One of the ways I (an old academic) think about technology is as a tool for implementing great ideas that have been around for some time but would be impractical without the advantages offered by the new tool. If I have a way to identify new opportunities (which are not really new), this is it. If old folks are credited for wisdom, this how I think it works.
I am a fan of digital content (ebooks and online content) because the format allows manipulation and not just consumption. While I do argue that it is personal cognitive behavior that makes any learning experience productive (minds on rather than hands on), the integration of tools and tasks with content is about the best we can do to encourage such productive personal behavior in others.
I refer you to a recent blog post explaining the highlighting/annotation potential of Newsela as an example. This is a commercial example of the type of idea I have been exploring and you may have tried without considering the learning benefits. For example, you may highlight and annotate what you read in Kindle books. Now, add a social component to such activities and you may really have something. A discussion (teacher or author led or not) can spring up as learners react to the content they encounter. Challenge the author, ask a question, add an example – use the opportunity provided by the technology to make an encounter with ideas more active.
Google introduced a feature within the Google Toolbar that allows users to comment on web sites. Other Google users can then review these comments. In the image below, I have identified the toolbar (in the case added to Firefox) and a comment I added to my own web page. The service is called Sidewiki.
Here is perhaps the most useful post I found on sidewiki (Danny Sullivan).
This idea is not exactly new and reminds me of some of the features of Diigo. Most others have compared sidewiki to other services so perhaps they are seeing something different in this product.
It is important to note that this service has already drawn criticism. Jeff Jarvis, normally a Google advocate (What would Google do?), predicts this will generate criticism of Google. I think the issue is that I as creator of content cannot control whether this service is linked to me content or not. I might welcome the interaction and see this is easier than some other add-on (e.g, tinychat), but I might also prefer that others not add to what I offer and perhaps encourage links elsewhere. The point is I am not in control. Google offers other services based on the inclusion of a small bit of code within the HTML of a page, this approach might have solved the lack of control issue. (Follow-up post from Jarvis)
BTW – the Google toolbar has other interesting capabilities. For example it, allows the translation of a page into other languages. Cindy is in Russia at the moment. So, babe – see if someone can read this.
The available options for doing traditional desktop applications online has expanded again. Adobe (Acrobat.com) recently allowed access to a suite of services including Buzzword (word processing) and ConnectNow (online conferencing and white board). Our distance education ventures at UND use Adobe Connect so it is interesting to see a similar free product with the same capabilities I use every week.
For the time being online apps (Google Docs, Zoho) are free, but have other significant advantages. I like the the opportunity to connect from anywhere and any machine. These features seem perfectly suited to the educational environment in which students work from home and school and may connect from different machines in the same lab or library. No more excuses about forgetting your homework.
What is often missed when exploring educational possibilities is the collaborative opportunities providers have added to their web-based applications. I must say I have not used Zoho tools for some time and cannot remember what capabilities are included. I use Google docs a lot and share documents with colleagues for the purpose of collaborative editing. I have yet to use the new Adobe site for actual work, but I have spent some time exploring the features of the word processing program. My first impressions were very positive. Adobe also recently released the online Adobe Photoshop Express. These products are not accessible as a suite at present, but unless Adobe has some plan for a subscription service for some but not all products in mind, it would make sense to see common access for these products/services in the future.
The limitations for the Acrobat site appear to be 5 gigs of storage and 3 participants in a conferencing session.
ReadWriteWeb provides a nice review of Acrobat.com.
The presentation was recorded using a program called Screenflick and the mike built in to my MacBook Pro. The system seems to work reasonably well as long as I remember not to pace while I talk.
I select convention sessions to attend based on session titles (and how many blocks I must walk if the session is another hotel). Participatory media is a phrase that now attracts my attention.
I noted this label for a 12:30 session and found that I was unable to get close to the door let alone gain entrance to the 40 person room. Perhaps folks are attracted when the speakers are Howard Gardner, Henry Jenkins and Carrie James. Who schedules this collection in a 40 person room? Division G needs more members so their sessions can be scheduled in larger rooms.
I tried the label again at 2:15 and had no difficulty finding a seat. There are probably several lessons here, but let me save comments on what such lessons might be until later. This session ended up considering adolescent media production in what I would regard as specialized and dedicated environments. The session featured presentations by “media literacy” types. I use the the word “types” from the amused perspective of sometimes being “typed” myself. At a generic level, it is true that I am a “psychologist” and hanging with my high school friends in rural Iowa it is interesting the reaction that this label generates. No, we are not all Freudians! In fact, potentially the most common application of Freudian interpretation is probably practiced by “media types”. Anyway, it is important to allow professionals their strange language and customs. “Poemness” was a new term for me, but hey, it is probably a couple of papers or presentations or possibly even a book for you. Such is the academic game.
This second session examined adolescent media production and used as a focus several impressive programs (Youth Radio, Reel Works, In Progress, Poetry For The People). The “subtext” for these programs is visible (note the effort to share the language of this culture) from terminology used to describe benefits and experiences – empowerment, social justice, identity development, marginalized youth.
What strikes me about the ideas you encounter at a conference like AERA is how broadly folks see concepts such as technology integration and participatory media. Our own writing about such topics assumes applications in core content areas and typical schools. Others view learning much more broadly both in terms of content and location.
So, I did not read the fine print and I did not look for “names” I recognized, but I did encounter some examples I could appreciate and some applications I endorse. An observation Cindy made in returning from Russia occurred to me. I think we think other educational systems focus on fact learning and neglect the development of creativity and other forms of higher order thinking. This is our explanation for international comparisons on NAEP exams (or similar international comparisons). To the contrary, creative projects are common in the student experiences we have observed in China, Japan, and now Russia. The opportunity for creative projects is somehow accommodated despite less impressive budgets. The participatory examples I have noted here were generated outside of traditional educational environments. Why is that?
The big participatory web news of the day (or perhaps year) is Google’s announcement of Google apps for organizations (translate as schools for this audience). The education edition is free. A summary of the concept and products is available for viewing (check out the 12 minute version). Google calendar, docs, gmail, page creator – the collaborative tools – make up the collection. It looks like Google is going to serve as an ISP hosting a branded site for a school (business or individual).
One interesting opportunity within this collection is Google Sites (based on the old JotSpot if I am interpreting the announcement appropriately). Google site offers template-based web development and collaborative. See this linked summary differentiating the Standard, Premier and Education editions.
This looks very impressive. More when I have had time to experiment.
Some time ago, I wrote about the MacArthur Foundation’s intent to investigate the participatory web. After some preparatory work, the Foundation offered a call for grant proposals and now has announced the recipients. Andy Carvin offers a nice summary of some of the awards and includes links to some of the projects.
An item that caught my attention was a course offered by Stanford’s Howard Rheingold on virtual communities ( see course syllabus). Carvin describes the course as an
initiative by online community pioneer Howard Rheingold will develop an online community for teachers and students to collaborate and contribute ideas for teaching and learning about the psychological, interpersonal, and social issues related to participatory media.
If educational implications of the participatory web interest you, take a look at the reading list contained within the syllabus.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
You must be logged in to post a comment.