Elementary Student Perspective on Internet Safety

Internet Safety 64 

- Written by J, Gr 5

First, I have a couple limitations for internet safety; NO sending any private information via social networking, NO using technology without permission, NO misusing others' files/work/info, NO use of technology not under supervision, NO sleeping less than 1/2 feet away from technology, NO accepting an user agreements/etc. without reading it through.

Second, I have a few and tips suggestions for everyone reading this: Note that children now have more access to technology and that there should be limits to how much kids use technology. I also think that every one should know the rules of internet safety. Schools should teach this. Kids are using technology in schools and in the classroom. Teacher's should teach students how to use technology well. 

I know a lot about internet safety because I saw a presentation at school by Paul Davis. He taught us about the dangers of the internet as a kid and as an adult. The link to his website is below. It is important for teachers and for students to read this website or see his presentation on internet safety.

http://socialnetworkingsafety.net/

3 Profiles: Secondary School Student's Opinion on 21st Century Learning

As part of tutoring with the SSEN Learning Centre this month, we are focusing on understanding ourselves as active 21st Century Learners. 

We first worked on brainstorming and defining what we think 21st Century Learning looks like in the classroom today using mind mapping.

We then wrote individual mini-blogs to reflect on how the current education system in Ontario is providing 21st Century Learning opportunities and what else can be done to bridge an existing gap.

To begin, the students were each shown this tweet by Lester Laminack to spark their active minds for engaging with 21st century learning concepts. His website http://www.lesterlaminack.com/ was also used for reference.

 MINI BLOG PROFILES

(All information/images shared with permission)

MINI BLOG ONE: ERIC, GRADE 10, DSBN 

 Students from a century ago and students from 21st century are very different. Invention of electronics, such as smartphones and personal computers is the biggest difference between them. Students' learning style and the time period is different. We cannot have a class without collaboration and interactions between students and teachers, and we should remember that we are learning for our future. 

Teachers usually restrict students from using cellphones in a class, but technology can be a tool for students and teachers to make them learn better. Almost every students including grade 1 to grade 12 knows what smartphone is. They use smartphones to communicate with their friends, or playing games a lot, and these reasons make teachers to hate smartphones. However, if teachers can teach students using the smartphones, students will be motivated to learn, because they already are very familiar with the learning tool called smartphones. Electronic resources, such as ebooks or online learning videos actually help students to learn and remember them. 

Teachers in Korea are stuck in the old learning style, which forces students to memorize, not to learn, and actually have a beneficial effect to students for the future.  Students in a class must follow instructions that teachers give, and cannot have a discussion within the class. This method usually makes students to forget what they learned after a year or two because they didn't really understand what teachers were saying. What students did were just copying what teachers said. This is very inefficient way to get students to learn. There must be discussions and debate in the class, and students must share their own opinions and interact with their classmates and also the teacher. Collaboration is also important, but the old method prevents students to learn collaboration and confidence to speak up, and actually "learn". This is why we should have think about the future for the students that really can help them to "learn" something from the education system.

MINI BLOG TWO: BRIAN, GRADE 9, DSBN

 

I often think about technologies settled in our school sometimes needs to be changed or improved. And this comes to my mind very often when I look around my school. When I am looking at slow computer, I think about how should they improve this computer's speed. It's not that I am uncomfortable with these technologies we have in my school, instead, of course if my school is going to expand the level of technologies in learning, they could start putting some more thinking into it. For instance, they could put more classwork into technologies and do some classwork with computers and taking notes with computers to prevent sore arms and hands by writing a stack of notes and make it easier to access their work and so on. They should have more serious rules about electronics and doing other things on computers instead of finishing their classwork. A lot of things should be changing soon and specifically technologies in schools.

EDUC 1F95 - Seminar 11 - CBC News Article

Oilsands companies could get a say in new Alberta curriculum
Click title for link to article

CBC NEWS- Posted: Mar 12, 2014 6:59 PM MT Last Updated: Mar 12, 2014 8:26 PM MT

The Alberta government plans to include oil and gas companies in consultations on the new school curriculum.

School boards were asked to come up with groups to provide input on what children should learn.

Education Minister Jeff Johnson is defending the decision to include oilsands companies in consultations on Alberta's new school curriculum. (CBC)

The Edmonton Public School Board plans to ask oilsands companies Suncor and Syncrude what to teach children in kindergarten to Grade 3.

"What are we looking for in the graduates of tomorrow. Certainly we have a perspective but we need to hear all stakeholders," said Mark Liguori, assistant superintendent of schools for Edmonton Public.

Education minister Jeff Johnson thinks including the business community in discussions will help.
"One of the things I think they may be able to help with is how do we attract kids to that side of the business, science technology and engineering piece of the education system that so much of the economy is telling us we're short on," he said.

However, NDP education critic Deron Bilous thinks this is the first step in allowing corporations to influence Alberta schools, which he worries may go too far.

"There's also examples in the United States where coal companies have been involved in curriculum design where they've written a completely one-sided view speaking only of the benefits," he said. 
Johnson says companies are only providing input and will not write the curriculum.

Syncrude and Suncor aren’t the only companies involved in curriculum consultations. Stantec, PCL Construction, Apple and Microsoft Canada will also get a say.

Suncor has yet to receive an invitation to join the consultations. Syncrude hasn't decided whether it will take part.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:  
Answers included are reflective of the conversations had in EDUC 1F95 Seminar 15 & 16 - Nov 21
 

1. Should oil and gas companies be allowed to influence curriculum? Why or why not? What impact do you think they would have?

The conversation began heated about this topic. The conversation shifted from who should be able to have a say to who already has a say in curriculum development. What really would be the disadvantages of Canadian companies having a say (not a definitive vote - just a say) in the content of curriculum? 

We discussed how society is always in need for the development of schools to foster youth into relevant, contributing members to local economy and society.  Shouldn't we have a curriculum and school system in place that aids students to developing into contributing members of society with the skills and knowledge needed to survive in that society as an adult. Who better to speak about the skills and needs in demand for that society than the companies on which help build the society? 

The consensus was that companies should be able to have a say but that means all Canadian companies. Allowing certain companies influence and others not can create a biased curriculum with skewed skill sets and societal competencies. The final vote in curriculum standards and content should be left with educational professionals and researchers. They should be considering a holistic view of Canadian needs and skills for a successful society. This includes but cannot be limited to assessing the influence of economic companies. 

 

The Twenty-First-Century Teacher - Revisiting the Story Model (5P42)

THE STORY MODEL 
 
 The story model describes a change process in expanding contexts from the personal to the social, cultural, global, and universal. The frames of the Story Model represent ways of knowing. The first three frames suggest our knowing is informed by individual or social differences; the universal frame also informs out ways of knowing and speaks to the aspects that connects us to others. 

- Our knowing is filtered first through a frame informed by our personal experiences. The students in your class will all learn a bit differently because they will connect new knowledge with their unique past experiences. Your personal frame will also affect your own learning.
- The second frame is a cultural frame; culture is defined as a set of values and beliefs that drive group life in the particular culture we live in. 
- The third frame is the global frame. In the twenty-first century, we are all connected to and affected by global conditions, and the global frame is evident in education. Students in classrooms around the world collaboratively engage in tasks ranging from peer editing to sharing ideas about solutions to global problems. 
- The outer frame is the universal frame. This frame reminds us that, regardless of our differences, we are all human beings with similar needs, drives, and emotions. 

(Drake, 2014, p. x-xi)

 Chapter 6 - The Twenty-First-Century Teacher in Interweaving Curriculum and Classroom Assessment written by Susan Drake, Joanne L. Reid & Wendy Kolohon provides a look at how teachers can educate and engage with students effectively in the twenty-first-century. 

A Canadian Education Association study called Teaching the Way We Aspire to Teach: Now and in the Future (2012) asked teachers what they valued. The teachers identified the following:

• passion for teaching and learning
• caring and commitment for students
• creativity, flexibility, and willingness to take risks
• knowledge and drive for self improvement 
• energy, enthusiasm, and engagement
• trust, collaboration, and connectedness 

As a complementary view, when asked what engaged them, 220 students wanted teachers who love their work, who believed in students, and who acted like human beings (Wolpert-Gawron, 2012). 

A close match existed between how teachers aspired to Be and how students wanted their teachers to Be. 

I was curious to see how other twenty-first-century educators are predicting and preparing for fast changing educating practices in the upcoming years in North America. While poking around on wordpress blogs I came across one blog called Rliberni's Blog - Radical Language that posted about his predictions for teaching and education in 2060 and the journey we have to get from here to there.

He proposes that classrooms will be radically different. We will shift completely away from passive learning where students sit in rows and they copy information (image on left) to active/creative/meaningful discovery (image on right).

Image citation: From video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiKrFcgVSIU

This shift, he explains in his video, comes from the changing needs of the society for different kinds of labor and economy players. He proposes that there are three kinds of thinkers and industry players in society that ensure the stability of our economy and society. Yellow represents physical labor (which he suggests is the most prominent and needed component of the work force today). Pink represents mental labor which makes up a good chunk of today's work force. The small blue box in the stack on the left represents the amount of art/innovation/creative/active/discovery labor that exists currently in society. 

If we compare these three types of labor to the existing model of education, we can see how the stack of labor on the left is representative of what exists today in the work force. If educators and students alike have identified the need to shift from the existing story model of education to one representative of twenty-first-century thinkers and innovators, we can see the need for teachers to shift their practices too. Educators need to be responding and assisting the shift from passive learning to active discovery learning to keep up with the predicted shift in societal and labor patterns.

Exploring Interdisciplinary Curriculum (5P42)

Literature Review: Integrating the disciplines: Successful interdisciplinary subjects. 

Literature:

Golding, C. (2009). Integrating the disciplines: Successful interdisciplinary subjects. Melbourne, University of Melbourne Press.

Type:

Guide / Descriptive

Review:

This guide, Integrating the disciplines: Successful interdisciplinary subjects, outlines why and how the University of Melbourne believes interdisciplinary teaching and learning to be integral to the curriculum of their institution. As well as the primary document, two supporting documents: Attributes of the Melbourne Graduate (2009) & Refining our Strategy (2009) were included in the guide to support claims made by the CSHE (center for the study of higher education).

This guide seems to provide two distinct purposes; one to enhance and educate on the interdisciplinary methods of the University of Melbourne and to provide a document for reference to enable consistency, second as a tool for educators outside of the University to use this process for themselves elsewhere. I believe that reading this guide has helped me conceptualize how our integrated units are going to be framed and how to go about it. I found the language in this guide very accessible and easy to relate and engage with your own interdisciplinary practice. This guide provides insight the importance and ideal scenarios to engage with either disciplinary or interdisciplinary subjects. Although the guide is written in the context and for the purpose of a University, the methods, procedures and findings are easily transferable to post secondary interdisciplinary work.

I would like to include the sections within this guide as I found just looking at the headings sparked ideas.

• Introducing interdisciplinary subjects
• What are interdisciplinary subjects?
• What are the generic objectives of interdisciplinary subjects?
• Do interdisciplinary subjects require disciplinary depth?
• How do you design and coordinate interdisciplinary subjects? (Included - Interdisciplinary subject template)
• How do you assess interdisciplinary learning?
• What conceptions do students need for successful interdisciplinary teaching and learning?
• How do you evaluate the success of interdisciplinary subjects?
• What criteria can be used for quality assurance of interdisciplinary subjects?

MY COMMENTS: 

I would like to include here a selection of referenced works at the end of this document that I believe may lead to deeper understanding of the practices of interdisciplinary work at the University of Melbourne and to inform practices of interdisciplinary work across the world.

Petrie, H. (1976). Do You See What I See? The Epistemology of Interdisciplinary Inquiry. Educational Researcher, 5(2), 9-15.

Paul, R. W., & Elder, L. (2002). The Miniature Guide to the Art of Asking Essential Questions. Santa Rosa: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Paul, R. W. (1994). Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Survive in a Rapidly Changing World (revised 3rd ed.). Melbourne: Hawker Brownlow Education.

Nikitina, S. (2002). Three Strategies for Interdisciplinary Teaching: Contextualising, Conceptualising, and Problem-Solving. Project Zero: Harvard Graduate School of Education.

Lyon, A. (1992). Interdisciplinarity: Giving up Territory. College English, 54(6), 681-693.

McCalman, J., Muir, L., & Soeterboek, C. (2008). Adventures with Breadth: A Story of Interdisciplinary Innovation. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.

Miller, M., & Boix Mansilla, V. (2004). Thinking Across Perspectives and Disciplines. Interdisciplinary Studies Project, Project Zero: Harvard Graduate School of Education.

What is development? Defining for a purpose. (5P30)

Teaching, Learning, Development:

What is development? Defining for a purpose.

“Our main critique of a traditional notion of development is that it has been assumed that development is independent of an observer. We argue that development is a social construction emerging in and among communities of practice” (Matusov, Hayes, & Drye, 2007, p.1).

In an attempt to fully understand the scope of the field I am researching under (Teaching, Learning, and Development), defining the broad discourse that falls under each of these concepts will assist in conceptualizing my work. During my undergraduate education classes and pre-service education, I was exposed to many opportunities to discuss, reflect, and define learning and teaching. I had previously assumed that the scope of what development encompasses was a concise, easy to define term used to enhance our understanding of teaching and learning. After reading Matusov, Hayes, & Drye’s article Whose Development?Salvaging the concept of development within a sociocultural approach toeducation, I was able to see that defining the discourse of development was more complicated than I had anticipated.

I am wondering how does education fit into the scope of development? Three differing angles to this debate have fueled education research on the development of students. Piaget believed that development was a constraint for education which cautions educators against implementing curricula and instruction that lay outside the student’s developmental stage. Where Vygotsky believed in the zone of proximal development in which more capable peers, adults, or a sociocultural activity (e.g. play) engage a child in more advanced actions than he or she would have done on their own and thus defines the child’s development (Matusov, Hayes, & Drye, 2007, p.2).  Third, there is also the belief that development is a self-organizing dynamic system that pulls focus to the emergence of stable patterns of relations. This view of development shifts focus from the student (how much they learn/how they behave) to the student’s emerging relationships (with peers, teachers and parents as ‘hidden curricula’ of education) (Matusov, Hayes, & Drye, 2007, p.3). 

The paper reviewed here examines the traditional notion or development and then provides an alternate, sociocultural view to development as a response to defining development in education and psychology. The traditional notion of development assumes that development is independent of an observer. What is common among these attempts to define development is how its observers define development, thus playing an integral part of the development of development. Defining development as something that is tangible and is effected by observers/outsiders allows education to apply pedagogical actions to enhance certain developmental phenomenon specific to the sociocultural aspects of the school/board/classroom. I would be interested in incorporating a more comprehensive understanding and definition of development in my future qualitative arts-informed research.

Matsuov, E., Hayes, R., & Drye, S. (2007). Whose Development? Salvaging the concept of development within a sociocultural approach to education. Educational Theory, 57(4), 1-8.