process. Additionally, the reference page at the bottom of most Wikipedia articles will direct students to research articles, books, web sites, documents, and images to get them started on the information search process for their research project.
Recognize the Merits and Limits of the Tool Teachers should be aware of the benefits and drawbacks of having their students use Wikipedia, and take all perspectives into consideration. In general, it is a useful tool if used properly. As previously stated, the average error rates are no worse than most other encyclopedias.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 97 Another important consideration is the amount of information, and complexity of the content in Wikipedia articles. Many articles are so comprehensive that it could seem overwhelming to students, or often be beyond their reading level. Teachers should consider these factors, and also realize that a Simple English Wikipedia exists if students need a more clear and concise way to access basic information about a topic.
Be Open-minded About Open Knowledge It is so easy to be critical of Wikipedia, skeptical of its content, and wary of its authors. If teachers can move away from the notion of Wikipedia as some sort of black sheep or dirty little secret of the information world, they can empower themselves to be successful facilitators of the research process and empower their students to be successful researchers. If teachers consider how the digital age has changed the way we create, seek, and trust information, the trend in collaborative information and the emerging concept of co-authorship will be clear. Understanding that we all play a part in the community of global learners is a daunting, but increasingly present, fact. Getting students to realize this phenomenon, and engaging them as both skeptical readers and generous contributors, represents another challenge altogether.
Converse with Students About Authorship, Neutrality, and Reliability Opening up the conversation on research with students is an important part of creating a learning environment where strong research habits are built and expanded upon. If students are given the time and space to think deeply about critical factors when evaluating research such as authorship, neutrality and reliability, they can be better and more informed student researchers for the variety of research projects they will encounter. When teachers talk with students about these topics, it allows for exploration of the validity of sources, discovery of personal and source biases, and recognition of the multi-layered and sometimes situational components of reliable information.
98 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
The moment teachers are willing to learn directly from their students how Wikipedia is being used for their own academic and personal use, students will feel heard and supported but also open to being gently pushed to use new strategies when employing Wikipedia. A good strategy for teaching critical literacy for research is to “separate research from its dry, academic context and consider it as an everyday practice of becoming informed about issues that have an impact on the students’ lives” (Harouni 2009). In this way, making research relevant and considering the background knowledge with which students come to the table, teachers can better guide students to find a needle in the “wikistack” of information available in Wikipedia articles.
Be the Guide Students are not going to stop using Wikipedia. People are not going to stop posting incorrect information on Wikipedia (even if editors are incredibly diligent). Teachers should realize they have a critical role in how students use it for school. “Rather than telling them they can’t use it, we need to take the lead in showing them how they can use it” (Fontichiaro and Harvey 2010). If teachers can leverage their role in classrooms, students will be better information seekers, both in and outside of the school building.
Being a guide doesn’t always mean simply sharing personal knowledge. It means connecting students to resources and people who can help them along their path. For teachers, the school library media specialist or public librarian is a goldmine of a resource. Teachers should seek out these people, ask questions, and find ways to help students collaboratively in their research.
m
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 99 Colleen McIntee is a master’s student at the University of Michigan School of Education. She will receive secondary teaching certifications in Physical Education and French in 2013. Colleen is a professional circus artist and teacher, and hopes to continue to pursue this art after graduation.
Jack Tamm is currently pursuing his teacher certification at the University of Michigan. Hailing from Detroit, he has always had a great interest in public policy and the impact of educational systems on society. In the coming years, John would like to start teaching social studies within Detroit at one of the EAA schools and perhaps eventually take on a roll within administration. Wikipedia is one of his greatest personal joys and he estimates that he has read somewhere between 8,000-10,000 articles (honestly).
References Fontichiaro, Kristin, and Carl A. Harvey II. 2010. “How Elementary is Wikipedia?” School Library Monthly 27(2), 22-23.
Harouni, Houman. 2009. "High School Research and Critical Literacy: Social Studies with and Despite Wikipedia." Harvard Educational Review 79(3), 473-493, 539.
Head, Allison J., and Michael B. Eisenberg. 2010. “How Today’s College Students Use Wikipedia for Course-related Research.” First Monday 15(3). Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2830/2476
Spring, Corey. 2006. “Stephen Colbert Causes Chaos on Wikipedia, Gets Blocked by Site,” News Vine, Aug. 1. Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://spring.newsvine.com/_news/2006/08/01/307864-stephen-colbert- causes-chaos-on-wikipedia-gets-blocked-from-site.
Taborelli, Dario. 2012. Wikimedia Research Newsletter. July. Retrieved October 5, 2012, from “http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/08/02/seven-years-after-nature- pilot-study-compares-wikipedia-favorably-to-other-encyclopedias-in-three- languages/
100 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Digital Textbooks Alex Mendiola and Rebekah Terry
"The Future of Books" by Johan Larsson on Flickr. Used with a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 License. http://www.flickr.com/photos/johanl/6966883093/
Introduction It seems that big wigs, big kahunas, higher ups, and head honchos are all pushing for the same thing; they want textbooks to go digital.
President Obama wants it. During his 2011 State of the Union address he stressed “connecting every part of America to the digital age,” and encouraged the use of digital textbooks.
The FCC and the U.S. Department of Education want it. On February 1, 2012 they released the Digital Textbook Playbook, a federal initiative “to encourage collaboration, accelerate the development of digital textbooks and improve the quality and penetration of digital learning in K-12 public education.”
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 101 Apple really wants it. They’ve done a deal with three major K-12 textbook publishers: McGraw-Hill, Pearson, and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Apple’s getting 30 percent of the pie “in the case of individual consumers, and an undetermined amount when selling on a state or district level” (Tomassini 2012). The textbooks will be available through Apple’s iBookstore.
We know that the big fish want it, but what about the rest of us? Do teachers and students want digital textbooks? And, more importantly, should they?
Pros and Cons There are several reasons why teachers should want digital textbooks. The FCC explains:
No longer will students have to tote 50 pound backpacks with outdated print textbooks. New digital textbooks will be light digital devices—such as a laptop or tablet—that combine Internet connectivity, interactive and personalized content, learning videos and games, and other creative applications to enable collaboration with other students while providing instantaneous feedback to the student and teacher (FCC 2012, 7).
These are the reasons why we should want digital textbooks, according to the FCC. But they give us little to no guidance for how digital textbooks should look. Nor do they explain how they should work. Although the FCC’s Digital Textbook Playbook is over 60 pages long, it fails to define what a digital textbook is and explain how it should work (See Watters 2012 for a more thorough critique).
What the Digital Textbook Playbook does discuss is the hows and whys of upgrading technology in schools, specifically a school’s broadband connection (For additional information see the FCC's 2010 Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan). This is all well and good, but it
102 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
leaves the format, creation, and distribution of digital texts up for interpretation.
The CK-12 Foundation (www.ck12.org), a non-profit in the OER (Open Educational Resources) community, has developed its own interpretation of digital textbooks. These texts are free to share and distribute. You can download a book in PDF format suitable for printing, Amazon Kindle’s mobi format, or the more standard ePub file formats. You can download part of a book, just a chapter, or just a few chapters. You can even create your own textbook and share it with others. It’s a great way for teachers to pick and choose, to design their own courses and use the content they want. The texts are relegated to Science, History, and Economics. Bad luck for the English teacher (but I suppose the copyright issues associated with “borrowing” literature for a digital textbook are too difficult to navigate for an OER just starting up).
What do these texts look like? Well, truth be told, they aren’t too different from regular paper textbooks. Sure, there may be a video thrown in here or there, a quiz at the end of a chapter, and maybe some flashcards, but the text is static. Innovative interactivity seems to be less important than availability and ease of use.
Boundless (www.boundless.com), another company associated with the OER community, has created a site designed to align content with the course in which a student is enrolled. The student signs up and enters the title or author of the textbook they’ve been assigned in their college or high school class. Boundless either pulls up the text or, if they don’t have it, pulls up a similar text, and allows the student to add it to their course. (Note: Since they are still relatively new, their selection of digital textbooks remains slim.)
These digital textbooks are a little more interactive. The big difference is that with these texts the student is able to highlight and annotate the content as they read. This can be beneficial as it allows the students to make observations, ask questions, and note key points in the text. Boundless also collates all of the highlighted text and annotations on a separate page so the student can view and use them as review materials or
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 103 even as a baseline for an essay. There are also pictures, quizzes, and flashcards.
Inkling.com and Apple (http://www.apple.com/education/ibooks- textbooks) are two other companies producing or selling digital texts, but these guys do not participate in OER. While they both have some of the most interactive texts I’ve seen, in regards to built-in digital graphics and game-like functions, Inkling charges just as much, if not more, for their digital texts as they would for the paperbound copies. The only discernable difference between traditional, physical textbooks and Inkling’s texts (apart from definition links and video content) is the ability to share your annotations in a social circle. This feature is noteworthy as it allows students to collaborate in the learning process much like other social media sites (i.e. Facebook, Twitter) they may already use. Apple’s digital textbooks may be more reasonably priced though their iBooks app, but you can only view these texts if you have an Apple iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch. You cannot read them on your laptop, which may be a deterrent for schools that have computers, but no funding for iPads.
Another important caveat is the license system that iBooks uses. It replicates the system used by the digital music industry. You can purchase a textbook, but when you’re done with it you can’t give it to next year’s students. This means that each year, you’re buying new textbooks. This can be good if you’re constantly looking for the new and improved texts, okay if the digital textbooks are offered at a discounted price compared to most paperbound textbooks (if a hardbound copy of a textbook is 50 dollars and the school uses it for five years, the school is spending 10 dollars a year which may equate to the cost of a yearly re-purchased or renewed digital textbook), and bad if you’re trying to save money and the yearly cost of the digital textbook costs more, in the long run, than the hardbound books.
Multiple Perspectives So, costs and hypothetical interactivity aside, how does using digital textbooks play out in classrooms? Do they play well with others (to wit, the teachers and students who must use them) and, with all their
104 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
additional content and connectivity, do digital textbooks actually increase understanding and achievement?
Some, such as Audrey Watters (2012), condemn digital textbooks (just as they do traditional textbooks) as “a terrible form…that standardizes, not personalizes learning” and that “closes rather than opens inquiry," but it seems her critiques are for naught; that ship has sailed. Digital textbooks are in wide distribution in South Korea. And they have been embraced by several American states. They offered a welcome reprieve in the disaster- ravaged school districts of Joplin, Missouri. When the city needed to re- acquire textbooks they lost to tornadoes, they turned to digital texts as a cheap solution (Edick 2012).
The folks of Joplin have seen the benefits of affordable digital texts, but will others? More importantly, will digital textbooks be known for their affordability (e.g., those currently $14.99 or less through iBooks), free- access (free through various OER repositories s such as CK-12), or will they conform to the textbook financial model as it stands now (wildly ranging in price from $9.99 to $399 through inkling.com)? We know that textbooks are a multi billion-dollar industry, and we also know that textbook revisions have been driven by for-profit publishers who solicit scholars and writers through financial incentives. Given the context, we might wonder if digital textbooks will actually lower the cost for the school district or student, or whether the traditional financial model will persist?
New publishing formats have already emerged. California State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg planned to introduce legislation in 2012 “to tap $25 million in state funds to solicit open-source course materials for 50 lower-division courses at University of California, California State University and community college campuses (Van Oot 2011).” The plan included utilizing open-source textbooks for college course offerings. But the generation of quality content presents a major difficulty in this model. Who will write the next American History textbook without financial compensation?
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 105 The previously mentioned company, CK12.org, is developing modular, user-generated content to expand the texts available to teachers and students. Other companies, such as FlatWorldKnowledge.com, recruit experts and experienced teachers to develop their content. Boundless.com aggregates free content to match paid textbook content. So far, it seems that industry insiders and startups are shaping the standards for content and delivery.
Teachers What should teachers take away from this? This technology may be exciting, and iPads, laptops, and other gadgets are trendy. But what value do these new technologies bring to teaching? Teachers should consider how these tools can be effectively used in conjunction with appropriate pedagogical techniques.
Other questions associated with using digital textbooks seem obvious. Does the school have the connectivity to support digital texts? (e.g. wifi) Do the students have access to the Internet outside school? What hardware is needed to access these texts (i.e. Internet, iPads, cell phones, laptops)? Will the school provide for those students not fortunate enough to afford their own devices?
The answers to these questions could determine whether digital textbooks are used, but perhaps a better question is whether or not a teacher should use a textbook, physical or digital, in the first place. Many teachers, particularly in the humanities, are shying away from textbooks because of the shortcomings enumerated by people like Audrey Waters. Instead, they use primary sources, or materials they have developed themselves. Like all technologies that are potentially beneficial to learning, educators must implement these new tools to benefit students. Too often we see technologies as teaching methods unto themselves, rather than tools to forward teaching and learning. Through exploring digital textbooks, a teacher may discover a lesson that is interesting and effective at explaining a concept to students. A unit or class period could be significantly enhanced through the use of digital resources.
106 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Conclusion Clearly, digital textbooks are still evolving in form, delivery, and content. But how are they evolving, and more importantly, who is at the head of this evolution? There are some big companies looking to make big money off of the digital textbook industry. Apple, Inkling, and Coursesmart are just a few.
Is that what teachers want? Wasn’t one of the selling points of digital texts the fact that they are cheaper, more easily available, and affordable for schools and students?
This is why OERs are so important; free information for all. Teachers need to be discerning, though, applying the same criteria for choosing whether and when to use digital textbooks as they would for any text, handout, video, or activity. They need to make sure that free texts are alos high-quality, and they need to consider the format of these texts.
One last thing to consider: Must digital textbooks replicate the same ol’ paper bound version of a text and merely transfer it to an online pdf? Is that all they can be?
What if digital textbooks were a place, rather than a book? What if a digital textbook was an online, interactive learning environment that incorporated text, video, forums gameplay, collaborative discovery, and creativity by allowing students to create podcasts, videos, comics, text, and more?
What if a digital textbook was designed to move students toward higher- level thinking through comparison, discussion, collaboration, and creativity?
There is an opportunity now to change the medium, and to do something new. Digital textbooks should not just be paper texts that went digital. Digital textbooks should be tools used to create better learning experiences.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 107 President Obama wants digital textbooks. The FCC and U.S. Department of Education want digital textbooks. Apple and other textbook publishers want digital textbooks. And OERs, such as CK-12, want digital textbooks.
But they should want something else as well. The goal of these organizations, people, and publishers may be to make textbooks digital. But the goal of teachers should not be relegated to the digitization of textbooks. The goal of teachers should be bigger. It should be better. The goal should be the creation of smarter textbooks; textbooks that challenge students to think.
m
Rebekah Terry is a graduate student at the University of Michigan and a preservice English teacher who likes to write things that amuse her, read things that make her muse, and watch things intellectually of use. She likes to play on words, trampolines, and stages. In her past lives, she was a mafia boss, a Buddhist monk, and a rabbit named Hester.
Alex Mendiola is a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor.
References Davis, Michelle R. 2011. "Schools Seek the Right Mix of Digital Computing Devices." Education Week. Oct. 19. Retrieved October 7, 2012 from http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2011/10/19/01one-to-one.h05.html .
Edick, Heather. "How a Tornado Inspired Innovation in Joplin, MO Schools." Edudemic blog. March 7. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://edudemic.com/2012/03/joplin-tornado-laptops/ .
Federal Communications Commission. 2012. "Digital Textbook Playbook.” Retrieved October 7, 2012 from: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/digital- textbook-playbook .
Federal Communications Commission. 2010. “Connecting America: The Digital Broadband Plan.” Retrieved October 7, 2012 from: http://www.broadband.gov/download-plan/
108 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Hefling, Kimberly. 2012. "Challenge to Schools: Embracing Digital Textbooks." Yahoo Finance. Feb. 1. Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Challenge-schools-Embracing-apf- 3730035119.html .
White House Press Office. 2011 "Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address." Jan. 25. Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/25/remarks-president- state-union-address .
Tomassini, Jason. 2012. "Apple Unveils E-Textbook Strategy for K-12." Jan. 20. Education. Retrieved October 7, 2012, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/01/20/18apple.html.
Van Oot, Torey. 2011. "Steinberg pushes free digital college textbooks for California." Sacramento Bee. Dec. 27. Retrieved October 7, 2012 from: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/12/27/4146712/steinberg-pushes-free- digital.html .
Watters, Audrey. 2012. "What's Wrong with the Department of Education and the FCC's Digital Textbook Push." Hack Education blog. Feb. 3. Retrieved October 7, 2012 from: http://www.hackeducation.com/2012/02/03/digital- textbook-playbook/ .
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 109 BYOD: Bring Your Own Devices Carrie Beattie and Shaza Katrib
Spend a day on any high school campus throughout the nation and make a log of how many cell phones, smartphones, iPads, or other electronic devices you see. Depending on how strategic you are in your location, you could get a range of results. In the hallways during a class change you might see dozens passing by. Hundreds might appear in the cafeteria during lunch hour as students send and receive messages with friends through a myriad of digital realms of communication. In today’s age of electronic connectedness, social media and technological gadgetry, reports such as these would be of no surprise to anyone.
The real question here is how many of these devices you would see within the walls of the classroom. As an ever-expanding amount of students are bringing their own electronic devices to school (and everywhere else they go for that matter), administrators struggle with the challenge of controlling the usage of personal devices during school hours. Yet, while some schools confront this phenomenon as a burden, others are embracing the use of electronic devices in the classroom, with teachers across the country encouraging their students to BYOD, or bring your own device.
Having students supply their own learning devices is no new idea--colleges and businesses have been doing it for years. But as availability of technology spreads rapidly, owners of electronic devices such as tablets, smartphones, and eReaders are becoming younger. A July 2011 Pew Internet and American Life Project survey reported that 77% of all teens own a cell phone (Pew Internet and American Life Project [2011]).
With this electronic progression, more young people are spending a greater portion of their time with cell phones in hand. Because of the shift towards and the increasing popularity of mobile devices amongst youth, kids and teens are itching to stay connected at all times of the day, even
110 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
during class time. This means that primary and secondary educators are presented with the dilemma of teaching with the technology or asking students to check their devices at the door, which begs the question of whether or not personal electronic devices might be useful in the classroom.
This, in turn, brings us to our first question: how are students already using their phones? We ask this first because our primary interest is to take advantage of the devices and skills students already possess. Obvious answers might include sending and receiving text messages, making phone calls, and taking photographs. So then, secondly, we must ask whether these basic functions have enough intellectual merit to deserve a place in the classroom before moving on to ask these questions for the more advanced features of smartphones and tablets.
Let’s begin with texting. Another recent Pew study showed that 75% of American teens send and receive text messages on their mobile devices, and 63% do it on a daily basis (Marwick & boyd 2012). Studies focusing on the texting teens report an average of fifty texts per day. It need not be said that this is a task that teenagers have mastered, but does it have the ability to lead to learning? Thanks to a set of websites targeting this minefield of possibility, students can use texting in a variety of educational tasks of which we will cite several, referencing one blogger’s highly informative list (Watters 2011).
For starters, Poll Everywhere allows students to text in response to a prompt written by the teacher. Educators can use this free polling service as a way to receive feedback and assess learning through questions or quizzes. A similar service that focuses on usage outside the classroom is StudyBoost. Here, teachers can create batches of questions for students to receive and respond to via text or instant messaging which the students can access at any time, within or outside of the classroom. An additional perk is that students can decide when to receive the texts, meaning that this service simultaneously functions as a flashcard as well as a study reminder. Along the lines of reminders, Remind101 allows teachers to send group text messages to students or parents without the necessity of
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 111 sharing your personal phone number with the group. Yet another service that offers group exchanges is Celly, which allows teachers and students to create a social network in which the members can send and receive group messages, administer polls and receive reminders.
Texting can also be used in conjunction with picture taking to attain noteworthy learning outcomes. No special service is needed for students to take pictures of their work to share with the class, a technique that has the potential for augmenting student ownership since work will be openly shared with classmates. Projects or observations can also be texted to the teacher’s email at no additional fee beyond standard text messaging charges, which could open the door to extending learning beyond the classroom as students search for examples and manifestations of the content in their everyday lives.
However, texting need not be part of the equation in order to fully reap the benefits of that digital camera lingering in most students’ pockets. I’m sure we’ve all encountered the student who prefers to take pictures of the board rather than copy the notes into a notebook. This practice could easily be used by students and teachers to permanently record written text or drawn images, whether teacher or student-generated.
The last of these basic features to be discussed is the simplest, most fundamental of all: phone calls. Initially, it might be difficult to envision how phone calls can serve productive purposes in the classroom. Surprisingly, the key word for this innovative incorporation of technology in the classroom is podcast, and yes we are still on the topic of basic phone features. Services offered by Podlinez allow teachers or students to upload recordings to a database, which can then be accessed by telephone with no additional software required. But the best part is that this podcast- telephone relationship is a two-way street. For example, students can dial in to a number associated with Hipcast and record a message which then appears as a podcast in a designated audio playlist or blog.
Basic phones can be used to record podcasts as well as listen to them later, meaning that teachers can record informative messages regarding homework or class projects that students will be able to access from
112 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
anywhere. Within the walls of the classroom, this feature can be used to assist students who struggle with reading or writing by allowing them to listen to instructions or to vocally record their assignments as a substitute for written work.
As these are just a taste of the possibilities afforded by basic mobile devices, you can only imagine the opportunities opened through the use of smartphones in the classroom. One researcher compared smartphones to laptops, noting the shared features of voice and video calling, sending and receiving email, messaging, searching the Internet, searching databases of scholarly information, organizing citations, accessing a course management system, reading or listening to books and articles, taking photos, playing videos, making videos, setting an alarm clock, using a global positioning satellite (GPS) navigation system, and playing games (Lippincott 2010). Allowing students to bring these devices into the classroom is virtually the same as funding an entire classroom with personal laptops.
As with almost anything in our world, BYOD has its advantages and disadvantages, pros and cons, benefits and consequences. It is often the case that the specific situation determines whether each aspect is an advantage or a disadvantage. A teacher must decide what is truly advantageous and what could have negative consequences and weigh whether using such an approach in their lesson is beneficial to their students and their students’ learning. The following are taken and compiled from Jamieson and Forst (2012), and Ketcham-VanHellemont (2012).
Advantages for students:
• Students are more engaged in learning
• Students learn 21st-century skills
• Students are able to use the same device at home and in school. This is convenient in that it allows students to access class material at home and avoid confusion
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 113 • More student participation, especially among introverts
• Students are able to be more creative in presenting their work
• Students have the opportunity to learn about digital citizenship
• Devices can serve as personalized research tools
• Teachers or students can identify games that correspond to the content and make learning more fun
Disadvantages for students:
• Devices could be distracting
• Use of such devices may make the digital divide more pronounced
• Students are more likely to lose device or have it stolen
Advantages for teachers:
• Immediate assessment results
• Less time required to complete mundane tasks like copying down homework
Disadvantages for teachers:
• Tools, such as applications and programs, may not be common to all devices
• Potential difficulty with including all students in an activity, as some may not have such a device
• Parents not allowing their children to use a device at school
Advantages for schools:
• Cost savings for providing and maintaining technology
114 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
• Technology is in all classrooms, and not just centrally located in a lab
• Provides a big teaching arsenal for teachers, allowing students to view e-textbooks, videos, educational apps, online research, digital learning apps, etc.
Disadvantages for schools:
• Costs in professional development for staff
• Concern of “safe use”
• Filtering certain sites/images
Beyond the issues mentioned above, there are things to consider before teachers can decide whether or not to employ student devices in their classrooms. Find out whether your school supports student devices, if there is a network available for students, and what your school or district acceptable-use policy entails, if there is one (you may have to develop one!) Consider developing rules and guidelines, in accordance with school and/or district principles, to inform all parties, school administration, teachers, students and parents.
m
Carrie Beattie is a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor. She has a Bachelor’s of Arts in Physics from Clemson University. She hopes to teach science and mathematics in rural, low-income areas. Contact: [email protected].
Shaza Katrib is a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor. She has a Bachelor’s of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Michigan State University. One of her goals is to encourage young women to pursue their interests in science, math, and engineering. Contact: [email protected].
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 115 References Education World. n.d. “Getting Started on the Internet: Developing an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP)." Retrieved October 2, 2012, from http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr093.shtml .
Jamieson, Kent, and Simon Forst. [2012]. “BYOD- Bring Your Own Device.” Updated 2013 by Joel Tremblay and Lisa Nevoral. Retrieved October 2, 2012, from: http://sites.wiki.ubc.ca/etec510/BYOD_- _Bring_Your_Own_Device .
Ketcham-VanHellemont, Laura. [2012.] "BYOD & Education." Retrieved March 8, 2013, from http://thinkonline.smarttutor.com/byod-education/.
Lenhart, Amanda. 2012. “Teens, Smartphones, & Texting.” Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved October 2, 2012, from http://pewInternet.org/Reports/2012/Teens-and-smartphones/Summary-of- findings.aspx .
Lippincott, Joan K. 2010. “A Mobile Future for Academic Libraries.” Reference Service Review 38(2), 205-213.
Marwick, Alice, and danah boyd. 2012. “Teens Text More Than Adults, But They’re Still Just Teens.” The Daily Beast. May 20. Retrieved October 2, 2012, from http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/05/20/teens-text- more-than-adults-but-they-re-still-just-teens.html .
Pew Internet and American Life Project. [2011.] “Teen Gadget Ownership.” Trend Data (Teens). Retrieved October 2, 2012, from: http://pewInternet.org/Static-Pages/Trend-Data-(Teens)/Teen-Gadget- Ownership.aspx .
Watters, Audrey. 2011."Texting in the Classroom: Not Just a Distraction." Technology Integration (blog), Edutopia. September 21. Retrieved October 2, 2012, from: http://www.edutopia.org/blog/texting-classroom-audrey-watters.
Zickuhr, Kathryn, and Aaron Smith. 2012. "Digital Differences." Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved March 8, 2013, from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences.aspx .
116 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Digital Behaviors
Media Literacy Abby Boggs and Rayhan El-Alami
As today’s society becomes more and more diverse in terms of classroom material, teachers and students both must be prepared to address the wide array of existing and developing media. A classroom teacher has to have the skills necessary to guide their students through the growing media jungle. The world of media is dense and a teacher has to have tools to help students decode the options in front of them. Without instruction around media literacy for students, comprehension issues will surely arise.But before the issue can even be attempted, it’s necessary to have a solid understanding of what is media resources are out there.
So Just What, Exactly, Is Media Literacy? In it’s most simple terms, media literacy can be described as the ability to evaluate and create various forms of media.
A definition that broad leaves much to be desired, especially since ideas on evaluation and creation, for example, can be widely interpreted. According to the National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE), media literacy consists of communication competencies, including the ability to access, analyze, evaluate, and communicate in a variety of forms, including print and non-print messages (NAMLE, 2012). For educators, media can mean a variety of sources: printed sources, digital items, and even visual and artistic pieces.
So Then, Just Who Is The Media Literate Individual? The media literate individual is someone who is able to think critically about the variety of sources they face each day and find the pieces that are valuable to their everyday life. They can accurately decode messages within non-print sources based on their skills, experiences, and beliefs. They realize that developed media sources are integral parts of our
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 119 democratic nation. Moreover, they realize that media is one of the greatest sources of socialization in today’s society and without a proper understanding of it, they’ll simply be left behind.
In an area like media literacy, there truly is no downside to being highly competent. Someone who can navigate print and digital sources of all kinds is an asset in every environment. In the process of becoming skilled, however, it can be difficult to determine which information is most useful to learn. A teacher must consider the environment where they are working and the students they will be teaching to decide how to instruct others on how to become media literate and specifically, in what areas. The media literacy needs of an elementary school teacher differ greatly from those of a middle or high school teacher.
At the elementary level, one of the most common forms of media literacy education involves teaching students about advertisements. Students work with printed media advertisements, commercials, and movies to learn about how a product is used, how it is presented, and how it is shown to interact with others (Thoman 2003). Middle school students are frequently taught about the different genres of media and how to use them in the works they produce. High school students are frequently taught about the role media can play in their everyday lives, even when they do not notice it. Media within public service announcements (PSAs), advertising on websites, and event sponsorship are introduced to students at this age. They are taught to “expect media where you’d least expect it” (Thoman 2003, 281).
What Are The Scholarly Opinions On Teaching Media Literacy In The Classroom? Because, as indicated above, media literacy encompasses such a wide array of information types, it’s easy to imagine that a wide breadth of differing perspectives would exist around the issue. In general, though, positions on media literacy’s role in education can be categorized into two classifications: traditionalist and pragmatic.
120 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Traditionalist approaches to media literacy can be defined as largely resistant. Rhetoric used by traditionalists argues that visual literacy (and media literacy today can be considered largely visual) is more of a beginners form of literacy than written or even oral literacy (Potter 2008). When people engage with visual information such as videos, pictures, and so on, they are actually engaging at less cognitive depth than if they were listening to or reading the information. Visual literacy, they argue is a matter of perception, while oral and written involve more interpretation and deep thought (Potter 2004). In effect, then, people who rely on visual media for their information don’t process the information as deeply or intellectually as one who might read or listen to it.
From this position, traditionalists will argue that because visual literacy is less cognitively deep, learners should not be taught using visual media. Instead, students should be instructed through more traditional means such as lecturing, writing, and reading. If one of the primary goals of education is to get students to think deeply, critically, and meaningfully, then we ought to provide them with the tools that will help them think that way as much as possible. In addition, if visual literacy just involves perception, then not only is it not furthering students’ critical thinking, but it is inhibiting their ability to grow their critical thinking skills. While traditionalist approaches to media literacy have historically been more common, there has been an increase in more proactive and pragmatic views on visual and general media literacy.
With the realization that we are now living in the age of information and that the current and upcoming generations of learners are digital natives, it is hard to deny the prominence of visual media. This is true regardless of how much cognitive depth perception of visual media requires. Furthermore, not only are students living in the age of information, but they are being exposed to both informational and social messages that influence their everyday beliefs and actions (Potter 2004). Even if visual media is less cognitively engaging, it nevertheless has the power to shape thoughts and ideological positions. One might even argue that because of its pervasiveness, visual media has more power to sway public opinion and discourse than its oral or written counterparts.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 121 Keeping all of this in mind, pragmatists argue, it is now the duty of teachers to help students make sense of the flood of information they receive through the media, regardless of whether it’s visual, oral or written. As indicated by some studies (Brumberger 2011), the fact that modern students are "digital natives" (Prensky 2001) does not mean they intrinsically know how to critically assess the information they are consuming. Not only do teachers need to help learners navigate this information, but they also need to arm them with the tools to critically evaluate the information they are receiving through various media outlets. Teachers need to get students to start thinking differently about what they see, hear, and read.
How Can Teachers Effectively Start Helping Students Think Differently About Visual And General Media? Regardless of the current cognitive depth visual media requires of its viewers, pragmatists are pushing educators to think in new ways about visual literacy. Many new and innovative methods of engaging students in learning through modern media have been developed, and more and more options are emerging daily. The true test at this point for educators taking the pragmatic stance on media literacy is how to weave through all the different media literacy tools out there efficiently and effectively.
A helpful tip to keep in mind is the use of centralized resource pages. Websites for organizations such as the Center for Media Literacy (http://medialit.org), PBS Teachers (http://pbs.org/teachers), the National Association for Media Literacy Education (http://namle.net), and so on often provide categorized resource pages. These resource centers offer educators a wide array of tools, ideas, and articles that can help guide their teaching media literacy. The suggestions posted on these resource pages are usually geared for teachers and have been tried out or at least looked over by others promoting media literacy. If you find yourself unsure of where to begin, or getting lost between all the different suggestions, resource pages are a great place to start your search for effective media literacy tools.
122 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
A general rule of thumb to follow is to “focus on usefulness as a goal” (Potter 2008, 8). It’s easy to get lost between all the different media tools that are available. Social networking sites alone can end up using a lot of your valuable time without necessarily giving you the learning results you are looking for. When identifying media tools that you think may be useful in your classroom, keep in mind what objective you have for using that tool. For example, if you want to help students better synthesize propaganda images, identify different visual media in which propaganda is pervasive and create activities that serve your goal. Don’t attempt to bring in too many different types of media examples in which both you and your student could get lost. Focus your efforts as much as possible and let efficiency guide you.
Finally, you may not necessarily have jumped on the pragmatist boat. Many educators still hold dear the types of technologies and methods they were taught with and are used to seeing (Kolb 2012). If you still feel unsure about the role you should play in helping students become more media literate in your classroom, try checking out more information in scholarly databases about media literacy. Again, some of the websites listed above would be a great place to start. More than that though, you may want to check to see what types of professional development opportunities exist around media literacy at your local school. These opportunities may deal directly with media literacy issues, or may be cloaked as technology trainings/tips. Becoming more familiar with the types of media that students are immersed in, and the ways they navigate that media, will help you gain confidence in addressing the issue of media literacy in your classroom. This is true regardless of whether you are a traditionalist of a pragmatist.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 123 Welcome To The Age Of Information … Navigating a media-filled world will never be an easy task. As our society becomes filled with more advertisements and other forms of media, we need to be aware of how this affects us as educators and the influence it can have on our students. The media literate educator is not the educator of the future—they are the educator of this very moment in time. They must make the right decisions about what kinds of media to make available to their students, and about how to help their students evaluate and use visual media thoughtfully. Welcome to the age of information…
m
A nearly life-long resident of Michigan, Abby Boggs is a graduate student in the University of Michigan’s SECMAC program, studying social studies education. An avid collector of sock monkeys and Chuck Taylor’s, she earned bachelor’s degrees in Political Science, Public History, and Gender Studies from Western Michigan University and a Master’s degree in Historic Preservation from Eastern Michigan University. Abby hopes to teach history or government in the secondary level.
Rayhan El-Alami is a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor.
References Brumberger, Eva. 2011. "Visual Literacy and the Digital Native: An Examination of the Millennial Learner. " International Visual Literacy Association. 30(1), 19-46.
Kolb, Liz. 2012. "Cell Phone Use in the Classroom." Lecture to Education 504 class, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor, Sept. 29.
National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE). n.d. “Media Literacy Defined.” Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://namle.net/publications/media-literacy-definitions/
124 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Potter, W. James. 2008. Media Literacy, 4th ed.. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Potter, W. James. 2004. Theory of Media Literacy: A Cognitive Approach. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Prensky, Marc. 2001. "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part I." On The Horizon 9(5), 1-6.
Thoman, Elizabeth. 2003. “A Guided Tour of the Best Resources for Teaching,” The Clearing House 76(6), July/August, 280.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 125 Cyberbullying Lakeza S. Ball and Katherine Strong
Today, bullying has reached new levels of concern. With children’s increased access to various forms of technology, bullying is no longer something that kids only experience on the playground. These digital natives now deal with an electronic form of bullying known as cyberbullying.
Definition: What is Cyberbullying? Cyberbullying is a new form of bullying that has emerged with the increase in online networks. Cyberbullying is formally defined as willful and repeated harm inflicted on others through technologies such as phones and computers (Cyberbullying Research Center n.d.). Because cyberbullying occurs electronically, it is not immediately visible to adults or other authority figures, making it more difficult to detect, monitor, and control. Harassment through technology may occur via texting, email, blogging, and through online social media sites. As a result of its electronic nature, this form of harassment has the ability to reach a large audience at the click of a button, potentially harming an even greater number of students than traditional bullying. Furthermore, because children have access to technology 24-7, cyberbullying may occur at any time, including weekends and times that children are not typically in contact with one another. This unique feature of cyberbullying makes it even more pervasive than traditional bullying (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Support the Kids Involved,” 2012).
Importance of the Issue: Stories of bullies and their victims can be tragic. The story of 14-year-old Jamey Rodemeyer is one instance of this tragedy. Jamey was repeatedly
126 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
bullied online by classmates for being gay. After soliciting help from others and being repeatedly ignored, Jamey Rodemeyer took his own life (James 2011). Jamey’s story is not unique. There is the story of 15-year- old Justin Aaberg who also committed suicide after being bullied (James 2011), and there is the story of Samantha Johnson and several other students in Minnesota who committed suicide after being bullied by classmates (Erdely 2012). Bullying is a serious issue with serious consequences.
Because cyberbullying allows for the concealment of a user’s identity, and because it takes place in a domain where the perpetrator and victim are not in direct contact, cyberbullying has been referred to as a “cowardly form of bullying” (Kowalski et al 2008, 64). For example, a student may send messages from anonymous sources or sources that are unfamiliar to the recipient, making it more challenging to find the perpetrator and also making children feel that, because their actions are anonymous, they may participate in behaviors in which they would otherwise not participate. Students say, “It’s easier to fight online, because you feel more brave and in control ...On Facebook, you can be as mean as you want” (Hoffman 2010, under "Middle School Misery"). One father noted that “Kids deal with meanness all the time and many can handle it.... But it never lasts as long as it does now, online” (Hoffman 2010, under "The Legal Battles").
Researcher danah boyd notes that, “Bullies offline are bullies online. Troubled kids offline are troubled kids online” (boyd 2007). The issues that students face with bullies online are real, and these issues are demonstrated by the real life consequences that result from cyberbullying. As educators, it is our duty to create a safe learning environment for our students. Part of that duty involves monitoring student behavior and protecting students from cyberbullying that might occur as a result of students’ use of technology in the classroom.
How to Take Action There are several ways that educators may protect students from cyberbullies. Some methods are proactive, making attempts to prevent
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 127 cyberbullying, while other methods are reactive, addressing issues after they occur.
Proactive Measures
One proactive way of preventing cyberbullying is to educate students about this form of bullying. Teachers and administrators may engage students in a school wide campaign where students plan, design, and implement creative solutions and interventions for cyberbullying. These campaigns may include public awareness events that address issues affecting school climate such as bullying, cliques, racism, and homophobia (Swearer et al 2012). The National Crime Prevention Council discusses the importance of raising awareness about cyberbullying (National Crime Prevention Council 2008). In addition to raising awareness, they also encourage schools to develop explicit rules against cyberbullying in order to protect students (National Crime Prevention Council 2008).
Anti-bullying programs may also be used to prevent bullying in schools and online. However, once these programs are in place, their effectiveness must be assessed in order to ensure that they really are protecting students and helping to prevent cyberbullying (boyd 2011). One method of assessing these programs is to solicit anonymous feedback (e.g. surveys) from the student body regarding their experiences with cyberbullying and bullying in general. Involving students in the assessment process helps them think metacognitively about the dynamics of their school and also provides instructors with feedback about the students’ perceptions of the school climate. Assessments should give insight into how often cyberbullying occurs, where it happens, how students and adults intervene, and whether or not preventative efforts are working (Swearer et al 2012).
Cyberbullying may be limited by providing students with anonymous tip sites where they can inform teachers and administrators of instances of cyberbullying. This tool may be used by both victims of bullying and by bystanders who witness bullying. Teachers and administrators should also be aware of sites such as Formspring that might prompt cyberbullying. This site is particularly noteworthy because of the role it played in the
128 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
suicide of Jamey Rodemeyer (James 2011). The website Formspring allows its users to anonymously post opinions on other users’ profile pages, providing a unique medium in which bullying might occur. The mission of the site is “to enable millions of people around the world to share their perspective on anything” (Formspring 2011). While the site encourages appropriate use, it still provides users with an anonymity that has been shown to encourage cyberbullying (Hoffman 2010). It is vital that teachers and administrators monitor the sites that their students are using as well as the technologies that are being used in the classroom so that cyberbullying may be prevented, and so that instances of cyberbullying may be addressed promptly and appropriately.
Reactive Measures
Reactive measures to cyberbullying include developing an infrastructure to support students who are victims of cyberbullying. This infrastructure should help students handle the bullying, process what they are dealing with, and learn what they can do to address bullies in order to make the bullying stop (boyd 2007). Other ways to support students who are victims of bullies include the following:
• Listen to and focus on the child in order to learn what has been going on and to show the child that you want to help.
• Assure the child that the bullying is not their fault.
• Be aware that children who are victims of bullying may struggle with talking about their experiences, and consider referring them to a school counselor or psychologist.
• Ask the child what can be done to make him or her feel safe. As the child is not at fault and should punished for being bullied, changes to the child’s routine should be limited. Such changes might include re-arranging the classroom or bus seating chart to suit the needs of the student. At the same time, it is imperative that the student who is the victim of the bullying not be singled out.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 129 • Maintain open communication between teachers, administrators, and parents to discuss the steps to take to address the bullying in light of limitations based on policies and laws (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Support the Kids Involved,” 2012)
• Encourage parents to use the school or other officials as mediators between them and the parents of the other student, rather than directly contacting the perpetrator’s parents (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Support the Kids Involved,” 2012)
Educators should NOT do the following:
• DON’T try to scare students with frightening videos, dramatic statistics, and a focus on suicide as an inevitable outcome of bullying (Swearer at al 2012).
• DON’T tell the child to ignore the bullying (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Support the Kids Involved,” 2012)
• DON’T blame the child for being bullied (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Support the Kids Involved,” 2012)
• DON’T tell the child to physically fight back against the bully, as this may lead to the child being hurt, suspended, or expelled (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Support the Kids Involved,” 2012)
Legal Complications In the 1969 case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court ruled that “First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment (Supreme Court of the United States, 1969). Furthermore, “A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments (Supreme Court of the United States, 1969). As a result of this ruling, schools have
130 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
struggled to deal with cyberbullies whose actions do not directly interfere with school discipline.
In the case of J.S. v. Blue Mountain School District, a student made fun of her school principal over MySpace, accusing him of being a pedophile and a sex addict, and was subsequently suspended. The court ruled, however, that the student had not caused substantial disruption to the school, and the school district, in suspending the student, had violated the student’s right to free speech (Carillo 2012). While the reputation of the principal was tainted as a result of the student’s accusations, the school was unable to take action against the student. In the similar case of Layshock v. Hermitage School District, a student used MySpace to accuse his principal of being a drug user. He even created a fake profile of his principal. The court ruled that the student had not disrupted the school and that the school could not punish the student for something that occurred outside the context of the school (Carillo 2012). Again, the school was legally unable to take action against the student for cyberbullying.
In the case of Kowalski v. Berkeley County School District, the court ruled in favor of the school. The student at question in this case had created a MySpace chat group that made derogatory claims about another student. When the student was suspended for creating this chat group, the student’s parents filed suit against the school. The court found, however, that the student had caused substantial disruption to the school. Furthermore, regarding the issue that the offense took place off-campus, the court ruled that the speech “was sufficiently strong to justify the action taken by school officials in carrying out their role as the trustees of the student body’s well-being (Carillo 2012).
Given these rulings, and others, it is difficult to determine where the jurisdiction of the school lies. Can schools suspend students for acts of bullying that occur outside of the school? What determines “substantial disruption” to the school? What rights do schools have to protect their students from bullies and from cyberbullies in particular?
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 131 In light of the cases filed against schools that have attempted to discipline cyberbullies, StopCyberbullying.org offers advice on how schools might combat cyberbullying within the legal constraints. The authors of this site recommend that schools work in partnerships with parents to combat bullying, that they educate students on both cyberbullying and the law, and that they make a provision in their acceptable use policy that reserves their “right to discipline the student for actions taken off-campus if they are intended to have an effect on a student or they adversely affect the safety and well-being of a student while in school (Stop Cyberbullying 2005). This provision serves as a contract between students and schools, and it gives schools the right to address cyberbullying and bullying that occurs off-campus.
m
Lakeza S. Ball, a Michigan native, earned a Bachelor of Business Administration Degree from the University of Notre Dame where she double majored in Finance and Business Economics and Computer Applications. Upon completion of her undergraduate studies she pursued a career in Information Technology where she worked for nearly 17 years. Now a graduate student at the University of Michigan she is working towards a Masters of Education degree and Teaching Certification in Secondary Education for Mathematics and Computer Science. Her areas of interest include the Word of God, Personal Finance, Health and Nutrition, Physical Fitness, Tennis, and Cooking.
Katherine Strong is a current graduate student at the University of Michigan. She completed a Bachelor’s of Science at Calvin College, receiving degrees in Mathematics, Physics, Spanish, and English. She is now pursuing a Master’s degree in Education with the goal of teaching high school math or science. Katherine has worked with students in a variety of settings including tutoring, summer camps, club sports teams, and Girl Scouts. She hopes to add to these experiences with her work in the teaching profession. Outside of the field of Education, Katherine has worked in a variety of positions including astronomical research, grounds maintenance, food service, and secretariat work.
132 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
References Formspring. n.d. “About Formspring.” Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.formspring.me/about/. boyd, danah. 2007. “Cyberbullying.” April 7. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2007/04/07/cyberbullying.html . boyd, danah. 2011. “The Unintended Consequences of Cyberbullying Rhetoric.” September 22. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2011/09/23/the-unintended- consequences-of-cyberbullying-rhetoric.html .
Carrillo, Christian. [2012.] “The Supreme Court’s Refusal to Hear Cyberbullying Cases Leaves Law Unclear.” Morris Polich & Purdy LLP. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.mpplaw.com/files/Publication/691836d4-078b-454b- b0d3-306f2651471e/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/c2ed8db4-f043- 4194-ba82-324935e874eb/Supreme-Courts-Refusal-to-Hear-Cyberbullying- Cases.pdf .
Cyberbullying Research Center. n.d. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://cyberbullying.us/.
Erdely, Sabrina. 2012. “One Town’s War on Gay Teens.” Rolling Stone, Feb. 2. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/one-towns-war-on-gay-teens- 20120202 .
Hoffman, Jan. 2010. “Online Bullies Pull Schools Into the Fray.” The New York Times. June 27. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/style/28bully.html.
James, Susan Donaldson. 2011 “Jamey Rodemeyer Suicide: Police Consider Criminal Bullying Charges.” ABC News (online), Sept. 22. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://abcnews.go.com/Health/jamey-rodemeyer-suicide-ny- police-open-criminal-investigation/story?id=14580832 .
Kowalski, Robin M., Sue Limber, and Patricia Agatston. 2008. Cyber Bullying: Bullying in the Digital Age. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 133 National Crime Prevention Council. 2008. "Cyberbullying Offending and Victimization.” March 5. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.ncpc.org/resources/files/pdf/bullying/cyberbullying-offending-and- victimization.pdf .
“Secondary MAC Effective Teaching Standards.” 2012. Handout from EDUC- 511: Records of Practice. University of Michigan. Ann Arbor, MI, June.
Stop Cyberbullying. 2005. “What is Cyberbullying, Exactly?” June 27. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.stopcyberbullying.org/what_is_cyberbullying_exactly.html .
Supreme Court of the United States. “Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District.” February 24, 1969.
Swearer, Susan, Mia Doces, Lisa Jones, and Anne Collier. 2012. “Bullying prevention 101 for schools: Dos and don’ts.” In The Kinder & Braver Worlds Project: Research Series. Cambridge, MA: Berkman Center for Internet & Society. Retrieved January 28, 2013, from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/publications/2012/kbw_bullying+prevention_101 _for_schools .
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. n.d.(a). "Support the Kids Involved." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from . http://www.stopbullying.gov/respond/support-kids- involved/index.html .
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. n.d.(b)."What is Cyberbullying." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved October 4, 2012, from http://www.stopbullying.gov/cyberbullying/what-is- it/index.html .
134 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Reading Online Grahm Hannah and Saskia Warren
Power On More and more, the 21st-century culture of technology encourages educators to integrate the Internet and eReaders into their practices. We assume that students of the digital age will not only prefer screens to pages, but will live in a world that requires them to do so. Therefore, we feel that to hold their attention and stay competitive in the modern world, teachers should “upgrade” as well. Is that evolution a helpful one, though? Recent studies indicate that this is a complex question. Some studies trumpet problems with critical thinking decay, heightened distractibility, and comprehension deficits, while others point to the potential for streamlining the reading process, offering insight into reading habits, assisting a variety of learners, and making readily accessible a wealth of knowledge. So, what are the realities of reading online and on devices? How can teachers make best use of the new toys and more traditional tools to augment student comprehension while also preparing them for the techno-joyous world?
Why All the Fuss? Schools all over the country are pushing their teachers to bring more technology into the classroom, and who can blame them? Just a few years ago, barely anyone had a cell phone, and when they did, it was just for calling people; now, a new survey has found that “the average age for a first cell phone has fallen to 11.6-years-old,” and calling has become a secondary feature compared to all the other stuff kids can do on their mobile devices (“The Online Mom” 2011). Indeed, we have digital media all around us, and many agree with the sentiment that “digital education…is key to preparing youngsters for the modern world” (Postal 2012). What are the arguments regarding the potential educational
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 135 benefits of eReaders, particularly as they relate to the accessibility of information?
More information certainly is available; rather than having to find a dictionary, an encyclopedia, or a card catalog, all a kid has to do is click on the links in whatever he is reading. Kindle features pop-up dictionaries, so that readers can immediately look up words (Fry & Gosky 2008). When reading online, students can easily search for related articles or explanations of references they do not understand. Kindle aficionados insist that eReaders also assist with comprehension, and many students claim that Kindle’s Text to Speech feature aids understanding and helps build vocabulary. It might even encourage more reading, as Kindle and Nook both recommend books and allow readers to download samples, thereby streamlining the selection process (Engel-Unruh, 2010). There is also the matter of physical accessibility. The ability to change font size and screen contrast can help certain readers better approach the text, making the reading process less laborious and easier on the eyes (Fitzgerald 2009). It is also more convenient; rather than having to lug home lots of heavy books, all students’ reading would reside in one easily-portable object.
There is also the lure of speed. Those in favor of using online reading as a tool for the rapid dissemination of knowledge claim that it will vastly increase the amount of information ingested by an increasingly information-hungry society. People have been consuming this electronically available literature at extremely impressive rates. For example, “It takes the average reader just seven hours to read the final book in Suzanne Collins’s Hunger Games trilogy on the Kobo e-reader- about 57 pages an hour” (Alter 2012). Therefore, it would appear that the goal has been achieved: if people are turning the pages, they must be processing all of it, and therefore learning more. Encouraging for reading teachers, right? In some ways, perhaps, but the picture is more complex than it might appear.
136 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Be Careful What You Wish For These starry-eyed arguments for technology overlook the challenges it presents. Many worry about the repercussions of making speed of reading such a paramount value, cautioning us that much of what kids read is “hastily produced and consumed,” quite possibly to their detriment (Bauerlein 2011, 30). Flipping through fifty-seven pages an hour does not necessarily mean that you comprehend each word or even each page; indeed, it is more likely that you are missing key information. Is how quickly you read a book like The Hunger Games a great indicator of how you will or should read To Kill a Mockingbird or Brave New World? Probably not. It is not enough for more information to be seen; it must also be read and understood. We need to teach students the value of “a slow and deliberate pace”; otherwise, they will continue to “read quickly and fail to comprehend” (Bauerlein 2011, 30).
With the Internet at their fingertips, it is easier for students to get distracted while reading, thereby constraining their engagement with the text. Being able to look up supplementary information instantly is a plus, but critics argue that the temptation to follow a thread farther and farther away from the original topic or the assigned text is too great; there are always “pages to view, links to follow, media supplements to incorporate” (Bauerlein 2008, 10). With the printed word, there is only the material itself, as “(c)onventional texts...present information shaped by the author, and readers have little choice but to follow the author’s intended plot or expository structure” (Bauerlein 2008, 10). Online, there is an unending and relentlessly tempting rabbit hole down which to disappear. When they are on their Kindles or reading on a computer, it is all but impossible to monitor whether or not they are even reading the right thing. Inability to focus will means they will not be prepared for more advanced reading in college. According to Jakob Nielsen’s studies on how people read pages on a screen, “only one in six subjects read Web pages linearly, sentence by sentence” (Nielsen in Bauerlein 2008, 10). Readers often skim across, looking for the gist, rather than reading more deeply. This racing across the page undermines their comprehension, but it also means they “are easily frustrated when not instantly gratified in their rapid search for immediate answers” (Bauerlein 2008, 10). They are forgetting the pleasure
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 137 and importance of “the animating power of inwardness,” activated by a lingering and thoughtful engagement with the text which “the triumph of the digital” threatens (Bauerlein 2008, 10).
On a purely neurological level, many recent studies warn us of “the dangers of screen time” (Ehrcke, 2012). In an article for Psychology Today written in early 2012, Dr. Larry Rosen described a study he had completed on three hundred students from middle school, high school, and university, observing their study habits and focus. His team learned that not only could these students stay on task for only three minutes at a time, always tempted away by their laptops or smartphones, but that their inability to focus predicted their academic success: “The worst students were those who consumed more media each day and had a preference for working on several tasks at the same time and switching back and forth between them” (Rosen 2012). Dr. Stuart Shankar is a Canadian researcher interested in self-regulation. He finds that we are dealing with “a generation of children whose nervous system is essentially being overstimulated” for reasons that include “increased use of the television, video games and the internet” (Hunter 2012). As it stands, “school is one place where children currently escape from their gadgets and screens,” and we must consider whether that sanctuary might be worth preserving (Ehrcke 2012).
All Is Not Lost: What You Can Do First and foremost, we must take the time to discuss with our students that digital reading is a different form of reading, and must be approached as such. Be explicit regarding the need for “new comprehension strategies”: students need to plan, for instance, how “to navigate this information” so they will properly absorb it, not just leap right into the text itself like they might a non-interactive version (Coiro 2003). We need to model for our students strategies for more successful engagement with digital texts. No matter our personal feelings, the odds are that students will use digital texts in college, and during the rest of their lives, and they need to know how to approach them with focus and discipline. One of these strategies might be think-alouds, as we use with regular reading
138 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
instruction. According to research done by Julie Coiro at the University of Rhode Island, think-alouds focused on how to approach online reading tasks, including navigating and negotiating online texts, finding productive pathways through online texts, and developing strategies for responding to online texts constitute the ultimate solution (Coiro 2011). This navigational instruction should include explaining the tools available to students, such as how to take notes and underline on a computer, and how to identify reliable sources.
In such a tricky field, it is essential to be aware of the individual needs of students: who can be trusted to stay on task, and who would benefit from supervision? Of course it is always a challenge to know when kids are paying attention rather than daydreaming, but when it is only the click of a tab that hides or reveals the true focus of their attention, it is even more important to know which students are self-motivated and disciplined, and which will require a more watchful eye. That issue raises the question of personal preference: should we allow students to choose whether they use a printed book or an electronic alternative, or should we determine that for them? The answer is the same: as teachers, we must know our students. We must decide what is appropriate for them. After all, education is about showing people all the options, and the tools for how to discern when to use each.
Part of using eReaders, like any other tool, is knowing when not to use it. We do not need to throw the baby out with the bathwater; you wouldn’t use a chainsaw to do the job of a kitchen knife. Technology is a tool, not a toy, and we need to use it for a purpose, not just for the sake of using it. In order to teach our students how to use it, we must also teach them how to treat it with respect and temperance. Allow—even encourage—your students to take breathers from screens; implement the “media diet” many psychologists recommend (Christakis 2011). Whether you are a devoted Luddite or an enthusiastic techie, do not abandon either approach. Students need each side--give them both.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 139 Saskia Warren studied English and Anthropology at Kenyon College, and is pursuing her Master’s and Certification in Secondary English Education at the University of Michigan. She believes in involving students in shaping their education, teaching grammar and style, incorporating both traditional and progressive practice, and the diversification of approaches.
Grahm Hannah is a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor.
References Alter, Alexandra. 2012. "Your E-Book is Reading You." Wall Street Journal, July 19. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230487030457749095005 1438304.html.
Bauerlein, Mark. 2008. "Online Literacy is a Lesser Kind." Chronicle of Higher Education. Sept. 18. Retrieved March 8, 2013, from http://chronicle.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/article/Online-Literacy-Is-a- Lesser/28307/ .
Bauerlein, Mark. 2011. "Too Dumb for Complex Texts?"Educational Leadership 68(5), 28-33. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational- leadership/feb11/vol68/num05/Too-Dumb-for-Complex- Texts%C2%A2.aspx .
Christakis, Dimitri. 2011. "Media and Children." Video of Talk Presented at TEDxRainier. Retrieved March 3, 2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BoT7qH_uV No .
Coiro, Julie. 2003. " Reading Comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our Understanding of Reading Comprehension to Encompass New Literacies." The Reading Teacher , Vol. 56(5), Feb., 458-464. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20205224
140 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Coiro, Julie 2011. "Talking About Reading as Thinking: Modeling the Hidden Complexities of Online Reading Comprehension." Theory Into Practice 50(2), 107-115. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23020747
Ehrcke, Tara. 2012. "Technology in School? How Much Is Too Much." Staffroom Confidential blog. Nov. 20. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://www.staffroomconfidential.com/2012/11/technology-in-school-how- much-is-too.html .
Engel-Unruh, Melissa. 2010. ReKindling an Interest in Reading with At-risk Students. Library Media Connection 29(3), Nov./Dec., 54-56.
Fitzgerald, Nancy Shuman. 2009. Exploring the Effects of Online Instruction on Reading Comprehension Achievement of Students with Learning Disabilities. University of Nevada, Las Vegas. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Fry, Sara Winstead, and Ross Gosky. 2008. "Supporting Social Studies Reading Comprehension with an Electronic Pop-up Dictionary." Journal of Research on Technology in Education 40(2), 127-139.
Hunter, Tamara. 2012. "Children’s Stress Levels Soar." The West Australian. June 14. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/lifestyle/a/-/article/13946118/childrens- stress-levels-soar/
Online Mom (2011). “Average age for first cell phone is now 11.6 years-old.” Blog Post. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from: http://www.theonlinemom.com/secondary.asp?id=1981
Postal, Leslie. 2012. "Educational Leaders Want More Than $400M to Expand Digital Learning." The Orlando Sentinel. Oct. 14. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-10-14/features/os-florida- schools-digital-technology-20121014_1_digital-content-digital-education- digital-upgrades
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 141 Rosen, Larry. 2012. "Attention Alert: A Study on Distraction Reveals Some Surprises." Rewired: The Science of Technology blog, Psychology Today. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rewired-the-psychology- technology/201204/attention-alert-study-distraction-reveals-some-surpris .
142 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Instructional Strategies
Gamifying the Classroom Shelley Catalan and Dylan Rustenholtz
Imagination, pretending, and engagement with virtual and digital dimensions all seem to have one thing in common: they are escapes from reality. In our world today, where education is heavily emphasized as the key to success, and where school increasingly becomes the venue for intense pressure upon both students and teacher, the stakes of this game of success run high. But a handful of teachers have found that bringing a new kind of game to the classroom changes the rules completely--the name of this technique is gamification, which means using the principles of game design within the classroom context in order to facilitate learning.
Gamification does not refer to any specific type of game, rather it implies the shaping of a unit or lesson according to the structures and incentives found in the design of games. In other words, it is the application of game design to contexts that do not explicitly involve games. The secondary education classroom is the perfect example of this type of non-game context.
The benefits of teaching through gamification, or “gamifying” a lesson, are manifest in the subtle attitudinal takeaways that students gain as a result of their engagement with games. For example, perseverance and a willingness to encounter, but also persist beyond failure are the kinds of skills that empower students and prepare them for learning.
A striking component of a gamified lesson structure is that real-life consequences are isolated from the consequences that happen in the game. In other words, winning, losing, earning points, and other events taking place within the dimensions of the game do not extend their impact into real life. This is not to say that students will not take away effects and lessons of their experiences within the game; it means, rather, that the implications of failure take place only within this specific, protected space. Naturally, this has the effect of providing students with opportunities to fail, and to try again, and it is here that the lesson of perseverance and
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 145 progressing past a single goal becomes one benefit from a student’s participation in a gamified lesson structure.
Teachers Amanda Pratt and Tim Saunders have taken ownership of this instructional technique, and have used games in their classroom to explore how they affect student motivation, collaboration, and understanding of content. Their paper “Effects of Gamified Units on Student Motivation, Learning, and Collaboration” discusses their findings and experiences as a result of gamifying their classrooms. Pratt and Saunders (2012) refer to Carol Ames’ concept of the “mastery goal orientation,” a framework that emphasizes that effort rather than ability contributes to student success. Within this framework, there is a focus on learning and skill development, and students understand the importance of perseverance in challenging situations, and progressing past a single goal. Classrooms that are shaped around the mastery goal orientation feature collaboration between students, challenging and meaningful tasks, and a shared authority in which students enjoy the freedom of choice in the completion of those tasks.
Perhaps the idea of a “game” makes the most sense in the context of a class of younger students. Labeling an instructional method with this word might make its affiliated teaching techniques seem infantile, condescending, and irrelevant to lessons that deal with the sort of “real world” skills that students need. But using game structures does not merely imply using childish methods to make learning “fun.” Gamification is indeed inspired by the concept of games--but its deeper structures allow it to be applied within a variety of classrooms and with the participation of students of all ages. When considering the merits of a gamified lesson or unit, it is important to recognize another phenomenon that occurs within the game’s dimensions: learning takes place even if learning is not named as a specific objective of the game. In other words, learning is facilitated during the process of playing, and when it is done within the rules of the game.
Amanda Pratt’s high school world history students participated in this exact sort of learning experience through a gamified unit about the
146 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Middle Ages and Renaissance society called “Kingdom Quest.” This unit was styled as a character-driven simulation, in which students researched and acted out the roles of various characters. The students also had to create avatars for themselves, based on research of historical portraits of actual people. Students were required to act in character while they were in the classroom, engaging with the social rules and norms of their historical society. Pratt’s gamified unit had the students conducting research, as well as using higher-order thinking processes through the act of role-playing. Formative assessments required the students to demonstrate their understanding of concepts like the feudal system, and relationships between characters of different social classes. Kindgom Quest, formatted as a simulation, allowed the students to learn the important concepts of the unit through the engaging activity of role play.
An exploration of a similar concept of learning, one that occurs within the context of acquiring language in an academic setting, will help illuminate how learning within a gamified system might function. Freeman and Freeman (2007) present the theory of teaching language through content. Rather than making grammar and vocabulary separate learning objectives and shaping lessons around these, Freeman and Freeman explain how a focus on acquiring content area knowledge helps facilitate simultaneous acquisition of the new language. This is referred to as “content-based language teaching.” The authors also cite Chomsky’s theory of linguistics, which holds that first languages are acquired rather than learned. This indicates differentiation between acquisition and learning, but it also refers to the unique relationship between the two, particularly within the framework of content-based language teaching. The implications of this framework, specifically in regards to how efforts toward a learning objective might facilitate the simultaneous acquisition of other skills, is directly applicable to understanding how a gamified lesson or unit might facilitate the acquisition of content area knowledge, while directly focusing on learning to play (or win) within the dimensions of that game. In other words, content-based language teaching helps language learners acquire the new language, while focusing on learning content area knowledge, while gamifying a lesson helps students acquire their content area knowledge and other valuable skills, while focusing on learning how
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 147 to be successful within the game itself. It is this deep framework that transfers across disciplines, and allows both teachers and students to creatively approach course content within the classroom.
One concern about gamification may stem from teachers’ trepidation about implementing games, or game-like structures, in their classroom. Teachers may be concerned about not having enough instructional time to implement such new strategies, and also about their relevance or usefulness. Furthermore, teachers must overcome the challenge of integrating game design into their curriculum and the culture of their classroom, as well as aligning the activities of the game with specific learning objectives. Fortunately for teachers, there is awareness of these concerns regarding gamification of the classroom, and resources and advice are available online. One benefit of gamifying a unit or lesson is that many games are offered online for free, and are easily accessible. Accessibility concerns motivated a recent episode of teacher Zack Gilbert’s EdGamer podcast (“EdGamer 69: A Quandry in the Classroom?”). Gilbert interviewed Peter Stidwill, a college professor and producer at the Learning Games Network, about a video game Stidwell helped launch called Quandry. Gilbert admits that it can be very difficult for teachers to integrate games into the classroom and that lots of games are what he calls “chocolate covered broccoli,” games that awkwardly attempt to mesh educational purposes and quality gaming features.
Quandry is a game that can be downloaded from the web for free. The website where this game is found provides teachers with helpful resources as well as the game itself. Included is a video of a teacher using the game in the classroom, as well as an instructional game guide and sample lesson plan that includes it. Websites like these allow teachers to have at their disposal games that contribute to substantive learning. As such, the creators of games like Quandry are explicit about how each game can be used in the classroom. The authors’ website includes learning objectives for the game, which allows teachers to provide warrants for the game’s effectiveness in creating a stimulating environment for learning and comprehension.
148 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Made for students age eight to fourteen, Quandry presents students with the unique challenge of creating and managing a human civilization on a different planet. While a key concept of a unit involving this game might be for students to learn about the intricacies of running a society, students do not directly learn this concept. The main goal of the game is to encourage ethical thinking. Quandry was designed for its players to learn and practice skills like perspective-taking, decision-making, and conflict resolution in complicated situations without obvious solutions; furthermore, no particular answer seems clearly right or wrong. Players experience consequences for themselves, for others in the game, and for their fictional planet, as a result of their ethical choices. Another realistic aspect of the game is that players directly interact with other characters in class, thus experiencing conflicts that reflect real-life situations.
One of the guests heard on the podcast, Gerry James, a visual arts teacher, shares the fact that this game meshes well with the “Four Cs” of Twenty First Century Skills: critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. Students, James suggested, could write about social and ethical principles based on what they learn from specific scenarios in this game, and the game structure can be used to help students to identify and create story lines in their own writing.
Teachers can use gamified units in their classrooms to facilitate learning within a creative, highly-engaging, and productive framework. Students learn key concepts, but the activities and tasks they complete are not directly oriented towards doing so. The acquisition of that information comes indirectly from engaging with the content and game-based goals. Students might not feel like they’re learning--but their involvement with the game requires that they are. We know that students will remember what they think about, so if there is a kind of thinking we want our students to experience in order to facilitate learning we can use a game to facilitate such thinking.
m
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 149 Shelley Catalan is a pre-service teacher in the Master of Arts and Certification (MAC) program at the University of Michigan. She received her bachelor’s degree in Italian Language and Literature and will be teaching Italian and English at the secondary education level. She has a particular interest in rhetorical strategy for persuasive writing, as well as pedagogy in relation to language acquisition.
Dylan Rustenholtz is a candidate for teacher certification in the University of Michigan's Secondary MAC program. He did his undergraduate work at the University of Michigan and received a bachelor's degree in Classical Languages and Literature. As a future Latin teacher, one of his goals is to get his students used to speaking Latin in addition to just translating a dead language. He hopes to successfully integrate gamification into my classroom one day.
References Freeman, David, and Yvonne Freeman. 2007. English Language Learners: The Essential Guide. New York: Scholastic. Gilbert, Zach. (host). 2012. “A Quandry in the classroom?” [podcast] EdGamer. Normal, IL: EDReach Network. Sept. 17. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from: http://edreach.us/2012/09/17/edgamer-69-a-quandary-in-the-classroom/ . Pratt, Amanda, and Tim Saunders. "Effects of Gamified Units on Student Motivation, Learning, and Collaboration." (2012). Unpublished Paper.
150 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Flipped Classroom Colleen Kartheiser and Lauren Rovin
Flipped Classroom: What Is It? Picture one of the classes you took in high school. What kind of activity is taking place? Perhaps the teacher is standing at the front of the room, writing on the board or showing a PowerPoint presentation, while students quietly take notes. This is the standard practice in many classrooms: students learn content at school, then practice it at home. But is there a more effective way to instill knowledge?
The concept of the flipped classroom turns this paradigm upside down. In a flipped classroom, content that was traditionally received in class is now received at home! Before they come to class, students are responsible for watching a video lesson that covers the target material. Teachers can create these videos themselves, recording a short lecture (generally around ten minutes) on anything from the Spanish-American War to multiplying fractions. Alternately, teachers can select a video lesson from a variety of online sources. One such resource is the Khan Academy, a website that offers over 3000 videos on a wide range of topics, encompassing math, science and the humanities (Khan Academy 2012). The organization, established by Salman Khan as a non-profit in 2008, has garnered many fans - over 2 million users watch the site’s videos each month. It has also attracted the attention of Microsoft founder Bill Gates, who has supported the organization with a grant of $1.5 million (Thompson 2011). The growing popularity of Khan’s website indicates that video lessons may be the way of the future.
When teachers instruct students to view the content lessons on their own, they free up class time for making sure students understand the material. In the flipped classroom, students take notes at home and do the work in class. Many teachers report positive reactions to this practice. Rob Townsend, a science teacher at Clintondale High School in Clinton Township, Michigan, implemented the flipped classroom when he
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 151 realized that students were having trouble completing homework because they did not have a strong enough grasp on the material (Alvarez, 2012). The flipped classroom allowed Townsend to spend class time working directly with students on projects and activities, ensuring that they developed a solid understanding of the concepts being studied. As a result, students completed a much larger percentage of their assignments, and the quality of their work increased significantly. By implementing the Flipped Classroom method, teachers like Townsend have begun to change the role of the instructor - no longer just delivering information, the teacher can work one-on-one with students to help them explore new skills and concepts.
Background The concept of the flipped classroom was developed in 2007 by Colorado science teachers Jon Bergmann and Aaron Sams. They sought a way to use technology to improve the quality of the time they spent with their students (Noonoo 2012). Bergmann and Sams began creating video lectures for absent students and posting them online; students who had missed class now had access to a convenient way to catch up! These recorded lectures began being used by students who wanted to brush up on concepts learned in class, or to review for exams. Eventually, teachers from around the country came across the videos that Bergmann and Sams had posted, and many of them used the videos in their own classrooms.
As their video lectures continued to meet with a positive response, Bergmann and Sams began to think about taking their idea to the next level - what if they delivered all of their educational content through video? In the book Flip Your Classroom, Sams observes, “The time when students really need me physically present is when they get stuck and need my individual help. They don't need me there in the room with them to yak at them and give them content; they can receive content on their own.” (Bergmann and Sams 2012) By providing students with lectures that they could view on their own time, Bergmann and Sams were able to devote more class time to working directly with students. They found that
152 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
this personalized instruction helped students complete higher quality work in a shorter amount of time.
In the years since the flipped classroom came into existence, a growing body of research has been done on its effects. In their article “Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment,” Maureen J. Lage, Glenn J. Pratt, and Michael Treglia (2000) examined the implications of implementing this practice in an economics class. Through surveys, they found that the majority of both students and instructors preferred the flipped classroom to the traditional classroom. Jeremy Strayer, however, in his dissertation for Ohio State University, found potential negative implications for this practice. He writes, “the flipped classroom contributed to an unsettledness among students (a feeling of being ‘lost’) that students in the traditional classroom did not experience” (Strayer 2007). Since the flipped classroom is a relatively new phenomenon, a great deal more research will need to be done to determine its effectiveness; however, the enthusiasm it has generated may make it worth exploring in your classroom.
Implementing a Flipped Classroom The basic structure for the flipped classroom requires that the teacher create an instructional video for the material being covered. Software that is useful for doing this includes Camtasia (paid software) or Jing in combination with Screencast (a free option). These allow the teacher to capture relevant images or PowerPoint slideshows - as a video or a still screenshot - and then upload them to the web. Teachers seeking a more economical option could use Jing to capture the slideshow, then upload these images to Screencast, where they are then converted into videos. Once on Screencast, the videos can be posted to a class webpage, making the material easily accessible to students.
However, as creating videos can be very time consuming, teachers should know that there are online resources available to which they can refer their students. One of these is the aforementioned Khan Academy, a web
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 153 resource that offers instructional videos in subjects such as math, science, history, and even standardized test preparation.
Now that the basic principles of the flipped classroom have been presented, let’s look at an example of how it can be implemented in a foreign language classroom. Monday, you send the students home with the assignment to watch a video on the future tense. The students would then go home and watch a video that would explain when to use, and how to form the future tense.
Tuesday, the students come to class having watched the video, or viewed the images. In the first five minutes of class they are allowed to ask the teacher clarifying questions. For example, a student might ask, “Profe, am I conjugating this -ar verb correctly?” (This example is in English, and it would be amazing if the student could ask this in the target language, however, to make sure that they understood the lesson, English would be acceptable). Next, the students would break into groups and work on an activity that would utilize the skills from the video: “Write the correct future tense ending for the following verbs…”
As the students work together, they can help one another, ask questions, and figure out the answers as a group. While the students are working together, the teacher can monitor their work by circulating the classroom.
Now, you may be wondering what happens to students who do not have access to the Internet at home, or those who had an away tennis meet three towns over the night before. There are a couple of solutions. If your school has access to a mobile laptop cart, then these students can watch the video lessons in class, while the other students work on the assignment. Another option would be to have the students go to the media center or a computer lab (accompanied by an adult like a student teacher or a classroom aide) and watch the video there.
154 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Criticism and Praise The concept of the flipped classroom seems ideal - the students are held accountable for learning the lesson! There have been some criticisms of the idea in practice, however. The lack of Internet access at home is one such criticism that has already been addressed. Another concern is the amount of time that it would take the teacher to prepare video lessons-- not only would the teacher have to create a video, but they would also have to plan supplemental activities to do in class the following day. However, as previously noted, there are options out there for accessing pre-made videos.
Another hesitation that teachers have with using this style is the fear that they themselves might become obsolete in the classroom. One teacher, Shelley Wright, was excited about the flipped classroom, but after trying it, decided it was not right for her classes. She explains that “our classroom had become a place where students discovered and shared their own resources, while engaging in projects with each other. There was no need for me to assign video homework or create portable lectures” (Wright 2012). This concern about not being necessary in the classroom has not only plagued Wright, but has concerned many educators. As a response to this, many teachers are utilizing this style of teaching selectively, for parts of a unit or once a month.
On the positive side, some find a major benefit of the flipped classroom is that struggling students who might give up on homework at home (due to lack of motivation or lack of parental help available) now have the chance to work through the problems with the help of their teacher and classmates (Tucker 2012). Furthermore, students are able to view the video multiple times, so if they don’t understand the material they have the opportunity to review the subject until they feel comfortable with it.
Another way in which this technique is beneficial is that it allows students who are slow readers to move along at their own pace, and the video format requires less reading than a normal lesson. What’s more, the students will be able to use these videos for supplemental learning - for
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 155 example, they will be able to view the video before an exam if they want to review.
Conclusion We feel that the Flipped Classroom is beneficial to use in the classroom as a way of differentiating instruction. We find that allowing students to watch the lesson at home and complete the assessments in class the following day creates a differentiated lesson. The differentiated lesson affords students the great benefit of working at the own pace and practicing the material in a format that best suits them. Therefore, we believe that the arguments for the Flipped Classroom outweigh those against it because of the benefits it offers for student learning and engagement.
The Flipped Classroom is a way in which educators can change the dynamic of the learning environment. The students can learn the new information on their own, at home, and then come to class to test and demonstrate their understanding of this new information. In this way, they come to class prepared to demonstrate what they learned. It helps to create a successful learning environment because it reaches the whole range of students, visual, auditory, and tactile learners.
As educators the Flipped Classroom will be beneficial for us as well. By providing these videos for our students we will be constantly re-evaluating our own relationship and familiarity with technology, which will allow us to be more available and accessible to our students. If this sounds interesting to you, give it a try!
m
!
Colleen Kartheiser is from Milwaukee, Wisconsin. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Comparative Literature and French from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and is currently pursuing her master’s degree in secondary education at the University of Michigan. She hopes to teach French in either middle school or high school.
156 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Lauren Rovin is from Marquette, Michigan. She is a graduate student at the University of Michigan’s School of Education. She is getting certified to teach secondary Spanish. In her undergraduate studies she received a Bachelor’s of Arts in Spanish with a minor in Latino Studies. She is fascinated with the use of technology in the classroom, and is looking to use it in her placement – as her cooperating teacher utilizes this style of teaching – and in the future. She hopes to return to Marquette to teach Spanish at her alma mater.
References Alvarez, Brenda. 2011. “Flipping the Classroom: Homework in Class, Lessons at Home.” National Education Association Priority Schools Website, Sept. 30. Retrieved October 24, 2012 from http://neapriorityschools.org/successful- students/flipping-the-classroom-homework-in-class-lessons-at-home-2. Bergmann, Jonathan, and Aaron Sams. 2012. Our Story: Creating the Flipped Classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/112060/chapters/Our-Story@- Creating-The-Flipped-Classroom.aspx. Khan Academy. n.d. Website. www.khanacademy.org. Lage, Maureen, Glenn Platt, and Michael Treglia. 2000. "Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment." The Journal of Economic Education 31(1), 30-43.. Noonoo, Stephen. 2012. "Flipped Learning Founders Set the Record Straight." T.H.E. Journal. June 20. Retrieved October 24, 2012, from http://thejournal.com/articles/2012/06/20/flipped-learning-founders-q-and- a.aspx?=FETCLN. Rodriguez, Erica. 2012. “Teachers 'flip' over technology, but classes are flop for some kids.” Orlando Sentinel, Sept. 16. Retrieved October 24, 2012 from http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-09-16/features/os-flipped- classroom-technology-20120916_1_alra-teacher-classroom-door-social- network Strayer, Jeremy 2007. The Effects of the Classroom Flip on the Learning Environment: A Comparison of Learning Activity in a Traditional Classroom and a Flip Classroom that Used an Intelligent Tutoring System. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi/Strayer%20Jeremy.pdf?osu1189523914. TechSmith. Camtasia Website. Retrieved October 24, 2012 from http://www.techsmith.com/camtasia.html. TechSmith. Jing Website. Retrieved October 24, 2012 from http://www.techsmith.com/jing.html
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 157 Screencast.com. n.d. Website. http://www.screencast.com/ Tucker, Bill. 2012. “The Flipped Classroom,” Education Next, 12(1), Winter. Winter. Retrieved October 24, 2012 from: http://educationnext.org/the- flipped-classroom/ Thompson, Clive 2011.“How Khan Academy is Changing the Rules of Education.” Wired, July 15. Retrieved October 24, 2012 from http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/07/ff_khan/. Wright, Shelley, “The Flip: End of a Love Affair.” Powerful Learning Practice Website. Blog Posting. October 8, 2012. Retrieved October 24, 2012 from: http://plpnetwork.com/2012/10/08/flip-love-affair/
158 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Learning Management Systems Matthew Foran and Chelsea Moszczenski
On a football Saturday afternoon within the University of Michigan student section, a variety of chants echo throughout the game. Most involve support of the home team Wolverines or disgrace of the opposition, while others are critiques of referee callsAnd in those moments where the action has hit a dull period, when the mood is just right, a chant of a different kind has at times popped up.
The chant is, “Let’s go CTools!” a friendly mocking of the university’s Learning Management System (LMS). It can be safely assumed (as demonstrated by this chant) that this LMS, operated through Sakai, is a large part of their learning. Learning Management Systems, in general, have been a staple of many institutions of higher learning for the better part of a decade.
Now, K-12 schools are more frequently using these systems as well. Though these systems seem to be effective at the university level, how easily can their use be transferred to our middle and high schools? This chapter will present what secondary educators need to know about these systems and their benefits, shortcomings, and future. It will also discuss one of the most popular secondary level Learning Management Systems, Edmodo, and will show illustrations of its use in a secondary classroom. It will be up to you, future educators, to decide whether the LMS chant fully takes hold in the secondary classroom or not.
First, it is important to note that there is some debate over what exactly is labeled as an LMS. For the purpose of this chapter, we will use the definition that “Learning Management Systems (also referred to as Virtual Learning Environments, Digital Learning Environments, Course Management Systems or Electronic Learning Environments) are web based applications, running on a server, and accessible with a web browser from any place with an Internet connection. Learning Management Systems give educators tools to create online course websites, and provide
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 159 access to learning materials.” (DeSmet et al, 2012, 688). Programs that simply display attendance and grades to students and parents online should not to be confused with an LMS.
Now that LMS has been defined, the question becomes why is it important? What are its benefits? What are its shortcomings?
Teacher opinions and polls on the use of LMS often are divided – sometimes as evenly as 50/50 as is the case in a recent poll, “The report, “Education Community Attitudes Toward SIS/LMS Solutions,” was based on surveys and focus group sessions involving 1,726 respondents, including 1,010 teachers and 716 administrators and technology leaders at the school and district level. It was conducted and prepared by the Gartner market research firm for the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN) and the American Association of School Administrators (AASA). Funding was provided by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation” (Nagel 2012, 1).
The researchers found that exactly half of the respondents were “satisfied with their school’s learning management system” and that most teachers weren’t using one (Nagel 2012, 1). Why did some teachers approve and some not? The data goes on to show that only “thirty-four percent said the LMS helps stimulate student creativity, but forty-three percent said their LMS helps teachers be more creative. Another forty-six percent said their LMS increases parent involvement, and forty-seven percent said it increases student motivation” (Nagel 2012, 1). The results appear to be a mixed bag.
In considering this “mixed bag” of results, it seems likely that an educator’s LMS experience is made unique by a variety of circumstances. What might some of these circumstances be? First, the amount of training and professional development provided to the teacher is deeply important. Most teachers from the survey expressed that their training was not satisfactory. Though there was also a disconnect on this issue between teachers and administrators in which administrators believed there was more opportunity for training and professional development available than did the teachers.
160 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Teachers often need to see concrete classroom implications to help them first utilize LMS. Additional training is needed to ensure that the teacher understands the many functions of LMS, such as how to utilize discussion threads, video or picture inputs, and assignment options. Without thorough training, a teacher will not be able to fully utilize the best function of LMS --- the tool can be personalized for each classroom’s needs and purposes.
A second factor that influences an educator’s experience with an LMS is the educator’s digital and technological fluency. Anyone over the age of 25 can typically remember a time without the Internet or video games, and are thus considered "digital immigrants" (Prensky 2001) These people have had to learn how to use technology as it has evolved and can easily be intimidated by today’s resources. On the other hand, students who are in school today have a natural type of digital fluency, as their frontal lobes have been stimulated by many forms of technology since birth (Shesky, 2010). These "digital natives" (Prensky 2001) are more comfortable with technology, can often learn new systems with ease, and are typically considered more technologically fluent.
Nevertheless, different LMS come with different levels of user difficulty. Even the most user-friendly systems, such as Edmodo.com, may remain a challenge for “digital immigrants.” Frustration quickly builds and many elements and tools of the LMS will not likely be utilized properly. The experience quickly becomes a negative one for both the educator and for the students. For reasons like this, it appears to be a very difficult decision for administrators to impose the use of an LMS in all of their classrooms.
A third factor that influences LMS effectiveness is the availability of computer and Internet access to students inside and outside the classroom. Many of the advantages of using an LMS turn into issues of equality and fairness when there are students that cannot participate due to lack of Internet access. Though schools often have computer labs available, students typically have to access these areas during valuable class time, which creates other problems. Schools with one-to-one laptop policies
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 161 can help circumvent this problem, though LMS use will be limited to in- class use only.
This type of issue is not nearly as relevant at four-year higher learning institutions where LMS are prevalent. Laptops and Internet access are virtual necessities at these levels, and the enrolled young adults are responsible and expected to use university libraries or public libraries in order to circumvent access issues. College courses require much less time in class and more time in which the students are doing independent work, often utilizing LMS. Moreover, college courses rarely meet five days a week and in many cases meet as infrequently as once a week or once every other week. Because of this condition of college, LMS are needed in order to supplement the activities of the daily classroom. In the same sense, utilization of a LMS may be beneficial in secondary schools with block scheduling. Yet, are they as necessary in classrooms that see each other every day? Perhaps their full realization in secondary schools will stop at the supplementary level, unlike the use in higher education institutions.
The previous three factors in LMS effectiveness also appeared in the report among the top five barriers to increased use of learning management systems (Nagel 2012):
• Repetitive tasks with no shortcuts (cited by 65% of respondents)
• Weak "professional development content" (64%)
• Too few students with Internet access outside of school (63%)
• The LMS doesn't solve important classroom problems (63%)
• Lack of teacher training (59%).
But again, some of the findings are quite positive. For example, “nearly two-thirds --- 62% --- said the LMS in their school helps teachers be more effective. 55% said it helps teachers save time, and fifty percent said it helps increase student achievement” (Nagel 2012, 1).
162 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
What are the types of things these educators are doing to achieve positive results? In classrooms where the teacher has had proper training, is generally tech-savvy, and has a student population with reliable Internet access at home, positive results are attainable. For example, because of the LMS online platform and “on-display” element that shows who is viewing the site, there is the possibility of enhancing student motivation as well as encouraging interaction. The instructor can also provide feedback to students when they are outside of the classroom as well as facilitate discussions at different times or even over extended periods of times. Additionally, an LMS facilitated correctly may include different multimedia formats such as video, audio, images, and text. Moreover, students can gain access to posted course material at any time. Teachers can update materials in real time, allowing students to immediately see changes.
Potentially the most powerful argument in favor of LMS deals with the overall theoretical shift in the education process from teacher-centered to learner-centered. LMS, when implemented effectively, could provide new and substantial ways for this to be realized (Al Naddabi 2007). LMS can help bring the technological experiences students have outside the classroom to the inside, and thus make learning more authentic, collaborative, and ultimately learner-centered (Shesky 2010).
Edmodo in the English Classroom “I think it is a great way to engage in a discussion because it allows everyone a chance to speak up and voice their opinion.”- AP English 12 student on using Edmodo in the classroom
Edmodo.com is one of the emerging LMS for secondary schools, largely due to its relatively simple functionality – enhanced by its Facebook-like design, its social networking advantages, and its free availability, it has become widely-used in classrooms. Funded mostly through grants, the site is ad free and therefore represents a safe place for young learners on the Internet.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 163 One of us (Foran) first learned of Edmodo during a professional development session and, due to the user friendliness of the tool he developed virtual Edmodo “classrooms” for all five of his classes during a professional development session. Of his five classes, only two continue to use Edmodo in any substantial capacity. These two classrooms are the AP English 12 classrooms – college prep courses. These students all have Internet access available at home – one of the most significant restrictions discussed earlier, and the reason why Edmodo was not utilized in the other three classes. Because of widespread Internet availability, the instructor posts assignments and other important course materials online, and is assured that students will have access to these materials.
The Edmodo platform also allows for discussion, something which the student quote above mentions. Discussion interaction over Edmodo takes away some of the in-class stress for students who do not feel comfortable voicing their opinions in front of their peers. While the students’ names are attached to the comments on the discussion threads, still leaving an important level of accountability, students who are quiet in the classroom seem more readily to respond to others through Edmodo. We noted this as one of the most impressive aspects of using Edmodo --- it allows students to participate in constructive and productive discourse.
We also see value in Edmodo in that it prepares these college-bound students for the LMS experience that they will almost certainly encounter at the university level. Exposure to LMS will help make their transition to the virtual aspects of college courses easier, as they will understand the proper usage of these tools in a school environment. Setting up user expectations and teaching digital etiquette is one of the lessons this instructor teaches his students while preparing them to utilize the LMS. Edmodo helped make the classroom more learner-centered, as lessons responded to what students were discussing on Edmodo, and the tool received high praise from the AP 12 English students who greatly enjoyed using Edmodo to further their learning.
Whether they ever end up chanting, “Let’s go Edmodo!” while at college is another question entirely. The thought of implementing Learning
164 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Management Systems in a secondary classroom requires educators to reflect on the many aspects discussed during this chapter. Research into which LMS would be most effective, the reliability of student Internet access, and digital fluency are all key elements to consider while pondering LMS implementation. Though it may not be realistic to implement in every classroom, it is worth taking a look at this valuable 21st century tool to enhance your classroom and advance student learning.
m
Matthew Foran is a Master’s student at the University of Michigan and future English and History educator. Prior to coming to U-M, he obtained a degree in English with a Concentration in Creative Writing at Michigan State University. Matthew’s passions outside of the field of education include screenwriting and camping as well as coaching youth sports. The majority of his work with youth has come through the lenses of the latter two outlets and he brings these experiences from to his teaching practice. A native of Lapeer, Michigan, he currently resides in beautiful Ann Arbor.
A Detroit native, Chelsea Moszczenski is a Master’s student in the School of Education at the University of Michigan and is a preservice English and History teacher. Twice a Wolverine, she received her Bachelor of Arts in English and History from Michigan in 2010. Chelsea remains actively involved within the Michigan learning community as a school ambassador and Kappa Pi Delta member. As a college student and teacher, she has varied experiences with Learning Management Systems and has seen them evolve over the last seven years into an effective classroom resource. Beyond teaching, she enjoys writing and one day hopes to publish a novel. In her spare time she enjoys traveling; Chelsea’s favorite trips include ones to England and the Bahamas.
References Al Naddabi, Z. 2007. "A Moodle Course: Design and Implementation in English for Academic Purposes Instruction in T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning."Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education., 1371-1376.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 165 De Smet, Cindy, Jeroen Bourgonjon, Bram De Wever, Tammy Schellens, and Martin Valcke. 2012. "Researching Instructional use and the Technology Acceptation of Learning Management Systems by Secondary School Teachers." Computers & Education 58(2), 688-696.
Dralle, A. 2007. "Analysis of Blackboard and Open Source Course Management Systems in Online Instruction. in T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning."Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, 7064-7066
Nagel, David. 2012. "K-12 Student Data and Learning Management Systems Miss the Mark." T.H.E. Journal. Oct. 10. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2012/02/06/K12-Student-Data-and- Learning-Management-Systems-Miss-the-Mark.aspx.
Prensky, Marc. 2001. "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part 1." On the Horizon 9(5), 1-6.
Shesky, Bill. 2010. "Creating Learning Connections with Today's Tech-Savvy Student." In Curriculum 21: Essential Education for a Changing World, ed. Heidi Hayes Jacobs, 195-209. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
166 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
One-To-One Computing Paula Veverica Gentile and Matthew Pierson
In an ever-changing age of digital innovation and electronic inundation, technology permeates many aspects of our daily lives. With computers, cell phones and GPS literally at our fingertips, we rely on technology to help us interact with the surrounding world. The classroom environment is likewise no stranger to the influx of new devices and gadgets meant to improve both teacher and student performance. From graphing calculators to complex multimedia programming software and digital film editing equipment, technology has enabled education to advance in ways previously unheard of. Many districts are now looking beyond the high- tech computer labs to an even more ambitious feat: one-to-one classroom communities.
What Does One-To-One Look Like? In a one-to-one classroom, each student has his/her own laptop, tablet, or other computing device. This approach enables students to interact with their educational world in a way that parallels our society at large. A school can effectively engage students in learning, creating, and communicating in ways that mimic the skills demonstrated by professionals in the real world. For example, students can network with university scientists to develop hypotheses for classroom experiments through online communication programs like Skype.
Providing students with individual digital devices requires a great deal of responsibility and cooperation between parents, students, teachers, and administrators, but the rewards and benefits may well outweigh the challenges. According to Owen and colleagues, one-to-one classrooms effectively support students’ growth as empowered individuals who have an entire world of information at the tips of their fingers (Owen et al. 2006). With the right scaffolding, students can reach beyond the scope of traditional formal education.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 167 In the most idealistic context, a one-to-one classroom instills a sense of self-reliance and autonomy that propels students toward becoming more independent, inquisitive, and introspective. However, many education professionals worry that this utopian view of a one-to-one classroom requires far too many “ifs” to be truly effective and thus are resistant to support a program that places a laptop in the hands of every student. While one-to-one classroom technology is on the rise, the concerns and uncertainty surrounding its implementation have made it one of the more controversial topics in education today. Many parents, educators, and administrators struggle to comprehend how teachers can effectively manage a classroom where each student is directly connected to as many distractions—Facebook, social emailing, chat sessions—as academic tools (Lei et al. 2008). The tremendous cost associated with one-to-one programs also causes many school districts to recoil and instead seek less holistic options for engaging students in technology (Lei et al. 2008). Finally, as comprehensive empirical evidence demonstrating the positive effects of one-to-one classrooms has so far been limited, administrations are left with a minimal scope of information from which to base such a significant investment decision (Lei et al. 2008).
What Does It Take To Become a One-To-One School? Although these concerns remain pervasive, many schools are nonetheless joining the one-to-one revolution. To date, at least 33 states across the nation have instituted one-to-one technology and the accompanying structural support in select schools and districts (Lei et al, 2007). For example, in 2002, Maine partnered with Apple through a $37 million contract to install wireless Internet in every public middle school across the state and to provide iBook laptops to all teachers and students (Lei et al, 2008). Through the Freedom to Learn program, Michigan has spent more than $30 million on laptop computers and PDAs (personal digital assistants) in 15 school districts (U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology, 2006).
In order to support the success of a one-to-one approach, teachers, administrators, and parents must share a unified vision of the benefits of the program as well as a clear understanding of the critical components
168 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
that come along with implementing this educational technology. Substantial preparation is needed to establish a framework from which the new curriculum can stem and to devise a plan to address logistical issues (server capacity and wireless Internet), technology support (maintenance and software updates), and suitable assessments (McLeod & Lehmann 2012). The method for supplying students with laptops or other digital devices can vary depending on funding sources (private grants versus federal grants) and program specifications. Hardware can be district- issued as mobile laptop carts, school-leased to the individual student, or parent-purchased and maintained (State of New South Wales Department of Education and Training 2009).
Once the technology is in place, schools must define explicit policies that outline the proper use and application of those resources, including “contracts” that dictate ownership and responsibility, acceptable use, liability (including theft), and measures for dealing with noncompliance to the contract. (Though it is understood that contracts signed by students would not be legally binding, they would instill a sense of structure and accountability.) In developing a thorough acceptable use policy, schools should include guidelines for personal use (when such use is permitted), how the devices are to be maintained, what (if any) programs or applications can be installed by the parents or students, how the network settings must be configured, and what (if any) modifications to the technology can be made (Summitt Academy 2009).
What Is The Role Of The Teacher In a One-To-One Setting? One of the most important components of the one-to-one initiative is the classroom teacher. In a technologically enriched environment, an intricate web of changes takes place among the school, community, pedagogy, and context, each with implications for teacher preparation and subsequent professional development (Spires at al. 2011). Specifically, one-to-one computing necessitates a powerful change in pedagogy with a shift toward a student-centric perspective (McLeod & Lehmann 2012). The role of the teacher is transformed from direct disseminator of the content to classroom facilitator and mentor. As such, teachers need to relearn many
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 169 practices that are already second nature to them in order to fully embrace the new design of the school, which can be daunting--if not overwhelming--for even the most experienced educator.
Curricula, classroom management, record keeping, and assessment must all be altered in order to fit the mold of a one-to-one environment. In particular, management and the role of the teacher are subject to dramatic changes (Owen et al. 2006). As a one-to-one approach is instantiated, the locus of control shifts toward the students, which inevitably requires the teacher to surrender the traditional authoritative position. Uncomfortable as they may feel in this new role, teachers need to support students in their freedom to communicate, collaborate, and research if a one-to-one classroom is to function to its potential. A new approach to management must take into account teacher watchfulness, instructional design, student responsibility, and student-perceived relevance (Owen et al. 2006).
Teachers can mitigate disruptions and maintain increased structure and order by putting several key practices into place. Such practices include creating a webpage or binder of self-help instructions and frequently asked questions; instilling an “ask three before me” rule; providing students with color-coded signal “tools” (paper cups, signs, or popsicle sticks) that can be held up to indicate that they need help; developing a team of expert students who assist their classmates; and providing a portfolio of online educational resources for students to explore when there is downtime (e.g. if they finish an assignment or task before the rest of the class) (Mortenson, 2011).
What Support Do Teachers Need? At the onset of a one-to-one program, the school or district must collectively define explicit goals rooted in both teaching practice and technology and devise a plan for professional development to support the achievement of those objectives (McLeod & Lehmann 2012). Training for teachers and media center staff is vital and can encompass several days to weeks of professional development arranged by the district and technology collaborators (e.g. the companies supplying the devices).
170 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Continued assistance from instructional technology specialists through email and online forums provides teachers with a direct link to options for troubleshooting and resolving issues that arise in the classroom (Owen et al. 2006). Teachers also need access to the Internet and online programs in their homes in order to establish a stronger sense of proficiency and command of the technology.
Just as with a traditional classroom, teachers in a one-to-one setting require a suite of resources to enhance their practice. Management tools such as Blackboard, Moodle, and even personal websites allow teachers to post course documents ranging from syllabi to assignments and quizzes. Teachers can also provide links to supplemental information, such as news articles, video clips, and interactive modeling programs, in order to augment the content taught in class. Furthermore, online library resources, electronic textbooks, and databases enable teachers to maximize the use of classroom computing (Owen et al. 2006). With so many assets combined and stored into a single portal device, the classroom walls no longer define where and when learning occurs.
Is One-To-One Worth It? Though vast preparations are necessary to introduce a one-to-one school reform, current research demonstrates the positive effects that such a classroom environment can have on student learning. For example, the use of computer-based cognitive tools in one-to-one mathematics classrooms enhances student engagement, improves time-on-task, and supports the development of intrinsic motivation and enjoyment of the content (Kong 2011). One-to-one computing can also have a significant impact on how students perform specific learning tasks. Personal computing devices equipped with word processing programs and electronic portfolios can improve students’ note taking skills and increase organization of coursework and class documents (State of New South Wales Department of Education and Training 2009). A one-to-one approach allows for greater diversity in the types of representations used to convey critical content and provides students with opportunities for alternative expressions of their knowledge and creativity (McLeod &
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 171 Lehman 2012). Students can design interactive PowerPoint presentations or websites and can express their ideas and opinions through extensive writing assignments (online journals), podcasts, blogs, wiki pages, and even formal publications and projects.
Access to the Internet opens the door for students to search for information across a wide network of sources (search engines and databases), engage in content through subject-specific programs (online modeling games and tools), and collaborate more efficiently with one another, as well as with external contacts such as real-world professionals in the field they are studying. In addition, one-to-one computing bolsters the level of communication between teachers and students through blogs, forums, emailing, wikis, and the like (McLeod & Lehmann 2012; State of New South Wales Department of Education and Training 2009). This in turn encourages stronger relationships and personal investment in the classroom community.
What is the take-home message? The students in our classrooms today are digital natives in a world driven by technological advancement and an ever-growing dependency on those tools. Our mission as teachers is to educate and engage students in ways that are meaningful, such that we spark genuine interest and intrigue. In doing so, it is critical that we build their skills for future roles as empowered members of a democratic society (Pearson et al. 2010). If we are to develop students’ intellectual character and teach them to be lifelong learners, we must leverage the resources available to us that successfully target our audience (Ritchhart 2002). One-to-one programs can effectively transform the traditional classroom and allow teachers to tap into the mindset of the 21st century student.
m
172 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Paula Veverica Gentile is a graduate student in the School of Education at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor). Prior to pursuing a career in the field of education, she worked as a molecular biologist and supervisor in the Cullman Laboratory of the Department of Ornithology at the American Museum of Natural History (New York). As a future biology teacher, Paula hopes to engage students in science and research through inquiry-based curricula.
Matthew Pierson is a graduate student in the University of Michigan's MAC program. He is currently majoring in biology within this education program. He received his BS in Biology from the University of Detroit Mercy in 2012, and his High School diploma from Greenville High School in 2008.
References Kong, S.C. 2011. An evaluation study of the use of a cognitive tool in a one-to- one classroom for promoting classroom-based dialogic interaction. Computers & Education 57, 1851-1864.
Lei, J., Conway, P., & Zhao, Y. (2007). The digital pencil: One-to-one computing for children. London and New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2008). One-to-one computing: What does it bring to schools? Journal of educational computing research, 39(2), 97-122.
McLeod, Scott, and Chris Lehmann. 2012. What school leaders need to know about digital technologies and social media. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mortenson, C. (2011). Mission possible: Keys to one-to-one success. Learning and Leading with Technology, August 16-21.
Owen, A., Farsaii, S., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2006). Teaching in the one-to-one Classroom: It’s not about laptops it’s about empowerment! International Society for Technology in Education, 33(4), 12-16.
Pearson, D.P., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science 328, 459-463.
Ritchhart, R. (2002). Intellectual character: What it is, why it matters, and how to get it. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 3-83.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 173 Spires, H.A., Oliver, K., & Corn, J. (2011). The new learning ecology of one-to- one computing environments: Preparing teachers for shifting dynamics and relationships. Journal of Digital Learning and Teacher Education 28(2) 63-72.
Summit Academy. (2009). Summit Academy One-to-One Laptop Computer Policy. Retrieved October 23, 2012 from http://www.summit- academy.com/Technology/Docs/New_Laptop%20Computer%20Policyv2.p df
State of New South Wales Department of Education and Training. (2009). One- to-one computing: Literature review. Curriculum Directorate, Version 3.5.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology. (2006). Freedom to learn. Retrieved October 23, 2012 from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/techreports.html
174 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Budget and Finance
Millages (or “Please, Can We Pay More Taxes?”) Sarah Guzick and Ryan Said
You’ve read the title, and I can see the look of despair on your face. Pay more taxes, you ask, and ask my peers and neighbors to pay more taxes, too? Well, yes, but fortunately the process is democratic (ideally).
In simple terms you can think of a millage, usually paired with a bond, as how schools pay for specific expenditures when their allotted bucket of cash from the state runs dry. So if your school district needs some technology upgrades, or you want to provide some new technology tools to aid student learning, and (most importantly) you feel like you can convince voters, a millage increase is your answer. In this chapter we’ll provide you with a “101” on millages and bonds, give some examples of recent technology millages that passed, and provide you with quick primer on grant writing should your technology needs not rise to the level of requiring a millage.
Define Your Terms Merriam-Webster (n.d.) defines “millage” as, “a rate (as of taxation) expressed in mills per dollar.” In layman’s (i.e. taxpayer’s) terms, a millage is a tax based on a percentage of $1,000. A millage is usually a property tax, therefore the millage rate gets applied to your taxable property value (as opposed to “actual” property value). Essentially, one mil equals $1 for every $1,000 of your property value.
A picture is worth a thousand words, so try the example below if things don’t make sense yet:
If your district proposes a 1.2 millage rate increase to purchase laptops for classrooms, and your taxable property value is $90,000, then your annual tax increase would be calculated as follows:
- Proposed Millage Rate: 1.2
- Decimal Conversion: 1.2 / 1,000 = 0.0012
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 177 - Your Taxable Property Value: $90,000
- Your Millage Tax Increase Annually: $90,000x0.0012 = $108
Not as bad as you thought, right? Especially if the millage supports a worthwhile cause for students. What is a “worthwhile cause” you ask? Ahh…a fundamental question of public funding! We’ll get to some examples deemed “worthwhile” by public vote in a minute.
Some other basic figures: Since none of us love paying taxes, studies have shown that millage rates greater than about 2.0 have a much lower success rate in passing (Holt et al. 2004). The timespans covered by millages also vary significantly, from one year up to ten years or more, including opportunities for renewal and even different rates over different periods.
Let’s look at the example again, but this time bump up the rate to 1.9 and calculate it over three years.
- New Proposed Millage Rate: 1.9
- Decimal Conversion: 1.9 / 1,000 = 0.0019
- Your Taxable Property Value: $90,000
- Your Millage Increase Tax: $90,000 x 0.0019 = $171 annually
- Calculated Total For Three Years: $171 x 3 = $513
Another important definition that usually goes along with a millage is a bond. A bond is a loan that can be paid back through taxes. In the case of a school, a bond is paid back through taxpayer dollars, via our friend the millage (Bucciero 2012). Since companies like to get paid for their technology products at one time, a school district will take out a bond to make that payment through a financial institution, then pay the bond back over time with the money collected from the millage increase (Brighton Area Schools 2012).
178 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Keep in mind that this is the simplified explanation. As is our wont, the reality of plans created for millages, bonds, expenditures, and payback periods is usually far more complicated.
It is very important to note that a bond can only be used to purchase physical items. Going back to our example, a school may purchase laptops for its students via a bond (and pay for it with a millage increase), but the school may not purchase human services to train teachers or maintain the equipment. The reason for this is that banks require collateral, in case the school district is unable to pay the bond, and humans are frowned-upon as collateral. When considering a bond, then, it is important to note what installation, training, servicing, and other costs will be incurred that the bond does not cover (Liu 2012).
From Start to Vote Actually, let's work backwards. To get a bond and millage increase passed, ultimately the residents of a district or county have to approve it with their vote. To get a millage increase on the ballot and a bond application approved, the District or County Board of Education and the State Department of Treasury have to approve it (Davids 2012). From here on down, the process of getting an item to a Board of Education can vary by district or county. As a teacher in a district, there is likely a chain- of-command for bringing concerns or ideas to the Board of Education.
Teachers have two primary functions with regards to millages. First, teachers are the representatives of the school with which the community has the most interaction. As a teacher, having a good rapport with parents and the community can go a long way towards convincing voters that a proposed millage is both really needed and worthwhile (Liu 2012).
Second, teachers are on the front lines of student needs, and collectively, should be providing direction for school administration as to where the real needs or opportunities lie. Keep in mind though, that your perceived need should be something that the whole district or county has equal need of. For example, if the math department at Ridgemont High needs new software, that is not likely something that a bond and/or millage would be used for. (That is where grant writing comes in, which we’ll address
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 179 later.) If you see a need or opportunity in your area, you should consult with other teachers both in your school and in the district, your principal, or other school leaders about how to get an item in front of the Board.
One important side note is that the rules on when an election can be held differ from district to district and county to county. It is not unheard of to plan for a special election on a cold February night, knowing that only those interested in passing the millage will come out to vote. While the date of the election must be clearly communicated via media outlets (mailers, newspaper, Internet, etc.), the specific date of a vote does not always have to be the first Tuesday in November (Cox 2012).
Examples From The Real World (Or, At Least, The Real Michigan)
Brighton, Michigan In May of 2012 the Brighton School District proposed a significant bond for voters, to be paid for with a millage increase. Included in this bond were major facilities upgrades and remodeling, student safety items, and, specific to this chapter, some significant technology items. In this case, the technology items were specific to the different schools in the district, although there was some overlap. Here are a few of the line items:
• Classroom/lab computers
• Wireless networks
• Projectors
• Network-based video production systems
Using the total value and timeframe of the bond, a steep $88-million over about six years, then back-calculating based on the population and property value within the district, a 1.49 millage rate increase was proposed. Given the large dollar value of this proposal, it naturally received significant and passionate public attention both for and against.
180 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Unusually large numbers of voters turned out. In the end, the voters decided by a 5% margin to proceed with this financial venture to improve their schools (Brighton Area Schools 2012; Liu 2012).
The example from Brighton is one where technology items were embedded in a larger bond/millage increase. In the interest of brevity (because we know this is stimulating material) here are a few other examples where a technology millage stood alone:
Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Ann Arbor Public School District passed a technology millage increase in May of 2012
- Won by a 40% margin
- Largely to purchase laptop and desktops with some future technology items still to be determined
- $45-million bond
- 0.51 millage increase over ten years (Arndt 2010)
Monroe County, Michigan
- Monroe County Schools passed an initial millage increase in 1997
- Voters have continued to approve the millage at intervals and it is still in effect in 2012
- Millage rate is 0.9866
- Purchased and updated laptops, desktops, printers, servers, projectors, SMARTboards, etc.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 181 - Renewal of the millage has allowed the country to keep up with technology changes (Monroenews.com 2011, Monroe Public Schools 2012)
Grant Writing As we mentioned a few paragraphs above, grant writing is a good alternative to millages when the dollar figure you need is relatively small, or the need does not apply to the whole district. Getting a millage approved by a board and passed by voters requires the equivalent of a small military operation. Getting a grant approved, fortunately, requires something less involved. Another big plus for grant writing is that there is a wealth of information available online to aid educators (much less so for millages, as the authors of this document can attest).
There are a number of different ways to write grants. Some nonprofits declare specific items they want to fund, and solicit teachers to apply. Other non-profits leave the topic of the grant open, and have teachers make the case for their request. Awarded dollar figures for grants usually run in the hundreds to mid-thousands of dollars, but larger awards are not unheard of. Teachers may also want to apply for several smaller grants to fund a single high dollar-value need (be sure to read the terms of the grant to make sure it is allowed to be combined with other grants).
Writing the grant document is fairly simple in most cases. It usually involves some kind of formal application along with an essay section where you describe your need in detail. The better you can describe your need, the more likely you are to be awarded the grant. Some grants may allow for things like PowerPoint presentations or pictures, so be ready to get creative. Basically, you need to be a good salesman.
Again, the great part about grant writing is that about an hour of searching and reading on the Internet will make you a near-expert on the topic. Grant writing is a fairly common practice in the teaching profession so talking to your co-workers is another great way to gather
182 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
information. To get you started, here are a few good grant related websites for educators:
• neafoundation.org
• grants4teachers.com
• grantwrangler.com
Donors Choose Another option that teachers can use for funding relatively inexpensive classroom needs is DonorsChoose.org. On this website, teachers from all over the country can ask that public donors fund anything from school supplies to classroom iPads. Anyone who wants to donate can browse the site to find a project that interests him or her. Since 2003, over 300,000 projects have been fully funded -- that's 70% of all projects posted there, and over $153 million dollars have been raised.
So What... As we’ve discussed, teachers have a role in getting bonds approved and millages passed. They need to be educated about the process because they are a part of the process. They need to know that how they are perceived by the public strongly influences what kind of voice they will have when the time comes to ask for taxpayer dollars to support student learning. Teachers have a role in keeping their school administration informed of both the needs of students, and new opportunities for student learning.
m
Sarah Guzick is a current student in the University of Michigan School of Education studying for a master’s degree in secondary education. She plans to teach high school biology and psychology. When not in school, Sarah enjoys travelling, reading, knitting, and swimming.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 183 Ryan Said is a former automotive engineer and professional tournament angler making a career change to pursue a master’s degree in secondary education at the University of Michigan. Ryan plans to teach high school math and also thoroughly enjoys philosophy, history, writing, literature, psychology, social studies, travel, music, tournament fishing, and candle making.
References Arndt, Danielle. 2010. “Voters OK $45.8 million Ann Arbor Public Schools technology bond,” AnnArbor.com, last modified May 8 2010. Retrieved September 23, 2012 from http://www.annarbor.com/news/ann-arbor- schools-technology-bond-special-election-results/#.UGvSNqn3DPB.
Brighton Area Schools. n.d. “Bond Update” Retrieved September 23, 2012 from http://www.brightonk12.com/district.cfm?subpage=1477857.
Bucciero, Gloria (certified public accountant). 2012. Personal interview. September 12.
Cox, Jeff (school board member). 2012. Personal interview. September 4.
Davids, Judy. 2012. “Schools Millage Proposal Approved for Nov. 6 Ballot.” Royal Oak Patch, August 9. Retrieved September 23, 2012 from http://royaloak.patch.com/articles/schools-millage-proposal-approved-for- nov-6-ballot-ed26843d.
Holt, Carleton, Roland Smith, and Capps Matthew. 2004. "School Facilities: The State Department's Influence." AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice. 1(3), 6-10.
Liu, Elson. 2012. Personal interview (email). Sept. 23 and Oct. 3.
"Millage." n.d. Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/millage .
Monroe Public Schools, “Technology Millage.” Retrieved September 23, 2012 from: http://www.monroe.k12.mi.us/Technology.cfm?subpage=123
Monroenews.com. 2011. “Monroe County voters wise to pass tech millage,” last modified May 6 2011. Retrieved September 23, 2012 from:
184 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
http://www.monroenews.com/news/2011/may/06/monroe-county-voters- wise-to-pass-tech-millage/.
State of Michigan Department of Treasury. n.d. “State of Michigan School Loan Revolving Fund Process: School Bond Qualification and Loan Program.” Retrieved September 23, 2012, from: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/3272_2816_7.pdf.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 185 E-rate Rachael Machiele and Kevin Galvin
E-rate? Why Do I Need To Know Anything About It? Are you a teacher who is interested in providing your students with learning tools that are innovative and take advantage of the latest advances in technology? If so, then you should know about E-rate.
Are you a teacher who wants to incorporate technology into your classroom to improve efficiency and better manage your time? If so, then you should know about E-rate.
This chapter is intended to make you aware of the E-rate program, what it is and how it works. It is not designed to make you an expert. There are lots of consultants making a living advising school districts on how to work with the program in order to make sure that they receive every dollar of funding that they deserve. In fact, if your district applies for E-rate funding, it may choose to hire a consulting firm to manage the application process. In any case, it is important for you to know what E-rate is, and how you and your students can benefit from it. Our goal here is to make you knowledgeable enough to be able to speak with others in your district, and to advocate for the tools to keep your classroom on the leading edge of technology.
What is the E-rate program? E-rate is a program that provides discounts to schools and libraries in the United States to assist them in obtaining affordable telecommunications systems and Internet access. The program was created in 1997 and is also known as the Schools and Libraries Program. It is part of the Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Service Fund, and is managed under the auspices of the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD) of the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC).
186 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
By providing discounts, the program hopes to "help open new knowledge, learning and education to all Americans--rich and poor, rural and urban..." (Education and Library Networks Coalition [EdLiNC], 2003).
Since it began, E-rate has committed more than $30 billion to schools and libraries to offset the cost of digital and telecommunication services and products. The discounts have enabled many communities to gain access to technology that they might not otherwise have been able to afford.
The funds are adjusted each year to reflect the impact of inflation and in 2012 the available funds totaled approximately $2.3 billion. The exact amount of available funds for 2013 has not yet been announced.
Where Does The Money Come From? First, it is important to recognize that E-rate is not a grant program. It is a discount program. E-rate is not funded by tax dollars. It is funded by fees collected from telecommunications companies. Have you ever wondered about those extra charges on your monthly phone bills for things like “universal service charges”? That’s the money that supports E- rate. USAC, which is an independent nonprofit corporation, collects the money and distributes it.
In order to receive E-rate money from USAC, school districts must complete an application process (a summary of the process is outlined below) and conduct a competitive bid for the services that they want to acquire. If the application is approved, the school district begins to acquire the services and USAC pays the service provider at the rate of the E-rate award. Any difference between the amount charged by the service provider and the amount paid by USAC is paid by the school district. All applications and bidding are done by the district, not individual teachers. You can help by making your district aware of this opportunity.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 187 What Do E-rate Discounts Cover? Each year, the Federal Communications Commission publishes its list of eligible services. The 2013 list was published on September 27, 2012. The list is lengthy (49 pages) and not something most readers of this chapter would be interested in reading. So, we’ve attempted to simplify the list as follows:
There are five categories of eligible services in two funding priorities: Priority 1 covers:
• Telecommunications Services
• Telecommunications
• Internet Access
This Priority 1 list includes things like e-mail, voice mail and telephone services and wireless access.
Priority 2 covers:
• Internal Connections
• Basic Maintenance of Internal Connections
This Priority 2 list includes cables, connectors, modems, servers and software and the installation and maintenance of these items. Essentially, Priority 2 represents the costs required to make the services (Priority 1 items) work. Hardware items (e.g., computers, video equipment, phones, whiteboards, Smart Boards, projectors) are not eligible for E-rate discounts.
The distinction between Priority 1 and Priority 2 is based on the type of request (i.e., services versus internal connections), the availability of funds and the economic status of the requesting schools and libraries. Priority 1 status is given to funding requests for telecommunication services and Internet access regardless of the applicant’s economic status or discount rate (a higher discount equals a higher percentage of economically disadvantaged students). After allocation of funds for Priority 1 requests,
188 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
any remaining funds will be made available to Priority 2 requests but only the most needy schools qualify. (Universal Service Program for Schools and Libraries).
Which Schools Are Eligible? E-rate discounts run on a spectrum that will correspond with your school's level of need. Most schools including K-12, public, private, and religious, will qualify for some sort of discount. The discount spectrum ranges from 20 to 90% of the cost of eligible services. (E-rate is also available for public libraries that meet the eligibility requirements.) “Larger discounts go to those applicants deemed economically disadvantaged based on the percentage of students eligible to participate in the federal school lunch program, and whether the school is in an urban or rural setting.” (Park 2007, 388).
When applying for E-rate discounts your representative must calculate the percentage discount that your school or district is eligible to receive. A discount matrix outlining the scale of discounts for urban and rural locations based on the school’s percentage of students eligible for the National School Lunch Program: can be found at http://www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/dmatrix.asp.
How Does One Apply For E-rate? The application process for E-rate discounts is one that is deadline critical, lengthy and often changing. As a teacher, you won’t be responsible for the application process; that will be completed at the district level. You could be asked for input, however, and you certainly should be knowledgeable about some of the key elements of the process.
According to SLD's guidelines, the process to which schools and libraries must adhere in order to apply for and receive E-rate discounts is as follows: preparing a technology plan, opening the competitive process,
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 189 seeking discounts on eligible services, confirming the receipt of services, and invoicing for services.
The window for applications is relatively short; in 2012 the Form 471 application window was from January 9 until March 20 or 72 days. The Schools & Libraries Division (SLD) usually begins issuing funding commitments in May prior to the start of the funding year. (The funding year is from July 1 through June 30 of the following calendar year.) Commitments are issued weekly in “funding waves.” As mentioned earlier, Priority 1 services are funded first. It is not unusual for funding to be delayed for up to one year, especially for Priority 2 services (HP Networking).
A detailed flowchart outlining the application process can be found at http://www.usac.org/_res/documents/sl/pdf/handouts/Applicant-Process.
What Is a Technology Plan? A key step in the application process could be creating a technology plan. Applications for Priority 1 services do not require submission of a technology plan. However, any applicant for Priority 2 connections and basic maintenance is required to have a technology plan that is approved by a USAC-certified technology plan approver. The premise behind the requirement of this plan is to “assure that E-rate funding is being used effectively” (E-rate Central 2012, Application Tips).
The technology plan must contain: goals and objectives, a detail of a professional development plan, as well as assessment and evaluation processes. Additionally, the applicant school must be able to demonstrate that it will be able to pay the non-discounted portion of the total price.
What Are Key Things To Know When Applying? Listed below are several key points that might be helpful to an E-rate applicant. Again, as a teacher you won’t likely be involved in the detailed
190 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
application process, but you may be able to pass along some of these helpful tips (Harrington, 2011, 1):
• Annual demand for E-rate funding is typically more than two times the available amount.
• The program is often revised so it is important to be aware of the regulations when preparing your application. Yearly changes to the eligible services list, key due dates, supporting documentation required, etc., are not uncommon.
• Applicants should be prepared for intense reviews and requests for validation of their request.
• It is best to file early, at least 30 days prior to the end of the filing period.
• Be especially aware of Item 21 (required as an attachment to Form 471) which requires a detailed description of the products and services that will be funded - this includes costs, quantities, account numbers and other details. If Item 21 is found to be incomplete or missing key information then the request will be delayed.
• Be aware of Priority 2 and arrange requests accordingly. As mentioned above, Priority 2 allows for funding to support internal connections and the basic maintenance of internal connections. However, school districts can only request funds for these purposes two times in a five-year period for a particular site. So, it might be best to bundle a number of projects together and include needed funds for connections and maintenance in a larger project.
• Applicants are prohibited from soliciting or receiving gifts from service providers who might be participating in the E-rate program.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 191 • Save anything related to an E-rate funding commitment for at least five years from the last date of service.
Is E-rate Working? Surveys have been conducted which indicate that the “E-rate program is increasing involvement in and opportunities for learning for all Americans through access to modern telecommunications and information services.” Parental involvement in children's learning is growing through increased digital access and connectivity with schools. Demand for and deployment of the Internet in school applications have increased and partnerships among diverse community institutions are being developed. “These findings support the theory that E-rate discounts are leveraging significant new investments in technology in schools and libraries” (Johnson et al, 2000).
However, many school administrators have “expressed frustration with the administration of the program and the application process in particular, which many found confusing and burdensome. Concerns were also expressed about whether the funding is adequate to meet demand and if not, whether some communities will be shut out of the program altogether” (Johnson et al, 2000). The need to upgrade technology to meet the requirements of new common, multistate assessments will likely put additional strains on the program.
So, What Does All Of This Mean To You? Again, as a teacher it is unlikely that you’ll be involved in the intimate details of the process of applying for and managing your district’s E-rate program. However, you will be involved in the use of technology in your classroom and in your school. This will involve not only teaching your students but also managing your class activities, communicating with parents and dealing with the day-to-day administrative requirements of your position. These are many reasons for you to stay current with technology and take advantage of new innovations.
192 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
You’ll probably find reasons to be happy and unhappy with the telecommunications and Internet connections in your school and, if you’re unhappy, you’ll want to be part of the solution for any problems you see. Having an awareness of the available discount programs that could benefit your school, your classroom, and your students will enable you to identify solutions and advocate for improvements and benefits to all three - school, classroom and students.
m
Kevin Galvin is a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor. He has a B.S. in Biology and an M.B.A and spent many years in industry before deciding he had a desire to get into the field of education and teach at the secondary level. His interests include his family, travel, cooking, reading, swimming, biking and running. Contact: [email protected].
Rachael Machiele is a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Education in Ann Arbor. She is a recent graduate from Calvin College in Grand Rapids, MI where she studied for a B.S. in Biology and ran NCAA Track and Field. As a Woodrow Wilson Fellow she is looking forward to teaching in Michigan Schools. In her spare time she enjoys planning her wedding and painting biology themed art. Contact: [email protected].
References Cavanagh, Sean. 2013. “Districts Look to E-rate Program to Help With Common Core Tech Costs.” Education Week, Jan. 16. Retrieved October 9, 2012 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/01/16/17e- rate.h32.html
U.S. Department of Education. n.d. "E-rate Program - Discounted Telecommunications Services -- Office of Non-Public Education." Retrieved October 9, 2012 from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/nonpublic/erate.html.
"E-rate Central: Simplifying the E-rate Program for Schools, Libraries and Vendors." n.d. E-rate Central Website. Retrieved October 9, 2012 from http://www.E-ratecentral.com.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 193 Harrington, John. 2011. "Six Habits of Highly Effective E-rate Applicants” T.H.E. Journal. October 4. Retrieved October 3, 2012 from: http://thejournal.com/articles/2011/10/04/habits-of-highly-effective-erate- applicants.aspx.
Johnson, A., Harris, L., Bond, J., Lee, J. H., & Raines, G. 2000. “Protect E-Rate: Keeping the Promise to Connect Kids and Communities to the Future.” Education and Libraries Network Coalition. Retrieved February 23, 2013 from http://www.edlinc.org/keeping_the_promise.html.
Park, E., Sinha, H., & Chong, J. 2007. "Beyond Access: An Analysis of the Influence of the E-Rate Program in Bridging the Digital Divide in American Schools." Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 387-406.
Universal Service Administrative Company. n.d. "Getting Started - Schools and Libraries Program.” Retrieved October 3, 2012 from http://www.usac.org/sl/about/getting-started/default.aspx
"Universal Service Program for Schools and Libraries." n.d. Federal Communications Comission. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://www.fcc.gov/guides/universal-service-program-schools-and-libraries.
"What is E-rate? | Funds For Learning." n.d. Funds For Learning. Retrieved October 3, 2012, from http://www.fundsforlearning.com/taxonomy/term/1056.
194 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Common Core State Standards
Technology and English Language Arts, 6-12 Abby Genise and Lisa Montez Sullivan
Before we begin to examine what teachers need to know about our topic, we will start by discussing the Common Core State Standards and English Language Arts. The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) were created to streamline curriculum and teaching standards so that educators have a unified understanding of the knowledge and skills that students should be able to demonstrate as a result of the educational process. The standards define grade-specific overall goals that educators should use as a guide for preparing and delivering challenging, substantive lesson plans.
It is generally agreed that the English Language Arts (ELA) are comprised of reading, writing, speaking, listening, and viewing. These five basic skills are the foundation of all learning and naturally provide opportunities to integrate technology. The CCSS provide a foundation for basic inclusion of technology in all phases of ELA instruction, for example:
Reading: Students should be able to integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse formats and media, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.
Writing: Students should be able to gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism.
Speaking: Students should be able to make strategic use of digital media and visual displays of data to express information and enhance understanding of presentations.
Language/Listening: Students should be able to acquire and use accurately a range of general academic and domain-specific words and phrases sufficient for reading, writing, speaking, and listening at the college and career readiness level; demonstrate
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 197 independence in gathering vocabulary knowledge when considering a word or phrase important to comprehension or expression.
Viewing: Students should be able to interpret, extract, and make meaning from information presented in the form of an image. They should be able to demonstrate visual literacy by interpreting images and other forms, therefore extending the meaning of literacy. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices 2010)
The Common Core State Standards invite technology into our classroom to enhance the learning experiences of our students by offering access to the world through the wide and varied lens that technology provides. We believe that teachers should focus that lens on content that is relevant, simple-but-innovative, and age-appropriate.
The Common Core State Standards invite technology into our classroom to enhance our lesson planning skill; to support our ability to teach; and to encourage collaboration among teachers. Teachers should find ways to take advantage of these opportunities.
That being said, what do English teachers need to know about incorporating technology into a language arts classroom?
The first thing that you should know is that there are about a million ways to do it. We’re not kidding. As teaching interns and graduate students in a course on Teaching with Technology, we were slowly amazed and then quickly overwhelmed by the abundance of information and technology that’s available to teachers.
The second thing that you should know is that more technology does not necessarily equal less work for teachers. It takes time, patience, and practice to identify; learn; and effectively use good technology.
198 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
You will find that questions of permission, control, and access should be your first priority.
• What is my school/district’s policy regarding Internet access?
• Does my school/district require students to sign a safe/fair usage policy?
• What types of restrictions does my school/district place on Internet use (i.e. blocked sites)?
• Do my students have access to technology in class and/or at home (cell phones, laptops, tablets)?
• Do I need to get permission from parents’ for Internet/cell phone usage costs?
• Do my students have access the Internet in class and/or at home?
Next, you must evaluate whether or not the technology is going to enhance the lesson and/or classroom discussion.
The English methodology text, Bridging English, suggests the following questions that English teachers should pose to themselves as they consider the appropriateness of integrating technology into a particular lesson plan:
• Would a technology-based lesson engage students in a way that is not available by other means?
• Can technology be used to provide students with multiple representations of content?
• Can technology offer inquiry and critical reflection?
• Can I position technology as a forum for dialogue?
• Do I have time to extend the dialogue with students before and/or after class?
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 199 • Will technology contribute to or detract from the conversation in the classroom?
• Can technology be used to provide multiple opportunities for students to express their knowledge?
• Can technology be an instrument for evaluation of student progress? Would it provide authentic assessment?
• Is this technology-based plan integral to reading, writing, talking, listening, and viewing or is it a tack-on? (Milner, Milner and Mitchell 2012, 52)
Next, you must decide on which, and how much technology to use. Bridging English also suggests that teachers use the following as rules of thumb when choosing technology:
• Identify which technologies are needed to support your curricular goals and objectives;
• Specify how the tools will be used to help your students meet and demonstrate these goals;
• Select and use appropriate technologies to address needs, solve problems, and resolve issues related to your own professional practice and growth; and
• Enable your students to use appropriate technologies in all phases of the learning process including exploration, analysis, and production. (Milner, Milner and Mitchell 2012, 51)
There are virtual fields of sites, tools, and programs out there, but be careful. These fields can be strewn with pitfalls that have the potential to transform our carefully constructed lesson plans into frustrating wastes of precious time.
Ideas for integrating technology into the classroom are plentiful for all five of the skill areas stressed in the Common Core State Standards. Sites like Freetech4teachers.com and Teaching That Makes Sense (http://ttms.org)
200 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
are clearinghouse-type sites that offer tools, tips, blogs, and advice for curious teachers. Platforms like Educaplay.com help teachers to create multimedia activities with our lesson plans. Tools like PollEverywhere.com allow teachers to create cell phone polls offering the opportunity for instant feedback. Bloggers are great resources for gathering innovating ideas and even lesson plan ideas for your classroom. They offer ideas on blogs, PowerPoint presentations, social media, and other technological resources that are a part of the 21st century learner’s English classroom.
As we have learned in our graduate experience thus far, blogging in particular offers a means for students to publish their ideas and homework assignments, not only for their professor, but also for the rest of their classmates. One possible homework assignment for students could be to post their analysis of a class reading to the classroom blog. As we experienced in our Teaching with Technology class, students could be assigned to comment on one another's responses, which would encourage them to both read their classmates’ reactions, and to connect to them through a paragraph response. Finally, through blogging, students can also be gain practice with real-world writing, which adds another dimension to the cognitive abilities tested through this online assignment. While in- person classroom discussion is vital in an English classroom, a blog could offer another form of discussion and writing practice, therefore making it an extremely efficient addition to an English lesson. These kinds of blogging assignments really hit on the reading and writing skills described in the Common Core State Standards, as students would be reading, writing, and extracting resources from digital resources.
But what if your students are already using blogs as part of their learning experience? We have identified several technological resources that can not only give English teachers ideas for technology integration, but also enhance practice and contribute to positive classroom environment.
Vicki Davis is another blogger with several innovative ideas on technology in the English classroom. In her blog, Cool Cat Teacher, Davis offers lesson-design ideas based on the latest and greatest technology, while also
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 201 providing humorous content for English lessons. She also links to several websites with resources for implementing the Common Core State Standards.
Another good resource for English teachers is Classroom 2.0 (classroom20.com), a website designed to get beginner teachers familiar and comfortable with the digital world that is becoming more and more important to our classrooms. Essentially, this website is a social network for teachers who want to learn more about participative technology and social media, and how these can enhance classroom instruction and understanding. This website includes forums about popular technological resources like Twitter, Skype, and several others. With websites like Classroom 2.0, teachers can immerse themselves in professional communities that keep one up-to-date on the newest and best practices with the latest technology.
A class wiki page is another specific technological resource that offers potential to significantly enhance an English classroom. Teachers can use the Wiki to create a positive academic community outside of the classroom—another resource that we experienced first hand in our Teaching with Technology class.
Additionally, several websites like Tagul.com, AbcYa.com, and WordItOut.com are great resources for creating word clouds, which can enhance vocabulary learning, especially for middle school students. With websites like these, teachers can get on the website quickly, and make a word cloud with the students vocabulary words that can be used as decoration, or for worksheets. It provides a simple way for teachers to jump outside that traditional formatting, and also provides an aesthetic dimension to a classroom.
Internet4Classroom.com offers several resources for learning grammar that can maximize grammar practice for students without wasting class time. The website includes great resources for grammar practice, quizzes, and even mini lessons for students who might be struggling. Since grammar understanding is often difficult to assess as a group, students can use this
202 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
resource in class to practice their individual needs with grammar. It allows students to move at their own pace and allows for additional practice.
Subscribing to other teachers’ Twitter feeds, blogs, and online communities like Classroom 2.0, is a good way to constantly get updates on the newest and best technological classroom resources. By becoming a part of these online professional communities, teachers can read about what works the best, as well as what doesn’t work so well. Conclusively, these kinds of professional resources will help teachers keep up on the latest technological resource that relates to the Common Core Standards.
m
Lisa Montez Sullivan is a graduate student at the University of Michigan, School of Education, in the Master of Arts with Certification program. She earned her Bachelor’s degree in English from the University of Arizona. She is a Woodrow Wilson Rockefeller Brothers Diversity Fellow who is committed to working with high- need schools. Her favorite quote changes almost daily. At the time of this writing, it is this bit of wisdom from Confucius ”If you think in terms of a year, plant a seed; if in terms of ten years, plant trees; if in terms of 100 years, teach the people.”
Abby Genise is a graduate student at the University of Michigan, School of Education in the Master of Arts with Certification program. She is a recent graduate of the University of Michigan with her undergraduate degree in English. In her free time Abby enjoys reading, watching movies, running, yoga, cooking, and listening to music. Abby loves traveling. While she loves the Ann Arbor area, she hopes to gain some experience following graduate school teaching in another state or abroad. Her ultimate goal is to spend at least six months teaching English in Thailand.
References ADRFormacion. n.d. Educaplay. Web site. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://en.educaplay.com.
Brooks, Susan and Bill Byles. n.d. Internet 4 Classrooms. Web site. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.Internet4classrooms.com.
Byrne, Richard. n.d. Free Technology for Teachers. Web site. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.freetech4teachers.com.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 203 Classroom 2.0. n.d. Web site. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.classroom20.com.
Davis, Vicki. n.d. Cool Cat Teacher Blog. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://coolcatteacher.blogspot.com.
Gorman, Michael. n.d. 21st Century Educational Technology and Learning. Blog. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://21centuryedtech.wordpress.com.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. 2010. Common Core State Standards - English Language Arts. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://corestandards.org.
Milner, Joseph O., Lucy M. Milner, and Joan F. Mitchell. 2012. Bridging English, 5th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Peha, Steve. n.d. Teaching That Makes Sense. Web site. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://ttms.org.
Poll Everywhere. n.d. Web site. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://www.polleverywhere.com.
Word It Out. n.d. Web site. Retrieved April 24, 2013, from http://worditout.com.
204 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
Technology and Math Michael Gilmartin and Mike Biro
The Common Core States Standards Initiative (CCSS) announced by the National Governors Association in June 2009 continues the emphasis on a standards-based model of educational reform. The standards for mathematics and English language arts were released a year later, and have been adopted by 46 states. The integration of technology into mathematics instruction is addressed in the CCSS Standards for Mathematical Practice, MP5: Use appropriate tools strategically. MP5 states:
Mathematically proficient students consider the available tools when solving a mathematical problem. These tools might include pencil and paper, concrete models, a ruler, a protractor, a calculator, a spreadsheet, a computer algebra system, a statistical package, or dynamic geometry software. (CCSS, 7)
Under High School – Statistics and Probability, the Standards articulate that:
Technology plays an important role in statistics and probability by making it possible to generate plots, regression functions, and correlation coefficients, and to simulate many possible outcomes in a short amount of time. (CCSS, 72)
Typically, when we think of technology we immediately think of calculators. However, as teachers of mathematics there are a myriad of ways we can, and often do, incorporate technology into our practice. We need to ensure that students do not become overly dependent on technology but rather use it as an aid to learning. We should not allow students to become dependent on technology to perform basic arithmetic calculations, and we should be wary of using technology in a distracting or detrimental manner, or on topics where it is not beneficial to students.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 205 We should realize that a ruler, protractor and compass are all pieces of technology and can be implemented and utilized to great effect in the classroom. Other forms of technology that can, and typically are, used in the math classroom include computers, the aforementioned calculators, SMART Boards, and document cameras. With so much technology available in the classroom it is important to be conscious of what is and is not appropriate technology.
The concern regarding the correct implementation of technology is easily minimized. In this chapter we will outline when and how technology should be used in the classroom, the benefits of using technology and why it is important to expose our students to such resources.
One of the principles of the Common Core is that “appropriate accommodations [should be made] to ensure maximum participation of students with special education needs” (CCSS, 4). Technology is a very effective medium for accommodating students who need help in order to fully participate in class. The Internet, Braille and things like “screen reader technology, or other assistive devices…” are all useful tools that can help make the classroom more welcoming to students with certain educational needs (CCSS, 4).
The goal of the Common Core and many similar standards is “college and career readiness for all students” (CCSS, 4), and in Mathematics this means getting students to a level where they are “mathematically proficient” in using the tools provided in order to assist them with their procedural and conceptual understanding of the material. Students need not be experts with all of these tools, and in fact it would be unfair for us to expect them to be so, for not every school, and thus every student, will have access to “computer algebra system, a statistical package, or dynamic geometry software”, but they should be able to effectively use the tools that are available to them.
When we as educators utilize technology in the classroom we must be careful that we “use technology mindfully to work with the mathematics” (CCSS, 8) and that the math is not lost or overshadowed by the distractions that technology might present to students. Not every use of
206 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
technology is appropriate--there is a reason that many standardized tests do not permit calculators. Even tests that do allow calculators, such as the ACTs and SATs, place restrictions on what types of calculators and other technology are acceptable (no computers, calculators with QWERTY keyboards or cell phones). Even though some tests permit calculator usage, the emphasis of the assessment is the conceptual as well as procedural aspects of mathematical thinking; calculators are merely meant to support student understanding and accelerate completion of the exam. These tests are not meant to gauge how well students can use a calculator. As a result it is up to teachers of mathematics to encourage calculator usage to some degree in classrooms, when appropriate. There is a need to prepare students for the reality of both higher-level math courses and standardized tests.
Two of the most common subjects where technology (especially rulers, calculators and modeling programs) can be used are geometry and algebra. One of the great benefits of technology is that it helps students “visualize the results of varying assumptions, explore consequences, and compare predictions with data” (CCSS, 7). “When making mathematical models, technology is valuable for varying assumptions, exploring consequences, and comparing predictions with data” (CCSS, 72). Technology can be tremendously useful in helping students visualize concepts and ideas in more complex topics, and can open up the opportunity for students to focus on understanding the conceptual ideas and reasoning behind such topics. Additionally, when used effectively, technology can free up students to examine patterns and explore connections between current material and the more foundational material that came before it. An example from the Common Core is using diagrams, spreadsheets and other technology to solve different types of real-world situations (CCSS, 79). In particular, in statistics and probability, these technological tools can help students generate plots, regression functions, and correlation coefficients, and can simulate many possible outcomes. “Calculators, spreadsheets, and computer algebra systems can provide ways for students to become better acquainted with these new number systems and their notation. They can be used to generate data for numerical experiments,
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 207 to help understand the workings of matrix, vector, and complex number algebra, and to experiment with non-integer exponents” (CCSS, 58).
In high school geometry, technology helps enable “an understanding of the attributes and relationships of geometric objects can be applied in diverse contexts—interpreting a schematic drawing, estimating the amount of wood needed to frame a sloping roof, rendering computer graphics, or designing a sewing pattern for the most efficient use of material” (CCSS, 72).
Instances of inappropriate use of technology would include the immediate implementation of calculator or technology usage before a strong conceptual foundation of the mathematical principles involved is built. An example of this would be in calculus and pre-calculus courses that address the unit circle, where the gradual development of what sin(x), cos(x) and tan(x) mean needs to be constructed conceptually before students begin using their calculators to calculate trigonometric functions for specific degrees or radians. It might be easy to permit students to immediately use calculators and their inverse trigonometric functions, but this may hurt students in their later studies. It is straightforward and easy for students to use these trig functions on values and find the corresponding angle, but it does not prepare them for algebraic manipulation of trigonometric functions. Without a conceptual understanding of what arcsin(x) means, students will struggle to solve equations like sin(!) = sin(x)* x, for using arcsin(x) on other functions rather than values might not make sense.
There does exist an appropriate use of technology in the classroom. It is important to remember that despite all the benefits of technology usage in the secondary mathematics classroom, technology usage should be intermittent, as it is important that students still understand conceptual ideas and the interconnectedness of mathematical ideas. Unfortunately, technology, particularly calculators, can prevent students from grasping a strong conceptual understanding of mathematical ideas, as it allows them to mask their deficiency with procedural proficiency. We do not want math to become an unrelated series of equations and numbers that students merely plug into their calculators to get a result, without any
208 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
underlying conceptual grasp. As a result, it is vitally important to provide our students with the skills to utilize technology, but also to monitor the amount of technology used, and the manner in which it is implemented, in order to ensure that conceptual ideas are not overrun with technological competence.
m
Michael Gilmartin is a 2012 University of Michigan graduate with B.S. degrees in Pure Mathematics and Comparative Religious Studies. This current University of Michigan graduate student and future Math and History teacher is a proud Vermonter, maker scrumdiddlyumptious baked goods, and a passionate Boston Red Sox fan. A born outdoorsman Michael is an avid lover of backpacking, rock climbing, camping, and the grandiosity of nature. The son of a college professor and a librarian, Michael Gilmartin is currently in hot pursuit of his teaching certification and a Master’s in Secondary Education with a major in Mathematics and a minor in History.
“The art of teaching is the art of assisting discovery” -- Mark Van Doren
After working 30 years in materials management functions in the medical device and automotive industries, Mike Biro is pursuing a second career in secondary math education. He completed a second BA in Mathematics and Economics at Oakland University while guest teaching in the Avondale School District, before entering the MAC program at the University of Michigan. A lifelong resident of Michigan, he has lived and worked in Ann Arbor for the majority of his professional life. He also holds an MBA from U-M and an MS in Manufacturing from Eastern Michigan University. Mike is also an avid bicyclist and movie-goer.
References Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI). 2010. Standards For Mathematical Practice. Retrieved October 1, 2012 from http://www.corestandards.org.
ED 504 : Teaching with Technology | 209 MAC Alumni Editors
We are truly grateful to the following MAC alumni, teaching across the United States and as far away as Japan, for providing feedback and peer editing to the class of 2013 as they put together this volume:
Barbara Applebaum (MAC ‘07) Diane Aretz-Kernahan (MAC ’12) Bob Ause (MAC ’10) Katie Colaccino (MAC ’11) Edgar Garza (MAC ‘07) Abbi Gee (MAC ‘08) Kevin Hankinson (MAC ‘08) John Heuser (MAC ’10) Joe Holtzman (MAC ’11) Matt Kautz (MAC ’12) Mike Kleiner (MAC ’03) Curtis Lee (MAC ’12) Shannon Morton (MAC ’12) Leanne Pascal (MAC ‘09) Chris Quiambao (MAC ’11) R.J. Quiambao (MAC ’12) Todd Rakes (MAC ’10) Leah Robinson (MAC ‘08) Adam Saligman (MAC ’10) Steve Sedore (MAC ‘02) Jen Semanco (MAC ’11) Caitlin Stansell (MAC ’12) Noah Weber (MAC ’11) Beezy Wilson (MAC ’12)
210 | What Teachers Need to Know About Educational Technology Practices, Policies, and Procedures
To learn more about the School of Education at the University of Michigan, visit http://soe.umich.edu