Halloween eve at the Grabe home. We are waiting for trick or treaters to show up at the door. Business has been slow because it has turned cold.
We decide to do a little experimenting – Cindy in the living room in front of the television – me in my office. Both have our computers going. Cindy wants to try a new program she has heard about called Yugma. The screen capture below is my computer screen while I mess around in Flickr captured from Cindy’s desktop. Pretty impressive. This is the Pro version (everyone gets to experiment with the Pro version and then it reverts to the free version in a few weeks).
I am familiar with commercial products (Breeze – or at least what used to be called Breeze) for distance ed applications so I have some experience with the desktop sharing thing. We traded files, used the markup tools to markup and annotate the shared screen, recorded a session, switched who shared the screen with whom, IMd, etc. Everything worked as advertised.
I am guessing there are some useful applications that extend beyond our strange way of spending our evenings. Take a look.
A new PEW survey (pdf available) indicates that in comparison to 2004 parents of teenagers have a slightly more negative reaction to the impact the Internet has on their kids. The down turn (7% fewer parents indicating the Internet has been a good thing) seems to be more related to content than time spent. The survey indicates about 70% of parents have rules about the types of sites their children can visit.
This just in from the “no spin zone” – liberal professors are distorting history (see education for the aughts blog). Read this post and the comments – this is an interesting debate regarding the “purpose” of teaching of history.
I have not historically had an interest in history, but I am probably one of those liberal professors and appreciating my own ignorance may be a force for good. What I know about this topic I know because Cindy received a grant several years ago allowing her to focus on the development of a web site promoting the “hands on” teaching of history. We worked on a follow-up proposal (unfunded), but I read some of the literature regarding how historians view their work and view the way their work is used in K-12 education. One book I remember, “History on Trial: Culture Wars and the Teaching of the Past” reviewed the disputes surrounding what historians do and the controversy over what accounts of history will be taught. Ironically, O’Reilly has a book and a television spot titled “Culture Wars”.
My take on the core issues is that some want to use U.S. History as a means to develop patriotism. Others contend that the course should familiarize students with U.S. History. As I understand the argument (or at least a relevant perspective), there are events and there are the experiences of many individuals in experiencing those events. The history of “the famous men” is not the only perspective on events and we as a people are the product of many individual (and group) histories. There are “her stories”, the perspective of minorities, there are not so appropriate events and behaviors, but it is all our story.
What is it we want students to learn from the study of history? Part of the answer to this question, as I understand it, is that we want students to understand the process of historical inquiry. The complexity of history, the multiple perspectives, the opportunity to evaluate primary sources, etc. present the opportunity to engage in critical thinking and problem solving. These skills are perhaps more important than acquiring the stories of famous men that represented our own education. The world was different then and we were being prepared to face different challenges. We did not have to worry about the confusing messages we encounter daily. We did not have to worry about trying to make sense of the no spin zone.
I have always admired those who write the open source programs I use. The ideal of a group of individuals working together to build resources by contributing what they can is so cool.
For the most part I have always been a user rather than a contributor. The skill level of those who write WordPress, Mediawiki, Drupal, Scuttle and the other software I run is far beyond my own. It is enough to make you feel a little guilty.
Today someone wrote and asked me for the code I wrote to allow those who use my educational resource database to rate the value of the resources I include. I sent the code. I am not sure anyone will be able to interpret my code – I pretty much just hack around until what I want to do works. Still, I now feel like I made a contribution.
Researchers have released a report evaluating student achievement as a consequence of a 1:1 laptop initiative. The researchers claim quite significant improvements in writing proficiency. At this point I have only had an opportunity to read the executive summary so I may have more to say after I have read the methodology.Maine Laptop Research.
There is considerable literature one can access that bears on the question of how and if we might benefit from web 2.0 tools (excuse this phrase if it annoys you – this is not about 1.0 vs. 2.0).On one side, there is Cult of the Amateur arguing that shared free knowledge is likely to be flawed. On the other side, you have Wikinomics; Small Pieces, Loosely Joined; Smart Mobs; parts of The World is Flat; etc. arguing that online information sharing is better than sliced bread, fresh bagels, or chocolate. I bounce between being depressed and elated depending on which book I happen to be reading.While I do not really feel I am closer to the answers I am looking for, I keep buying these books.My most recent trip to Barnes and Noble led to the purchase of Infotopia. The author examines the question of how (and if, I guess) many minds produce knowledge. Many minds in this case do not necessarily have to express their wisdom via a computer and the Internet, but blogs, wikis, online prediction markets, etc. figure prominately in the author’s agenda. The book draws on what seems a literature from social psychology or management investigating “deliberating” groups and the question of whether a group will be able to surface and integrate collective knowledge.Many times it appears that deliberation – open sharing and discussion – does more harm than good. I did pick up a couple of useful phrases. At least, if I don’t have answers it may now appear like I understand the problems. Cocoon and echo chamber – we tend to read those who think like us and we tend to repeat similar messages in follow-up interactions. I used to call this the “CNN vs. Fox effect”, but now I have some new terms. As applied to blogs, the blogs we select to inform us may tell us what we want to hear rather than challenging us to consider different perspectices. The result is a radicalization of beliefs and values and possibly the perception that we have become educated. It is true, I have not read a pro NCLB blog lately.I have been following a different kind of approach that on the surface may offer a remedy. The Economist has been sponsoring debates for the benefit of readers for some time (at least as I understand the background). The publication is now attempting to adapt this tradition to the Internet with some twists (viewer voting). The readers were even allowed to vote on questions and the questions selected for “debate” involve technology and education. After reading Infotopia, this makes some sense. No matter what positions readers bring to process, they will encounter reasoned argument on both sides of an issue. This is worth following (note – registration is free).
The pioneers thing? – I am searching for a term to fill in the gaps allowed by categorizing folks as immigrants and natives.Anyway, I came across this post which attempts to create historical connections between hypercard and Safari 3.0. Not certain which principles of historical inquiry are violated, but I suppose the answer would be “several”. Still, it was cool just to see screen captures from hypercard. Remember cyberdog? What a stroll down memory lane!
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.
