The (N)App Generation

So, this week for class we read The App Generation, and as always I am going to pull some of the main points I thought would be most helpful (for myself) to recognize. By the way, sorry for the pun in the title of this blog, but it seems appropriate that I would poke fun at the next generation, when there are so many people from the prior generation that constantly are putting me down for being a millennial. (well you all are ALL lazy and selfish, you don’t work hard enough to make a living, no wonder you ALL live at home! You have everything handed to you! In my day I walked 100 miles uphill in the snow to go to school! We had REAL diseases; in my day there was no vaccines! When I was YOUR age, I had a house and 7 kids. ETC.) But I digress.

No, but really, are we all that different? :Cue the song Why can't we be friends:

But, it's all OUR fault. SIGH.

I had two houses, a wife, two cars, seven kids, no loans,  zero debt, and a condo in Florida by the age 30.
Cool, thanks.

I thought this book was extremely interesting because I myself am a millennial so I kind of felt like this book (in some ways) was written about me or my friends. I found myself nodding with the positives and cringing along with the negatives. Millennials are famous for: freedom, customization, scrutiny, integrity, collaborative, entertainment, speed, and innovation. These things are not all necessarily a positive. For example, while we are more used to freedom in the world as a whole- we do not feel safe, we scrutinize everyone and everything—AKA me in a nutshell. Two of my best friends do not have their drivers licenses (which is part of the attributes to identity), which I had never thought about how that was really an unusual phenomenon! I think that it is really interesting that the author discusses how the parents have impacted this generation, for better or worse.

I really saw this in our activity this week when we made the posters about all of these ways to describe digital natives. I also thought our discourse about the fact that digital immigrants are no longer an applicable term (for most people) because most of our lives are so integrated with technology that we are truly all natives. I also liked when we talked about the differences between identity, intimacy, and imagination because it was really interesting to see those attributes and flaws in my own personality. This is also pertinent to my students because we need to realize their own drawbacks or strengths to teach them better.  For instance, the fact that I am teaching my 3^rd, 4^th, and 5^th grade students pretty rigorously about cyber safety and keeping themselves safe online in general is a testament to how much our world is changing. No one has EVER taught me this, and I am only roughly 15 years older than my kids I am teaching. So I am teaching them a topic that has never been taught before this generation. Words like apps, cyber bullying, personal vs. private information, upstander/bystander, are now apart of their every day vocabulary (or this is what I am trying to accomplish!)

This is also where the idea of ‘”the medium is the message” idea comes into play, as well. We need to be relating to our students with what we are saying, but the medium of our presentation and activities. That is the most important thing that I took away from this week. Once again, as Dawn said in class, teachers and students have the same patterns of technology use but neither uses it as innovatively as we COULD be, in order for learners (and teachers) to be designers. This is our ultimate goal, so I found The App Generation to not only give me background of the way my students will be thinking and their personalities, but the deeper meaning of how technology has permeated their lives in a deeper way, which we as educators need to be cognizant of and embrace.

(Using the Inter)Net Smart(er)

This week, we read the book Net Smart. This was as always- an interesting read, however I did feel that there were some powerful similarities with this book and the Information Diet. Such as, they both talk about becoming obsessed with technology and having an inability to turn off technology or get away from it and how it can grab your attention for far longer than you actually are aware of. These are just some of the similarities that both works talked about. The thing that we talked about most and that I found most interesting and helpful were the 5 literacies Rheingold mentions. He specifically talks about: attention, crap detection, participation, collaboration, and network smarts. These 5 literacies are supposed to help us to basically be a better digital citizen an become more aware of what we are doing and accomplishing online and what the majority of our time is spent doing online. This will in essence, make us more aware and productive by being more introspective while being online.

To break down the 5 literacies a bit further, the first is attention. Rheingold talks about how we can use our attention to look at all of the information coming to us in various formats and focus on the pertinent ones. I just read a quote from the MIT press and they called it a “tsunami of information” and I could not agree more. Next, participation with others helps all of us to be better digital citizens. It also broadens our base of knowledge and helps us become digitally literate in many formats. Next is collaboration goes with participation in that it facilitates new knowledge into the world in many new ways. Finally, we have network sharing in that he talks about network building. This is of course, the briefest of overviews but I also think that Rheingold’s ideas also would benefit us as teachers because we are constantly barraged with information as teachers (here have a pamphlet or another catalog) about products, services, and whatever the new “it thing is. I think we can use this process that he outlines to focus on the importance of what we are talking about with the students and cut out the extraneous details that are not as important because it is so easy to get bogged down. Like Rheingold alludes to, if we collaborate with each other and become more mindful of our work online, we could really end up elevating everyone’s life a little more, digitally (and make their educational experience better as well!)

Clarifying Copyright

While reading copyright clarity, there were several things that I learned. To sum it all up, copyright makes good designers because for using copyright well, you have to consider the whole project. The intent for copyright is to spread knowledge, even within the first amendment guidelines, does not extinguish creativity. I also noticed that collaboration is so important with the idea of copyright, even among educators. Copyright and fair use is not trying to squelch what educators do; it is trying to protect creators and consumers from doing anything wrong.

 I also really liked certain cases the book presented. The Harry Potter example from the book was very interesting to me, not just because it was about Harry Potter but the idea that you cannot just make an anthology of someone’s work and use tons of quotes and other things in there, that is against fair use. I really was happy that the man in that case was in violation of copyright because when I was reading the background information, I thought that surely there would be no way they would let him! So, I was happy with that ruling. Another thing I found interesting was when they talked about those infamous charts about copyright, which you see, in secondary education all the time! This is apparently wrong. I have seen TONS of those things, which basically terrify you and list all of the things that will land you in jail for copyright infringement. It is also supremely unhelpful because it does not tell you what you CAN do, at all.  It is pretty funny to hear Hobbs say that this is not correct, because I remember thinking to my self when I viewed those charts that it would be slim what you COULD do. I also liked that she told us several things that are misconceptions, like you can never copy anything to give to someone else (false), or that fair use is only applied to educators (false), or that there is no such thing as copyright bias from companies (false) and that they will not try to scare you into purchasing things you could use for free under fair use.

The ways that copyright would impact my practice are several. I think that for my purposes, I actually teach my students about copyright and fair use (in the most basic sense), including things like citations from when you borrow information from someone else. It’s hard for the kids to understand that they cannot just borrow whatever information they want and that’s why we also talk about plagiarism a bit as well. So, for me, this book really helped me for that use- it made me realize how to better go about talking to the kids about copyright. I also think that personally, it clarified a lot of things about copyright for me. There are still some things that I think I am unsure of about copyright. I feel that it is one of those topics that is hard to fully understand, and that is something that I personally need to work on.

Information (Diet) Overload? Real or Not...

The Information Diet was quite an interesting read in several ways. I really liked the concept of comparing food with information and I found many more correlations than I ever anticipated with comparing such unlike items. But, I felt that talking about all the different components that go into information using (like eating) really does have different types of information, not unlike when you look at nutrition. This all being said, there were several things that I disagreed with- particularly when he goes into the topic of "there is no such thing as information overload". I find this to be untrue. I think there is TOTALLY a point where you reach information overload status. I think that he literally mean that our brains make room for new information and thus there is no such thing as information overload in that sense- but I think there is info overload when it comes to how you personally feel. For instance, I recently went to Costco on a Sunday in Northern Virginia. I can almost hear the groans that go along with this- it was a poor decision from the start, but alas I needed some items that could not wait until an obscure hour during the week. (Sidetone: the fact that we cannot allow ourselves to go anywhere in NOVA on the weekend because we fear the crowds and the ridiculousness of the general populace always baffles me. I hope that I never become accustomed to it, because that would make me one of "them" the people who perpetually make the trip so AWFUL.) So, I am digressing here, but I walked into Costco and it was like a scene from either The Hunger Games or a movie similar to World War Z where everyone is scavenging for food after an apocalypse-type event. I am exaggerating, but not as much as I would like. There were tons of people everywhere and the line to pay was crazy- in short, I had some serious information overload in terms of the way I felt. My brain was fine, dealing with all the stimuli around me, but I felt anxious about it all. This is what I mean by there being such a thing as info overload. 

Next, I thought that infoveganism is crazy. I am so sorry to say, but it (just like veganism) seems to go way over the necessary limits and into something, well crazy. Like I said, I think this because I personally do not feel that I am obsessed with information to the point of needing to monitor it to the degree that Johnson does. Maybe that is because as a teacher and not a person working from home, I literally am unable to look at a technology device (that is not work related) for more than 7 hours a day. That is fine with me, but I feel that careful monitoring of your devices and making sure you use them (like everything) in moderation is a fine way to succeed in life. Quite frankly, I think that Johnson's level of information consumption before he started infoveganism was a little on the obsessive side. Perhaps I would need something drastic as well. 

This all being said, I did really agree with most of the points in the Information Diet, I also see the correlation of why we read it, and I felt that it was good to think about WHAT we are using, HOW we are using it, HOW MUCH we are using information, and WHY we are using it. Awareness about yourself and your habits are always a good thing. We need to do a lot of self reflection as humans, to make sure we grow and prosper. The Information Diet will effect or impact my practice because it applies to my students in the way of cyber safety. This is a new unit I am starting and the Info Diet gave me a lot to think about and incorporate into my new lessons. It is quite a bit of food for thought and I am working through it. 

Lego as student design

Hello All!

Today, I wanted to take a couple of minutes to recap again what is going on in my brain, including all of the topics from this week. Basically, in the most simple of terms, the thing that I took away from this week was the fact that while we think that we are doing right by students, I really think we are going about it in the wrong way. As teachers, we mean really well and come up with these grand ideas of how to convey our teaching but I am realizing over time, how important it is to connect what students learn with the real world. We give them tons of info but are slacking on the use of it. I think that was what I most learned from doing the designs this week and talking about others designs. I also noticed that while it SEEMS to you like you are being crystal clear in your design plan, that translating these ideas to others is not always as easy. I think that is something for all of us to learn from. Be explicit in your design language- the more detail the better (in this context)!

This all being said, we focused on students as designers this week with our new design principal. This led us to: "good learning designs engage students in using content to construct meaningful outcomes by comprehensively scaffolding students' ability to design." The most helpful part to understand this idea was when we read the article about Gainesville high school building a Makerspace. Now, I found some flaws with this idea because I am not sure why we need a space to be making things, but I did like the concept of the kids leading the design of what they are making. It means that the activity is much more authentic because it is a design of their own. They connect to real life because they are physically doing it!

Great- so what does this mean to me and in my library? To me, this means that I need to let loose of my control a bit more and have my students be able to be the designers of their own projects. They do not always need a prompt! We perpetually underestimate kids, and I think that giving them the right scaffolding would really help them in making great choices for their authentic activity and whatever they would be making. This is a weird connection, but it reminds me of legos. When I was a kid- there was no such thing as a lego kit. You bought a tub of legos and used only your imagination and that was it. Now, you can buy loose legos of course, but it is much more common to buy a kit with directions for the kids to build. Where is the creativity? Where is the build your own attitude? It actually is pretty depressing. We are selling kids short! We need to really stop doing that, and let them spread their creative wings.

Creative Spirit of Teachers

After our last class, our latest design principal was the teacher principal that read: “Good learning designs are anchored in the creative spirit of design by teachers who recognize their before action role as designers.”  During our class, we did a lot of different activities to lead up to this principal. The latest design principal was one that made me think about what I do as an educator. I think that we as teachers are often more used to the PLAN rather than the design of the lesson. As one of my professors in undergrad said, “why recreate the wheel when you can use someone else’s idea and make it your own?” This idea to me, exemplifies the fact that we, as teachers see ourselves as planners not designers. Teachers are usually people that use someone else’s plan and make it our own- this is not designing. This is planning. This is not best practice. We are often so wrapped up in doing what we have to do, with SOLs and other constraints that we are not interested or do not have the drive to be an innovator of design. Teachers as designers SHOULD be commonplace, but it is not. This is why we need to change the way we think about plans and stop thinking in terms of a plan and start thinking of design as the best way to be an effective educator. To say that I have this concept totally understood would also be a huge over-statement of my own skills. But, I think that after this week, I am definitely closer than I have ever been.

I think one of the most helpful things this week to get me to this point of tentative understanding was reading The Creative Spirit of Design by McDonald. Basically, it says in the most simple of terms that using imagination, creation-oriented, and inter-disciplinary designs are the characteristics of the creative spirit. Designers then will also become more flexible and perceptive of WHAT the students needs actually are. For some reason, having it laid out in that way really spoke to me. As I said, I really am starting to GET the idea.

When reading the Carlgren, the more interesting thoughts was that “teachers are expected to do and know something other than they do and know.” I literally loved this quote because of the truth in it. We are literally taught to be planners in school but you get into the real world of teaching and have to do lots of other duties as assigned during your lessons. It’s frankly exhausting even though we love our jobs. The other striking thought was that no one questions when a doctor says something is inoperable and when teachers say that a student is not teachable, everyone thinks teachers are not professional or are in need of more schooling to learn how. It could not possibly be the student needing to change. It MUST be the teacher.

To sum up, I am going to try my hardest to be a teacher designer, not just a teacher-planner. It is not easy and is going against a lot of what I thought was good practice- and need to reverse that thinking into good design. But, at least I do have the design principals to go on to make the transition easier! Now, on to the ZPD in my own life, where hopefully I come out on the other side with deeper meaning. FINGERS CROSSED! 

Using our design knowledge to connect the dots

Using my copious amount of notes from this week as my evidence, I really felt that we covered a lot of ground this week. We started the class by talking about conceptual tools being learned in the context of their use. We also talked about knowledge being inert, because it is taken out of context. Through our discussion, I realized that when you introduce technology to the culture of people who use it and situate it correctly in the culture of their use and engage the students in authentic activity, that is when you have true enculturation- as long as you are doing this consistently, not just one class. This idea of enculturation also relates to the idea of cognitive apprenticeship. Basically, cognitive apprenticeship is where a “master” of a skill teaches the skill to a novice or person who is less knowledgeable. This, in a lot of ways reminds me of how we as teachers, have to do student teaching in order to become a professional ourselves. While we do a lot of teaching ourselves, we always have another person (master) there who is leading us in the correct direction. This is really the closest that I have ever come to cognitive apprenticeship that I am aware of.

We also talked about modeling (I do), coaching (we do), and fading (you do) approach. I use this method all the time with my students and it really seems to go well with what we have previously learned about the ZPD. Because, as we know- knowledge is the intersection of activity, culture, and tools, and knowledge can be symbolic, conceptual, physical, etc. This point ties in the design principal for this week as well, which is that good learning designs situate knowledge in the context of its use- combining authentic activity, conceptual tools, and culture. As I just said, all of those points really go together. You can’t have learning without the kids actively using what they have learned in the context of an activity. We also need to work harder to make sure that we are enculturating the kids- to teach lots of different opportunities to learn from other cultures- even if that culture is just a different expert in a field you are teaching. Thinking of enculturation as ethnicity is not the correct idea. It is more akin to like-minded people learning together, like when I have my countywide librarians meetings where we discuss pertinent issues that librarians face.

After we had most of our discussion, we also talked about the reading from last week- including the ABC’s of Activity- which are authentic activities, background knowledge/building, constructing activities (making and doing it), and sharing. Because, as we talked about none of these things are sufficient without the others, particularly when we talk about background knowledge. IT is necessary but not sufficient in explaining all. Constructing is usually best done collaboratively (like many teachers do on a team), and you must share because they learn from each other and get feedback to check for understanding, especially from someone in the culture they are learning about. The ABC’s also had a way for teachers to engage their students in- pedagogical knowledge, content knowledge, technological knowledge, and then quite separately we have doing knowledge. The way that we connect the doing with the rest is design knowledge. We as teachers also tend to know a lot from experience which explains that the doing knowledge is often over in its own little island away from the other knowledge forms.

As far as how this all effects me, I think that it is way too easy in getting caught up in the teaching of something, that we can sometimes forget the true progession of concepts. We need an activity, sure- but we need the background first! Sometimes it seems like we as teachers can put the cart before the horse, and I like to think that I do not do this, but in talking about what makes a good design, I think that it has made me more aware of the succession of events and even that I need to give the kids more time to share what they have learned with each other and me! 

Once again, sorry for the summary to those reading – but I really do find it the most helpful to the way that I learn. I can find out what I think and process it all and also make a summary of what I have learned in a cohesive way. Thanks for reading!