Data on general use of technology in education is hard to come by and typically outdated by the time it is distributed. My writing activities require that I constantly search for such data so that I can provide a sense of what is typical. Andy Carvin’s site alerted me to a new study concerning K-12 students enrolled in online courses conducted by the Sloan Foundation. While the rapid increase in online instruction in higher ed was obvious from my vantage point, I must admit that the level of online instruction in K-12 surprised me.
Based on these numbers, the researchers estimate that approximately 700,000 K-12 students are enrolled in online courses, up from less than 50,000 students in 2001.
One group taking heavy advantage of online opportunities is the smaller school in rural areas. I was interested in data from my state, North Dakota, but information on individual states is not provided.
The pdf is available for download at the Sloan site.
I hate running into messages like this after I am home and settled down for an hour of relaxing reading before heading off to bed. By chance, I was scanning the web2.ohh blog and encountered an urgent message to WordPress users. Supposedly, a cracker gained access to the WordPress servers and inserted malicious code in the upgrade available for download. I think I upgraded before the date this exploit supposedly was added, but it was not worth taking the risk. So, it was back to the office to install the upgrade. I must stay on the good side of the security people.
I must admit I have wondered about this before. Wouldn’t joining an open source project and inserting malicious code in a component offer a relatively easy way to insert access opportunities in many servers? I suppose the open source community examines contributions carefully. This was not the reported cause of the WordPress problem because scripts in a couple of WordPress modules were modified after being approved for distribution. As I understand the danger, the modules would allow PHP code to be submitted remotely in a form that would be run by the server. In contrast, if I would enter PHP commands as I enter the text for this blog, the PHP commands should not be interpeted.
echo “hi”;
The night watchman always says the same thing – “Working late Dr. Grabe?”
Time for a little political activision. You will soon encounter a documentary exploring the history of commercial communication and the importance of assuring net neutrality. The video obviously takes one position, but as I understand the issues I am in favor of keeping the Internet open.
I have decided that my formal academic training is somewhat of an obstacle. It functions somewhat like a conscience. It is that little voice in the back of my head reminding me that it is inappropriate to be a promoter without having solid evidence to back claims I may find advantageous to advocate. This is probably the one issue that troubles me the most when I read many blogs related to my personal interests. I don’t mind bloggers promoting ideas associated with personal profit motives (e.g., books, speaking or consultant fees) because I do believe individuals with good ideas should be compensated for their knowledge and skills. However, those in such situations do have a responsibility to seriously consider the evidence for and against the positions they accept fees for promoting. In my world view, this is about science and not promotion.
Many participatory or constructivist positions on education (this covers a great deal of ground) are contrasting themselves with something. This alternative is described in a variety of ways – the traditional approach, the instructivist approach, the lecture approach, instructor centered, etc. – and as a hold over from another time requiring different skills (an assembly line mentality). Clearly, occupations have changed and require different skills or at least a change in the skills that are emphasized. Clearly, information can often be conveniently accessed from external sources and need not be stored in personal memory. The issue is not so much that performance in changing times requires more sophisticiation and a different set of skills, but how best to develop these skills. There are many proposals that essentially suggest that new skills require different learning experiences and some of these proposals have come from me. What that little voice in my head keeps reminding me is that I should be able to offer sound emprical support when I make such claims.
This concern comes and goes with me. At present the topic is more salient because I am teaching a graduate educational psyçhology course and engaging students in the consideration of constructivism. I have always felt this unease when presenting/discussing this topic noting that the “research base” in the reading assignments I use seem weak in contrast to the references available for other topics. My personal preparation for these discussions also engages me with challenging positions taken by very well respected scholars (a partial list appears at the end of this entry). Why is it that the blogs I read seem unaware of these contrary positions and seem unable to respond in kind by offering empirical support for the positions they advocate?
As if by magic, one blog I follow (EdTechDev) has posted an entry that at least seems to acknowledge my concern. D Holton seems to be thinking along similar lines in recognizing this unacknowledged challenge.
I sometimes wish there would be an opportunity to get these folks together in the same room and make them deal with each other. One problem with reading what people have to say is that individuals are free to ignore core issues and continue to harp on personal perspectives. If the blogosphere is to move causes forward by “churning ideas”, part of the process must require a more direct approach to considering the data presented by contrasting positions. So, I guess this is a challenge – how about a little more effort directed toward reading what the position being put down has to offer and a commitment to offer up a strong refutation (e.g., Hake).
– – – –
Chall, J. (2000). The academic achievement challenge: What really works in classrooms. New York: Guilford Press.
Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R.E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.
Lesgold, A. (2001). The nature and methods of learning by doing. American Psychologist, 56(11), 964-973.
Mayer, R. (2001). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59, 14-19.
Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
