Thursday - Feb 23, 2012
Earlier this month news broke of parent Tommy Jordan and his somewhat unorthodox method of dealing with his daughter’s disobedience in the online realm. Jordan’s daughter, Hannah, reportedly used vulgarity on Facebook to talk poorly about her family. In response, Jordan lectured his daughter and then shot his daughter’s laptop nine times with a pistol. Additionally, he recorded the “lecture” and posted it to his daughter’s Facebook page as part of her punishment.
Jordan has since defended his actions, stating “you raise your children however you want.”
“As long as they turn out well in the end, then our jobs as parents was well done,” he added.
Despite a fair amount of support, there are still many who oppose Jordan’s discipline methods. And from that disagreement comes a few interesting points that apply to parents with kids learning to use the Internet.
1. Compared to their kids, parents need to be as knowledge if not more knowledgeable about technology and social media. If parents know significantly less, they risk not being able to set prudent household policies and being less involved with their kids’ development in utilizing online environments.
Jordan supporter Samantha Radecki hints at this, stating on her opinion blog that parents don’t have the same level of control over their kids due to technological advances.
“Fifteen years ago, when a home telephone was the only way to keep in contact, it was easy for parents to monitor their kid’s activities,” said Radecki. “Parents today have to be up to date on using social media websites, cell phones, email and everything else in order to keep track of their kids like they used to.”
This easily leads into point two, which is…
2. Parents must be less fearful for and more supportive of children who wish to explore and search for information online. If parents are “introducing children to online environments through a len[s] of fear” as author Daniel Donahoo says, their “need to control, interject and govern” what their kids do online will limit the learning development of their children.
That view may seem to oppose the first point Radecki makes about monitoring what kids are doing online, but it truly doesn’t. Rather, a parent who knows how to use social media and other Internet technology not only relates better to their child, but also makes more intelligent household Internet policies, which can be created without the fear factor. That parent can sit down and explain what cyber-bullying is and why passwords shouldn’t be shared, all the while encouraging healthy online search habits. “Children supported to explore and search for information online will actually be better equipped to manage and avoid inappropriate content,” said Donahoo.
Looking at how Tommy Jordan handled the situation with his daughter’s Facebook postings in light of these two points seems extreme. While we don’t know all of the circumstances that led up to him shooting bullets through his daughter’s laptop, it’s easy to wonder if there was a better way to handle it.
When he defended his actions, he said that he didn’t have his daughter close her Facebook account because he’s an avid user himself and can empathize with the thought of losing years of memories. There are additional reasons to believe Jordan isn’t completely tech ignorant, leading me to believe that there was still the opportunity for him to spend productive time with his daughter on how to better use social networking. Instead he chose to shoot bullets through her laptop.
In the end, he’s at least partially right: parents more or less have the right to raise their children how they wish. However, there seems to be enough scientific evidence to show some methods are more productive than others. When it comes to raising a child in a tech-laden world, isn’t it more responsible to understand how that tech works and to spend time with the child creating a healthier, more meaningful view of the Internet and what it offers?
Photo via Oleg1975, Flickr Creative Commons
Thursday - Oct 27, 2011
It’s easy to see how reading the daily headlines would lead someone to believe that incorporating technology into education is a vital maneuver in modern education reform. “Technology in the classroom aids in learning,” “Technology sparks learning,” and “Technology changing how students learn” are some of the resounding refrains heard across the news wires, praising the adoption of education technology.
But not everyone is buying into the idea, with some likening the infiltration of computers, tablets, and other mobile devices into the education sphere to a colorful Band-Aid on an unduly large problem.
Take for example the authors of a recently released National Education Policy Center report, one that paints a picture of the failings of online schools due to lack of oversight, lax accreditation, and greedy commercial and corporate interests. With “nearly one in every 50 students in the U.S.” obtaining all or some of their education from online sources in 2007, and 27 U.S. states hosting online schools (which get most of their content and services from five private companies), the report’s authors claim that more must be done to ensure the quality of online education, especially in the face of rapid ongoing change.
At the end of the report the authors make four key recommendations to state legislatures:
1. Authenticate the source of students’ work using in-person exams or more rigorous credentials.
2. Apply fiscal and instructional regulations to K-12 virtual schools, focusing for example on teacher certification status and adjusted accounting practices.
3. Conduct audits to ensure actual costs are reported, providing a more accurate funding system by the state.
4. Create and maintain a list of agencies that give accreditations to K-12 virtual schools, ensuring the accreditation process is vigorous.
The National Education Policy Center’s recommendations are welcomed by many in the education industry, including those who question whether the traditional classroom setting should be hastily abandoned for the virtual school.
“We are concerned that in their eagerness to embrace the virtual school model, policymakers and some educational leaders are overstating its success and ignoring the tremendous advantages a classroom environment provides for students,” said David R. Colburn, director of the Reubin Askew Institute, and Brian Dassler, KIPP Renaissance High School principal, in an opinion piece for the St. Petersburg Times.
“There is no question that technology can be a great asset to students with learning deficiencies and an excellent supplement to classroom learning for all students,” they said. “As the technology is refined and expanded, virtual learning may offer more substantial advantages to students and teachers.”
Despite their optimism, they went on to caution state legislatures and school policymakers about buying too deeply into the hyped promise of the online learning environment.
This line of thinking falls in stark contrast to the methodology of a school in the United States’ Silicon Valley, which is home to numerous technology corporations. Last week the New York Times highlighted the Waldorf School of the Peninsula, one of many such schools that questions the idea that technology will save the modern classroom.
Far from taking online classes, the Waldorf schools don’t even incorporate technology, focusing instead on more traditional low-tech instructional methods. The fundamental belief stated by the school is that kids will easily learn how to use technology later in life, so why not focus on the more human and engaging elements of personal teaching.
Granted, this sort of take on technology in education seems almost as extreme as one that endorses stuffing every bit of tech possible into a class. Like most things in our lives, approaching some sort of balance seems like a more reasonable approach. The authors of the NEPC report subtly preach this balance by offering realistic suggestions on how to better a growing online education industry, despite believing that same industry has “zero high-quality research evidence” of being an “adequate replacement for traditional face-to-face teaching and learning.”
Even higher education students like Kinsey Streib at Purdue University are being realistic about the role of technology in education.
“Admittedly, some technology inhibits the learning experience,” Streib recently told the Exponent. “However, it is a pertinent teaching tool in modern education.”
In the end, diving head-first into technological classroom solutions — or shunning them completely — doesn’t seem like an appropriate education solution. State legislatures should make some conservative reforms, while at the same time scientists should do more quality research on learning methodologies that include technology. From there we can evaluate in what ways educators can best integrate technology into the classroom and better gauge the effectiveness of privatized online education, all without tripping over ourselves in a mad dash to educational uncertainty.
Photo via popofatticus, Flickr Creative Commons
Monday - May 31, 2010
I read an interesting article a few days ago on the Campus Technology Web site about the basic infrastructure of learning facilities and how they’ll likely have to change for full adoption of technology.
“What I think we are confronting now is that the core infrastructure of higher education, that’s been built over the past several hundred years, is really becoming a barrier to innovation in terms of what technology potentially can do to improve teaching and learning,” said Josh Baron, Director of Academic Technology and eLearning at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, New York.
Baron went on to say that without dedicated education technology leadership, many education facilities aren’t going to be able to adapt their infrastructures. Without solid leadership and direction, tech in schools may simply lead to “pure automation of teaching and learning to the point where it’s just people on computers memorizing facts,” he added.
I hinted at this failing while talking about the technology facade a few weeks ago. Operators of learning centers must consider having some sort of education tech leadership, whether it’s an internal or external candidate. Without that, deployment plans, curriculums, and training may be lacking or absent, causing the implemented tech to fail in purpose.
But are there consistent methodologies to be adopted to meet the tech challenge? Robert McLaughlin, who works for the New Hampshire Department of Education, has pondered the same question.
“Many people talk about how schools and preparation programs need to change dramatically to meet the needs of 21st century students, but there isn’t any consensus about what that really means,” McLaughlin, who was also the committee chair for the recently held New Hampshire invitation summit for educators, told the Examiner.
Teachers from all over New Hampshire participated in the summit with the hope of gaining a clearer picture of the problems they face. This large-scale, statewide approach is at least a first step in the right direction. But for every New Hampshire, there are plenty of other U.S. states and schools that aren’t as keyed in to the issues.
Do you find that the educators in your area are ready to deal with change? Do they seem to understand the driving factors that may very well change the basic infrastructure?
(Photo used under Creative Commons attribution license: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nesri/ / CC BY 2.0)
