Perhaps too much has been made of generational difference in the way technology has been used. And, perhaps there is a confusion between comfort level and productivity.
The first ever virtual longitudinal study carried out by the CIBER research team at University College London claims that, although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web.
The group responsible for this study intends to track individuals longitudinally. The group also seems to contend that bad scholarship is like a disease – the rest of us are catching it from our students (I made the part about the disease model up – the group says no such thing, but they do observe that similar patterns are emerging across generations).
(pdf explaining the research and intent of the group is available to those in which the problem has not progressed past the point of no return – read while you still can) 😉
BTW- the details in the pdf are a little sparse. This is more of an issue piece, but the issues are interesting and linked to some research.
This is follow-up to yesterday’s post considering how social networks might more usefully advance general understanding.
Have you been following the NYTimes debate between Rick Cotton and Tim Wu considering copyright in the digital era? I like the debate format (with side reader comments) as one approach that may make productive use of social networks. At least with the debate format you must consider active opposition to arguments. This is better than allowing one group backing one position to explain the arguments of the hypothetical opposition. It is important to consider “both sides of the story” (with a nod to Phil Collins).
Back in June, I read “Cult of the Amateur” and made the prediction that this book would set off a heated commentary from some of the visible supporters of educational blogging. The book did not generate the level of response that I expected. Perhaps the individuals I had expected to respond chose to ignore the book in the hopes the issues raised would go away. In October, I offered my own analysis, partly based on some positions I was familiar from social psychology. I think the book is still sitting in one of the piles on my desk, but I had pretty much forgotten the issue.
Out of the blue this week, I read a post from Andy Carvin bringing the topic back into focus. Andy offers a nice summary, links to others who have commented (perhaps I ignored these posts), AND links to a new blog – Why we like web 2.0 … promising a more positive and negative evaluation of web 2.0 apps and activities (we will see). So far, I do not see much pro and con type analysis.
It is the give and take on issues, including the value of “web 2.0” learning, I was encouraging in my analysis. As I argued in my earlier post (I should have titled it CNN or FOX), if we read more and more of the same arguments we are not necessarily improving our understanding, we are typically just radicalizing our positions. This is what I would call a digital literacy issue.
BTW, in my earlier posts on this topic, I note that the debate format may have some value. The example I offer is a debate hosted by The Economist. I see that the Economist has another currently active debate on the value of social networking in education. Funny how these convenient examples just pop up.
I have been experimenting with an online service called OpenDNS. I must give credit to a Leo Laporte’s podcast for bringing this service to my attention.
Most tech folks are probably familiar with the role played by a DNS server. As I understand the purpose of the DNS server, it functions to translate the web address we enter into the IP of the server. The IP number directs the query to the needed machine.
My understanding of how OpenDNS works is that the DNS server could perform functions between this translation. It could check the request against self selected filter options and tell you that you really don’t want to go to the site you have requested. It could also record information about your Internet use. It might seem that these are sinister functions, but you may want to impose well defined types of filtering on your own activity (e.g., don’t let me go to known phishing sites) and you may be interested in your patterns of Internet use. I am guessing my service provider (the University of North Dakota) at this moment has a record of the activity originating from the IP of the computer I am using anyway. Perhaps the issue is – who do you trust?
The filtering options in OpenDNS are quite specific (phishing is the only one I apply) and may be of interest to institutions/businesses who feel the need to apply filtering. The thing I found most interesting about examining the log of my “activity” was the number of connections I was making to services without my awareness. All of the services my browsers activate without recent purposeful action were there on the list. As far as I know, these were all connections I asked my browser to make by adding plugins and using a wide variety of online interactive services, but it is informative to see just how many different servers you connect to.
The process of making use of OpenDNS is fairly simple. You add the OpenDNS IP as your preferred DNS. You create an account on OpenDNS and set preferences regarding what type of filtering you prefer and whether or not you want to log your activity.
The one thing I worry about is what happens if OpenDNS goes away. It might create one of those weird problems I have so much difficulty trouble shooting. What are the odds that two months from now I will remember that I am using this unique service as my designated DNS. Maybe the operating system just defaults to something else, but probably not unless I maintain multiple DNS listings (it was my impression that my system was skipping OpenDNS when I did this, but I may be wrong). This is one problem with experimenting with so many different tools and services. I simply cannot keep track of what I have done over time. I guess if the feel the need to experiment, the message is? – Back up often and be prepared to reinstall??
National Geographic has a recent feature on North Dakota. The piece was vaguely reminiscent of Poppers’ Buffalo Commons. In both cases, the negative imagery (isolation and bleakness) used to describe N.D. has offended many who live here (e.g., today’s editorial). Perhaps it depends on what one regards as beautiful and whether one regards a low population density as depressing. The complaint here is that low population density has been attributed to negative factors (cold and long winters, flat landscapes, lack of opportunity). Actually, it can be argued a declining population is a sign of progress. For example, farming has become so high tech and functions on such a large scale that it does not require a large number of individuals devoted to the tasks. I guess efficiency and productivity has costs.
It might be argued that these are the best of times in North Dakota. Our state is often on the up swing when other states are experiencing problems. The farmers experienced bumper groups this year and unlike so many years when the crops are large, the prices now are also very high. As I understand the argument, the use of corn to create alcohol for fuels has driven up the price for all grains and influenced the cost of any product directly or indirectly influenced by expensive feed grains. Check out what has happened to food costs as a consequence. North Dakota also has massive coal reserves and some oil. I am not certain I am pleased with the consequences of burning coal and not sure the reason extracting oil in North Dakota is now lucrative is a good sign for the country as a whole, but these industries are booming. BTW – so is wind energy.
We even profit from the down turn in the general economy and the advance of the Canadian against the U.S. dollars. The Canadians are streaming across the border here to purchase inexpensive goods. Hotel rooms were often difficult to come by during the holiday shopping season and all those folks filling up the waiting areas in eating establishments on weekends is annoying – 😉 .
There are some things that bother me about living in a low population state. In some sectors you cannot downsize services to match your population. Small towns are suffering here as in many midwest states. Education in small communities and in the state in general is a good example. I understand this situation through my personal experiences at the University of North Dakota. The reality of critical mass often represents a challenge for us. You need a med school and a law school. You need physics and philosophy departments and fine arts programs. To maintain an institution that offers the necessary diversity of expertise and the breadth of graduate programs necessary to maintain the ranking necessary to compete for external funds is a challenge. If you cannot compete for external funding, you cannot attract quality faculty members and the most elite students and you also have fewer resources to work with. One element in the economics of the institution must be tuition dollars and obviously the more students the more tuition. We know exactly how many kids are out there in K-12 and we know the number is declining. This puts a research institution in a difficult situation – you need to draw students from elsewhere and students don’t come from elsewhere unless you have high quality programs. How do you generate the money to create the level of quality necessary to attract students? You can find mediocre anywhere.
I hope technology is part of the answer. While there is always the danger of assuming the area in which you work is the area to develop, I do think that the opportunities in online education represent a real opportunity for extending the reach of quality programs. I also think I understand the challenges in doing so. Time efficiencies are so often misunderstood. Still, online interactivity has come a long way and quality experiences relevant to many areas of study are now possible and continuing to improve.
Lifehacker has a nice tutorial on the installation of MediaWiki on a machine using the Windows OS. I run my apps on Macs, but I know there are many who use the Windows platform to serve web content and getting started without guidance is always a challenge. Yes, MediaWiki is the core software associated with Wikiopedia, but you don’t have to projects of that magnitude in mind to use the powerful wiki software yourself.
I have been interested in the $100 laptop since I first learned about the project in 2005. When the opportunity to purchase an XO (the name for the first version to ship) as part of a buy one / give one plan became available we made the commitment (Our XO ).
Of late, the grand plan seems to be growing confused. The price point has changed at least temporarily – the $100 laptop is now $200. Perhaps this is inflation, but it is more likely the inability to operate on the needed scale. I understand the buy one/ give one plan was an effort to increase the number of machines to be produced even if all of the machines did not go their target audience. The scale issue comes up in some other ways. Clearly, there is no longer a single plan and there may now be several vendors interested in offering a low price, educationally focused machine (Intel dispute with OLPD – New York Times; Intel quits one laptop per child). There is also the dispute regarding the operating system – UNIX vs/and Windows (Negroponte at CES is positive about eventual connection with Windows). It is even unclear if the OLPC agenda is now focused exclusively on other countries or has been modified to allow some U.S. schools to participate (Birmingham in deal to bring XO to students. (eSchool News)). This last issue is strange – if U.S. sales are to be part of the model, limiting access in any way seems a very bad idea. As a developer, I find it difficult to spend too much time with the machine exploring possibilities without the opportunity to field test ideas (meaning machines available in local schools). I can see no U.S. sales. I can see open U.S. sales. I don’t get a few projects here or there when the original model asked for buy in to support projects elsewhere.
I think competition is great. I think exploring competing educational models is great. I hope other agendas (power/visibility/control, profit, platform exclusivity) do not dilute and confuse the original goal. Let’s get some machines in the field and let other issues work themselves out based on what students are able to accomplish.
