How may I serve you? This question is not being asked by educators, political reformers or parents. Yet, it is an integral question inside the arena of classroom culture and one worth pondering. With the ongoing heated debates over school reforms mimicking the likes of school bullying, cafeteria fights, and classroom brawls, those very blockages in school we are trying to eliminate, we must collaborate and stop competing. People are relational beings and we must nurture this aspect of human nature because early life for all of us begins inside classrooms. The question: How may I serve you? engages the mind and heart and opens up neural pathways inside the brain that are reflective while emitting positive emotion, instead of emotionally ignited reactive or impulsive responses.

The amygdala, which is part of the limbic system, is a tiny cluster of neurons that control emotional responses. During the adolescent years, part of our brains, like the amygdala, mature faster than others. But older children and adolescents do not have the mature wiring of another area in the prefrontal cortex, the frontal lobes that are responsible for rational thoughts and logical responses. So, our students aren’t thinking with the immature, but logical, parts of their brains. Their brain activity is in the more developed, but emotional, amygdala.

When we ask what a student needs, or How may I serve you?, we immediately dispel a growing angst, anger and frustration of a perceived problem because even for a second, our students become curious, anticipating, and truly desire to know what is next. This strategy has a significant impact on classroom culture and pro-active and preventive behavioral interventions and challenges within the schools. When students and teachers feel understood, the roads leading to increased feelings of self-worth and success are activated.

The use of inquiry as a teaching strategy, coupled with an emotion, ties together learning proficiency, motivation and student growth into a winning formula. Research now reports that when children and adolescents feel safe, respected and listened to, their test scores and mastery of content soar to new heights along with their desire to know more. Positive emotion increases motivation and students who feel successful and worthy of what is asked, even if they disagree will invest in school and forge authentic relationships.

Perspective drives learning, and when students feel and see that they have a choice and voice inside their academic journey, they intuitively feel a responsibility for the choices they create and therefore will try and enforce the rules of the safe learning environment. A three-step process unlocks the door to a safe learning environment where teacher, student, and parent meet one another with respect, inquiry, alongside creative and positive academic and emotional outcomes.

1. How may I serve you? What do you need? How can I help?
2. We then listen and listen deeply to verbal and non-verbal responses because 70% or more of our communication is non-verbal. We listen beneath words and actions. We listen and embrace a perspective that invites us to understand the heart and mind of another.
3. Finally, we create and design a plan, a template that takes incremental steps, goals and visions that hone in on student’s strengths, intelligences, and interests. We weave this design into an active goal of emotional, social and cognitive growth that guides our students into meeting life’s challenges with success. Collaborative teaching and learning is the cornerstone to a safe learning environment.

A safe learning environment calls for a compassionate presence, which is neither trite nor fluffy, but a necessary element of raising math, science and reading scores of students across the nation. When we inquire, we engage, and when we engage we diminish the building defense mechanisms that have blocked the learning and teaching channels.

A safe learning environment calls our teachers to be self-reflective, because research reports that the difference between a good teacher and a superior teacher is one who self-reflects. When we investigate and analyze through deep listening, we are able to reach the root of a student’s discomfort, stress and challenges. Effective communication calls us to deeply listen without creating a response in our heads simultaneously!

When students are given voices and choices inside their classrooms, a magical transition occurs that is effortless, sustainable, and creates a safe and nurturing learning environment.

Lori Desautels, Ph.D., is a university supervisor for the Indianapolis Teaching Fellows and Teach for America programs. She is an instructor at both the undergraduate and graduate levels at Marian University in Indianapolis.  Before coming to Marian University, Lori taught emotionally handicapped students in the upper elementary grades, worked as a school counselor in Wayne Township, was a private practice counselor through the Indianapolis Counseling Center, and was a behavioral consultant for Methodist Hospital in the adolescent psychiatric unit. She graduated from Butler University with a BS in Special Education, from Indiana University with an MS in counseling, and earned her Ph.D. from The American Institute of Holistic Theology with an emphasis in early adolescence in thought formation. Desaultes’ website is at www.revelationineducation.com

Do you have a question for the editor? Would you like to suggest a topic for a post you’d like to read? Are you interested in submitting a guest post? Email editor Diane Trim.

Photo credits:
Positron emission tomography image of a human brain: BlatantNews.com / Blatant News
Brain: GreenFlames09
neurons: MikeBlogs / Mike Seyfang

Research indicates that many of our students are using deceitful methods to complete their school work. A recent poll by commonsensemedia.org found that more than one third of teens admit to cheating with their cell phones and about half admit to using the internet to cheat (http://www.commonsensemedia.org/hi-tech-cheating). Perhaps even more disturbing, about 25% of the students polled do not think that using a cell to get answers for a test is cheating! The results of the 2008 Josephson Institute survey support these statistics. 64% admit to cheating on a test during the previous year and 36% admit to using the internet to plagiarize, yet 93% are satisfied with their personal ethics or character (http://charactercounts.org/programs/reportcard/2008/index.html). 
 
Students are not the only ones with competing priorities. Teachers are asked to prevent and respond to cheating amidst pressures to maintain or raise standardized test scores. As a result, some teachers confess to ignoring cheating—preventing and responding to cheating can not only be a stressful process (think about the wrath of angry, protective parents!) but it may seem antithetical to the main goal of leaving “no child behind.” The trouble is, ignoring the problem does not make it go away and, in fact, might worsen it. 

Here is the good news. Preventing and responding to cheating do not have to be difficult. Years of research and exploration of best practices tell us why and how students cheat as well as the effective classroom and schoolwide strategies for preventing academic dishonesty and creating cultures of integrity. 

Students cheat for a variety of reasons. Although some are not easily addressed by teachers and schools (e.g., pressures from parents to make “good grades”), others can be. For example, students cheat when they: lack of understanding of the assignment or material; have too much work and not enough time to complete it; perceive that teachers don’t care; think that “everyone does it;” receive assignments and tests that are the same as previous years; perceive grading methods to be unfair; and, receive an unreasonable amount of work, particularly “busy work” that has little or no value or purpose.  In their often-desperate attempts to get high grades while minimizing effort, students perceive cheating as a smart solution, especially when the risk of getting caught and the potential penalties are minimal.

So what can classroom teachers do to prevent cheating?  Students need to be engaged in ongoing, open dialog about the importance of honest and ethical behavior and to have these behaviors modeled for them.  Teachers can create meaningful assignments that challenge students to think and synthesize rather than simply regurgitate others’ words and ideas.  Students must be taught why attribution is important and the techniques for citing others (and not just in English class!). 

Also, academic conduct class expectations and specific rules for each assignment need to be articulated.  Are students permitted to work together, to ask parents or tutors for help, or to consult notes or tests from students who took the course in previous terms?  Are they permitted to use online translators for foreign language assignments, or to watch a movie based on a novel being studied? Finally, parents should also be informed and be educated on how they can help with homework without inadvertently helping them to cheat.

Teachers should not stand alone, however. The school must tackle the problem of cheating and to promote a culture of academic integrity.   First, a schoolwide academic integrity policy or honor code can be an effective vehicle (not a quick fix or cure-all) for affirming core values, establishing the responsibilities of all community members, clearly articulating expectations and definitions of unacceptable behaviors, and fostering a shared ethic of integrity. The values underlying a code or policy must be reinforced through ongoing dialog and modeling by teachers, administrators, coaches, and parents. 

Second, student involvement is a key school-wide strategy because peer influence is a powerful force in creating a school climate where cheating is “uncool.”  Student leaders can be most effective as peer educators. They can organize and lead academic integrity discussion forums (such as assemblies, brown bag lunches, mock hearings, debates, and focus groups), coordinate guest speakers, and conduct outreach campaigns to proliferate school definitions of cheating as well as acceptable use of technology (cell phones, PDAs, Internet, etc).  Students can also be involved as members of an honor council, a body that would hear and decide on allegations of cheating. Incorporating students into the school-wide academic integrity initiative not only generates student “buy-in” but also develops ethically responsible citizens.

Third, technology should be harnessed for preventing and addressing cheating. Plagiarism detection software tools can save teachers time and frustration, as well as reduce the temptation to plagiarize. Podcasts, online tutorials, videos, blogs, and social networking tools can be used to spread the academic integrity message.

Above all, schools should aim to implement these 4 integrity components:

1. a clear articulation of rules and expectations (in a policy or code); 
2. a manageable system that facilitates consistent reporting and fair enforcement;
3. teacher training in preventing and responding to cheating;
4. resources to help students with writing and research skills, paraphrasing and citation;

There are no quick and easy solutions to the problem of high school cheating. Best practices include a combination of proactive initiatives to create a school integrity climate and preventative strategies to address and avert the causes of cheating. 

 Tricia Bertram Gallant, Ph.D. is the Academic Integrity Coordinator at the University of California, San Diego (UC San Diego), and is the outgoing Chair for the International Center for Academic Integrity’s (ICAI) Advisory Council. She is the author of Academic Integrity in the Twenty-First Century: A Teaching and Learning Imperative (Wiley’s Jossey-Bass, 2008), co-author (with Stephen Davis & Patrick Drinan) of Cheating in School: What we know and what we can do (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009), and editor of the forthcoming book Creating the Ethical Academy: A Systems Approach to Understanding Misconduct and Empowering Change (Routledge).

Karen O. Clifford, Ph.D. is currently conducting research on high school programs for promoting academic integrity and preventing and addressing cheating.  Clifford has consulted with high schools and colleges in developing or revitalizing honor systems and has made numerous presentations about promoting academic integrity, including workshops and webinars for high school teachers, administrators and students.  She is co-editor of the monograph, “Academic Integrity Matters.”

In the recent past, the term “sexting” has come into our lexicon. Sexting can be defined as creating, sending and/or receiving sexually explicit images or texts.  It has been described as a 21st century variation of you-show-me-yours-I’ll-show-you-mine game. However, with the added factor of 21st century technology, it is a whole new game!

There is a lot of conversation among law enforcement, the legal community, educators, prevention-intervention people, counselors and others as to whether sexting falls into the category of criminal activity as child pornography. There is no single, simple answer. Each situation is different.

 By way of example, the recent tragic suicide of Rutgers University freshman Tyler Clementi raises sexting to a new level: live sexting.  In the reporting of this tragedy, commentators repeatedly posed the same question. Although worded differently by different reporters, the question was something like this: “Don’t these tech-savvy kids understand what they are doing when they….?” Fill in the blank with whatever is most appropriate for the situation. The answer is all too obviously, “No, they do not.” Both the question and the answer underscore the need to differentiate between understanding how technologies work and understanding the social, personal implication of their use. Sexting is a prime example of this. The prevailing wisdom suggests that cases of sexting are very often the result of immaturity, naivety, and lack of fore-thought. Young people – people of any  age – can be both tech savvy and stupid!

 As noted above, sexting is generally creating, sending and/or receiving sexually explicit images or texts. The phenomenon is both well publicized and complex, and all incidents of sexting are not the same.   Let’s paraphrase the commentators’ question, delete the “tech savvy” part and ask, “Why would kids do this?” The question contains the answer: they are still kids. They are kids with 24/7 digital access. As kids, they tend to not think situations through. What may seem to be funny on one level may be very serious on another. In addition, hormones are very likely kicking in. Flirting in the hall becomes virtual flirting. This sometimes triggers “you-show-me-yours…” Throw in the fact that “everybody else is doing it,” mix with bragging rights and the recipe for sexting is almost complete.

This is a fairly benign look at something which we know can be extremely damaging. Beyond the hormones and virtual flirting, there are other, more malicious answers to the question of why kids would do this. Among them are pressure, pressure from boyfriends – and even girlfriends. “If you really loved me, you’d send me a picture…” And after a break-up, there is revenge. Pictures shared in trust and love become the weapons of a former boy or girlfriend. Interestingly, this can be played either way. Pictures and messages can be shared either to embarrass a former partner or to make that partner jealous. (“She’s not all that goody-goody” versus “Look what he/she’s missing now.”) Sexting thus becomes mean-spirited, true bullying and harassment. The negative potential does not end there, however. Sexting can be used for threats and coercion. “If you don’t send me your picture, I will…” Or “If you don’t …., I will send you that picture I have of you.” Ultimately, sexting can devolve into sexual solicitation, and the creation and marketing of child pornography.

 There are other considerations when faced with a sexting situation. First, not all participants necessarily know that they are involved. Some pictures, taken very innocently or through trickery, can be shared out of context, suggestively tagged or otherwise modified for use in sexting contexts. Those in the frame may have no idea that they are in the picture or that the picture is being shared.  In addition, we have to remember that cell phones are ubiquitous, they have cameras and pictures can be shared in an instant. Finally, age matters.  It is very important to determine the ages of those involved in sexting situations. It may become a factor in determining if criminal charges are in order. Always check with your legal office.

 After the “why” question, the next question which is frequently asked is, “So, how much do schools need to become involved in sexting?” The answer is both simple and complex. If sexting happens away from school, after school and if there is no connection, no nexus to the school, then the school is not required to intervene. However, if sexting happens and if there is a connection, a nexus, then the school is required to intervene. The question then becomes, “How might there be a nexus?” In answering that question, consider whether the sexting involved school hardware or software. Did it occur on campus? During school? Did a student or parent come to a staff member for help? Is your student in obvious distress? Has the situation caused a disruption to the educational environment for your students or staff? Is anyone on staff involved? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then the school is involved.

Here are some suggestions for dealing with sexting situations which may happen in school.

1. Be prepared to support the target of the sexting.
2. Be proactive. Have a plan and take it to your legal office before the need arises. Know your school and district policies and procedures around bullying, harassment, cyberbullying, Internet use, etc. 
3. Educate your entire staff on all appropriate policies and procedures. Be sure staff is prepared to intervene appropriately, should a situation arise. Do the same for parents. In addition, although it seems almost unnecessary to say, make it very clear to all the adults that they should never share, copy, forward, download, email or otherwise distribute sexted images or messages which they might receive.
4. Do not overreact. The biggest deterrent for young people in reporting sexting – and other uncomfortable situations – is the fear that the adults will overreact. The biggest demonstration of that overreaction: taking away technology access.
5. Determine all the participants. Have a Student Intervention Team or a Multidisciplinary Team in place. These teams could include administrators, counselors, nurses, Prevention-Intervention staff, school security, possibly legal and law enforcement personnel, if so needed.
6. Investigate the situation. Determine who all are involved. Document how the situation and the images came to your attention. Determine how widely images have been distributed.
7. Apply appropriate discipline. Appropriate discipline should be included in your overall plan.

 So, educate your students. Educate them not only in the “how to’s” of using technology. Educate them in social, educational, ethical and civil considerations of using technology so that we will not continue to hear tragic stories like that of Tyler Clementi.

Mike Donlin has been an educator for decades. He has taught English Language Arts and English as a Second Language at all levels and in different locations around the country and the world. Donlin started with Seattle Public Schools in 1980 as a classroom teacher. Since that time, he has taught, trained and supervised a variety of programs from TBE/ESL to technology and bullying and harassment prevention and intervention. In Seattle’s Prevention-Intervention program, Mike implemented bullying prevention programs with an emphasis on Internet safety and cyberbullying and oversaw the development of a Middle School Cyberbullying Curriculum. In 2008, he received a Qwest/NCMEC Spirit of Online Safety Leadership Award, and is currently a member of the National Cyber Security Alliance K-12 Work Group and an alumnus of the FBI Citizens’ Academy. Mike is married and has three digital native children.

Photo credits:
I Swear, He Is Texting Everywhere He Goes (2): dmjarvey / Dean Jarvey on Flickr.com Creative Commons
Courtney texting: vosburg_09 on Flickr.com Creative Commons
Cell phone teens: K. Kendall on Flickr.com Creative Commons
Texting: kamshots on Flickr.com Creative Commons

Now as a parent, I race my daughter to the bathroom in the morning and I feel around her pillow at night for the contraband cell phone.

Cell phones. The fact is, kids are wired. I’m not talking junk food and Red Bull. In their dramatic teen way, 85 percent of our secondary students have a cell phone and they insist they’d just die without it. It’s their social outlet and nearly half of the kids in our school hallways say they their cell phone is the key to their social life.

And teens love to text and spend about 90 minutes a day doing it, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation Study. They love it because it’s fast (42%), it’s stealthy (33%), and it’s fun (29%). (Harris Interactive, 2008) The problem is that over half of your students are doing it at school (65%). What’s worse is that a third of your class has used a cell phone at least once to cheat on a test (35%), yet they really don’t think it’s cheating (23%). (Common Sense Media, 2009)

Despite the trouble with cell phones, few recommend that students not have them. Teens report that they carry their phones everywhere with them not just to communicate, but for safety reasons (78%). They call someone for a ride (79%), call to help a friend who is in trouble (33%), and call for an emergency (18%). Cell phones are both a blessing and a curse. (Harris Interactive, 2008)

Social Networking. Social networking and cell phones are a closely tied. One-third of the nation’s secondary students have a smartphone that can browse the Web. When they’re on the ‘net, almost half of them are on a social networking site. (Harris Interactive, 2008)

When they’re on the computer, it’s likely they’re on a social media site, too. Ninety-two percent of kids socialize online and over half have made new friends online. Of those who have an online social life, just 1 in 4 are friending their parents. (Norton Online Living Report, 2009)

Despite friending their kids, parents have a tough time monitoring their children’s’ Internet use. Seven in 10 parents have Internet rules and their kids say they follow these rules 80 percent of the time. Most parents think it’s their responsibility to monitor their kids’ Internet use (90%) and 70 percent of them talk about online safety with their kids. But parents struggle with this (33%) because the Internet and other digital technologies weren’t around when they were kids.

We’ve all read the stories of cyberbullying and it is certainly a problem. About 30 percent of teens have reported being the victim of some kind of cyberbullying and about half have seen it online. Most of the cyberbullies knew their targets personally (84%), but just one in three victims knew who was bullying them. Over the course of a year, almost one in five secondary students were directly involved in cyberbullying. Of those kids, twelve percent were bullies, four percent were victims, and three percent were both. (Hinduja and Patchin, 2009)

Sameer Hinduja and Justin Patchin, who run the Cyberbullying Research Center (http://www.cyberbullying.us), recently did a study and found that 1 out of 5 students reported contemplating suicide and about that many had actually attempted it. They write that their findings mesh with other suicide studies. When looking at bullying, they found both victims and aggressors were more likely to attempt suicide than their non-bullying peers. Victims of traditional bullying were 1.7 times more likely than their peers to attempt suicide and victims of cyberbullying were 1.9 times more likely to attempt it. Traditional bullies are 2.1 times more likely than their peers to attempt suicide and cyberbullies were 1.5 times more likely to attempt it. Although these numbers seem low and almost identical, the study authors write that any suicide attempt is one too many. (Hinduja and Patchin, 2010)

One principal’s response

In Ridgewood, N.J., middle school principal Anthony Orsini sent an e-mail to all of the students’ parents to encourage them to stop allowing their kids to be involved in social media. “It is time for every single member of the BF Community to take a stand!” Orsini wrote in the e-mail. “There is absolutely no reason for any middle school student to be a part of a social networking site.” (Brody and Coutros, 2010)

Orsini recommended that parents take action to make sure their children weren’t on social networking sites. Told parents to close out their kids’ social networking accounts, install Parental Control Software, and keep the computer in a place where parents can monitor online behavior. He said parents should monitor their teens’ text messages online and make sure that all wireless devices are left at a central docking station at bed time.

Orsini wrote that middle school students are not ready to cope with cyberbullying and its negative effects. It’s not enough, Orsini wrote, to teach a student to be responsible online. Social media is uncontrollable and unsafe.

“[…]it is not worth the risk to your child to allow them the independence at this age to manage these sites on their own, not because they are not good kids or responsible, but because you cannot control the poor actions of anonymous others,” Orsini wrote.

My opinion

Our students are digital natives, a term that means they depend on electronic devices for almost all parts of their lives. They’ve never known a world where the Internet didn’t exist. Their cell phones are always at an arm’s reach and they spend a good portion of their day online. To take away their technology is to isolate them from their friends.

And let’s face it: they can just go to a friend’s house to login. In fact, over 1 in 5 students do just that. (Norton Online Living Report, 2009)

Parents and students expect our schools to prepare kids for the 21st century. Like it or not, online social networking isn’t going away. We can either embrace it or have it run amok, unsupervised and unchecked behind our backs.

Instead of powering down, we need to empower our students. We need to have the conversation about what they should do if they witness or are the victim of online aggression. Encourage students to print out the Web page as evidence and tell an adult. Keep inviting them to tell an adult and assure them that they won’t be lose their digital access if they do. Hinduja and Patchin found that 60 percent of cyberbullying victims do not tell an adult because they’re worried they’ll lose their online access.

The just turn it off philosophy doesn’t equip students to deal with the very real consequences of their digital world. Instead of turning off the technology, we should create a contract with students and outline our expectations on the front end. We need to be having the conversation every time we take our classes into the computer lab: don’t reveal private information online; you can be legally held accountable for nasty images and text you post online; if you ever have trouble online, tell an adult you trust.

Schools have a responsibility to prepare students for the world beyond our double doors. If you’d like to teach an entire cyberbullying unit, you need some scenarios for a discussion, or you want some examples of parent letters, I recommend checking out the free, extensive curriculum that Seattle Public Schools has developed. You can view it here: http://www.seattleschools.org/area/prevention/cbms.html.

Not only do we need to educate our students about social networking and online safety, but we need to educate parents as well. Instead of just having them review and sign the Acceptable Use policy, dedicate part of the school’s open house night or parent-teacher conferences to online safety. We need them to partner with us to make their kids safe at school and at home.

Taking away the kids’ devices isn’t going to remove the problem; the problem will just go underground. I would rather have open, honest discussions about technology use than to have students find ways to circumvent adults. I would rather figure out ways to employ responsible social networking in the classroom as an engagement tool as well as a model for how the technology can be used. It’s difficult and time consuming to teach the kids about responsible social networking. However, I don’t think pulling the plug teaches anything at all.

What do you think? Is social networking interfering with your ability to teach? Are the kids so focused on texting that they can’t focus on their textbooks? Should we tell the kids to close their Facebook accounts or should we use it in the classroom?

References:
Brody, L. and Coutros, E. “Ridgewood principal to parents: Get your kids off Facebook.” NorthJersey.com, April 29, 2010 http://www.northjersey.com/news/education/042910_Ridgewood_principal_to_parents_Get_your_kids_off_Facebook.html, accessed 5-13-10.

Generation M²: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds. (2010) A Kaiser Family Foundation Study, January 2010. http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf, accessed 5-14-10.

A Generation Unplugged (Research Report). Harris Interactive, September 12, 2008 http://files.ctia.org/pdf/HI_TeenMobileStudy_ResearchReport.pdf, accessed 5-14-10.

Hinduja, S. and Patchin, J. (2009) Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to Cyberbullying. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.

Hinduja, S. and Patchin, J. (2009) “Cyberbullying Research Summary: Cyberbullying and Suicide.” Cyberbullying Research Center. http://cyberbullying.us/cyberbullying_and_suicide_research_fact_sheet.pdf, accessed 5-14-10.

Hi-Tech Cheating: Cell Phones and Cheating in School. A National Poll. (2009) Beneson Strategy Group and Common Sense Media, June 18, 2009. http://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/Hi-Tech%20Cheating%20-%20Summary%20NO%20EMBARGO%20TAGS.pdf, accessed 5-14-10.

Norton Online Living Report. (2009) Symantec Corporation. http://www.nortononlineliving.com/documents/NOLR_Report_09.pdf, accessed 5-14-10.

May is also project month. We have just weeks left of school; no one wants to lecture students who squirm in their seats and watch the clock. Better to keep them engaged with the content and let them direct their own learning with a project.

Many students rely on Google’s Image search to find photos for their PowerPoints, PhotoStories, or iMovies. However, better visuals exist for school projects and what’s more – most of these are copyright friendly.

Flickr.com’s Creative Commons. This site requires a Yahoo! login, but if you’re comfortable allowing your students to register with the site, it’s a great opportunity to find photos to illustrate presentations. The Flickr’s Creative Commons uses CreativeCommons.org’s guidelines for copyright. There are six categories of copyright and they’re all explained on the right-hand side of Flickr’s site. If your students give credit to the photographer, let the photographer know that they’re using the image in a school presentation, don’t alter the image, and don’t sell the photo on T-shirts, they should be within the copyright guidelines. However, it’s a great idea to discuss the copyright guidelines with them before they use the photos. You and I both know that our students will visit the site outside of class and we want them to respect the photographer’s rights. For the most part, the images are classroom appropriate. Occasionally I’ll find something objectionable, but then I flag the photo. When your students search, make sure they click on See More to the bottom right of each copyright collection. Do not use the search at the top of the page – those photos may or may not be a part of the Creative Commons. One of the best things about using Flickr.com’s Creative Commons is that students can download the photos in the size that will work best in their project. The photos also respond well to resizing and won’t become too blurry if a student increases the photo’s size.

MorgueFile.com The term Morgue File comes from the print world where editors put the paper to bed and then review the past issue in a postmortem meeting. After the review, someone files the old issue in the morgue file. Online, this is a spot where searchers can use any photo they find in any way they choose – without regard to altering, selling, or providing attribution for the image. MorgueFile.com doesn’t have the huge number of photos that Flickr.com’s Creative Commons does, but it’s a place where you know your students won’t be stomping on anyone’s copyrights. Despite the free nature of the site, having the copyright discussion and providing attribution and feedback for the photographer is just good manners. No one has officially culled these photos for inappropriate content, so occasionally I’ll find something objectionable. MorgueFile.com has a reporting link for objectionable images at the bottom right of each photo. Be sure your students are using the free photo search at the top of each web page, not the sponsored, paid photo search they’ll find at the bottom of the page. These photos respond well to resizing, so you don’t need to worry about blurry images in projects.

LoveVectorFree.com Students will find illustrations for use in projects on this site. Vector means that the images can be resized without blurry effects. Free means that your students can use the images without opening your wallet. LoveVectorFree.com’s legal page allows people to use any image on the site for any purpose, without attribution. However, a good discussion about attribution is never wrong. Encourage students to leave a comment for the artist, give them feedback about their work, and let them know they’re using the images in a school project. It’s good manners. LoveVectorFree.com is a new site, so the collection doesn’t have tons of illustrations, but new images come in all the time. Unlike the other sites in this post, LoveVectorFree.com doesn’t have a feature for guests to report inappropriate content. At the moment, the images on the site lean towards fluffy bunnies and brightly colored flowers, so I think sending students to the site would be safe.

The Big Picture. This site is part of The Boston Globe’s Boston.com site. A web editor chooses a timely topic like the anniversary of the Vietnam war, the oil spill in the Gulf, or Earth Day and gathers up the best photos from around the world about the topic. Of course, Boston.com has the right to post these photos, but your students shouldn’t use these in presentations. Rather, this site is for you and your lesson planning. The dramatic photos are a terrific way to bring up current topics in many disciplines or illustrate the impact of the world’s big events. I strongly recommend that you preview the photos first before class. It’s good practice anyway, but a few photos on the site are graphic. For example, some photos in the Vietnam war collection have been blacked out for graphic content. To access the photo, a user has to click on the screen to view the image. That’s great – it makes lesson planning easier for me. However, some of the photos in the Vietnam series haven’t been blacked out and they made me squirm. I wouldn’t want to show some of those images in my classroom, not just because they’re graphic, but I wouldn’t want to cement my reputation as a total wimp.

Do you have any online image resources where you send your students? Please share these in the comments and let us all know about the copyright restrictions and content. Even better: how do you make sure that students don’t spend their entire computer lab time hunting down images instead of creating content?

The educational aspirations of young African-American males are influenced by the choices that are available to them. With more than one third of African-American children living below the federal poverty line, over 60% living in single parent homes, and a high school graduation rate of only 50% in some states, African-American children, particularly males, face numerous barriers to academic success. However, every Black community, regardless of economic resources, contains shining examples of young Black men who achieve in school, regardless of immeasurable social disadvantages.

Importantly, education policy needs to examine the full scope of the experience of African-American males to improve their school performance. In Breaking Barriers: How Teachers can Help Black Males Achieve in School, I provide strong empirical support for the impact that personal and emotional, family, social and environmental, and school factors play in the ability of young males to perform and successfully participate in an academic setting.

Achievement gaps, racial disparities in learning and school funding, and the growth of punitive measures to address student academic and social behavior are only some of the issues that educators and administrators face in the battle to improve student performance. Not surprisingly, research evidence indicates that the better students felt about their lives, the more positive was their engagement and academic outcome in school. Students who had a less positive outlook had lower academic achievement.

The research also revealed strong evidence that modeling is an important component to academic development among Black adolescent males. Father’s education, but not mother’s education, had a significant impact on Black males’ academic achievement. Generally, parents who helped their children with homework, who were comfortable talking to teachers, who urged their children to do well in school and who maintained high expectations generally had higher-performing children.

“Liking” school and not being “bored” by school appears to be language that is particularly salient to school adaptive patterns for Black males. Two national surveys demonstrated that the more Black males report that they like school, and the less they report being bored by school, the better their educational outcomes. Black males also need to believe that what they are learning is important for their future and that the school work is meaningful. Research findings also revealed that academic failure among young Black males may also be attributed to feeling pressured by school work and feeling that school rules are too strict. Notably, low-achieving Black male students’ sense that they “belong” at school was similar to high-achieving Black male students. “Belonging” might be an initial investment in the learning process for low-achieving Black students that could ultimately foster an interest in school.

Across three national surveys, through the findings, a profile of a teacher that was particularly effective in fostering academic growth among Black males clearly emerged. High-achieving Black male students reported that their teachers were interested in them “as a person,” treated them fairly, encouraged them to express their views and gave extra help when needed. Teachers who were effective also routinely let their students know when they did a good job. Overall, Black male students who were successful perceived their teachers to be respectful people who treated them like they matter and nurturing people who builds up their strengths, instead of making them “feel bad” about their weaknesses.

The findings clearly demonstrated that Black male students perform best in environments that they perceive as safe. Low-achieving Black male students were more likely to carry a weapon to school for self-defense than middle- or high-achieving Black male students. High-achieving Black male students reported more often that they feel safe at school. The findings also revealed that Black students were significantly more likely than white or Hispanic students to feel unsafe at school. Current school safety measures explored in this study did not have a relationship to academic achievement among African-American students. These issues indicate a need for greater mental health services in schools and African-American communities.

For most, the research revealed in this study will remind them of, or provide statistical support for, commonly held truisms in contemporary education. Education is most effective when it promotes positive school-related growth experiences, with particular emphasis on teacher-child relationships, didactic learning and emotional support. Positive parent-child communication, including parents expressing praise, helping with homework, talking about the dangers of drugs and alcohol and cooperative parenting arrangements, promotes academic success among Black males. Providing community resources and academic assistance to children in low-income areas, which build character through civic engagement, volunteerisms and sports, can improve academic functioning. Most importantly, we must advocate for policy that reduces racial disparities in income and increases equity and inclusion in education.

Students like to feel good about themselves, they gravitate towards teachers and classes where they feel good, and they like subjects that reinforce the notion that they’re good at something.

It’s nice, though, to see what we all accept as good classroom management and good teaching backed by research. It’s also good to be reminded of some simple truths that surround the simple concept of praising students for good behavior and good work. However, we all know that implementing these simple truths isn’t always so simple.

In the article, “Using Teacher Praise and Opportunities to Respond to Promote Appropriate Student Behavior,” I learned that not all students receive the same amount of attention. Indeed, the authors wrote that, from a very young age, kids learn that they receive more of a teacher’s attention for inappropriate behavior than for appropriate behavior.

That’s part of the problem, isn’t it? The kids who act out in class receive a lot of the teachers’ attention; however, good behavior goes unrecognized. Really, teachers are encouraging the cycle of disruptive behavior.

The authors also wrote that teachers tend to avoid engaging students with poor behavior, so these students don’t receive a great education. The student’s records of misbehavior and the many negative student-teacher interactions leads to fewer engagement attempts from the teacher. Teachers who have really disruptive students, the authors wrote, might try to tiptoe around the difficult kid so as to avoid setting the student off.

Of course, these teachers are trying to survive their school days the best they can, but when we look at it, avoiding students won’t improve their behavior or their education.

Prevent off-task behavior. The researchers wrote that it’s best to prevent poor classroom behavior before it starts. But, if I’m the beleaguered teacher with the out-of-control seventh period, I’m rolling my eyes right now. My class is well beyond the prevention stage.

Actually, it’s not. The researchers wrote that teachers can use two easy methods to prevent off-task behavior and promote learning. They are: targeted, meaningful praise for appropriate behavior and many opportunities for students to respond correctly to content questions. In other words: praise good behavior instead of punishing bad behavior and give students a feeling of success. It’s all about feeling good.

Teacher praise. These researchers aren’t the first to write about the efficacy of praise in the classroom. However, they do bring something new to the discussion: they write that praise is effective with all ages, all skill levels, and all children, even those with disabilities. They write that praise not only increases good behavior and decreases bad behavior, but, when combined with decreasing attention to bad behavior, it can actually lead to fewer student-teacher power struggles and other disruptions.

Students aren’t widgets and they don’t all respond to praise in the same way. Some might want a quiet word or a nod, some might want a whole class announcement about a successful pencil sharpening. They offer some guidelines for giving praise:

• Praise must be specific and linked to behaviors that the teacher wants to promote
• Praise must be tailored to each student
• Praise is meaningless if the teacher has no other positive, personal interactions with a student
• Some students need praise for small acts that other students might take for granted, like sharpening a pencil at an appropriate time. Give into that kid’s need. Praise doesn’t cost anything.

Opportunities to respond. Hand-in-hand with teacher praise are the opportunities for students to respond in class, the authors write. The more opportunities the students have to respond to academic questions correctly, the fewer classroom disruptions occur.

I was surprised to learn the number of opportunities to respond that the authors recommend. For new material, teachers should shoot for four – six opportunities to respond per minute, with students answering correctly 80 percent of the time. If the teacher’s reviewing material, the opportunities to respond should increase to between eight and twelve responses per minute, with a 90 percent accuracy rate.

I can tell you, I know I didn’t have that many opportunities to respond in my classes. Unfortunately, the authors of this study didn’t offer any strategies beyond visual response cards to increase the number of times students could respond per minute. There’s always the one-two-three finger method where students hold their hands close to their chests and signal with their fingers the answer to a question. Small whiteboards and dry-erase markers are effective, if the students can tolerate the overwhelming marker fumes.

Teacher reflection. The authors’ strategy to increase student opportunities to respond didn’t lie in teaching strategies, but in teacher reflection. In the study, the researchers recorded teachers in their classrooms once a week for 15 minutes and ticked off the number of times a teacher offered praise and opportunities for responses. They shared the results with the teachers. Over the course of the 15-week study, the teachers increased their praise rates and opportunities to respond as a result of the researchers’ feedback. One teacher in the study tripled her praise rates to 25-30 incidents per 15 minutes of instruction. Her opportunities to respond rose from 40-60 every 15 minutes to more than 100.

I think that taking a good look at your own teaching practice is a healthy thing. Graphing praise and response rates will surely help a teacher reflect on best practice and focus on improving one area of her teaching style.

Praise and opportunities to succeed help students to learn. Teachers who use these two strategies have more on-task behavior in their classes and fewer behavioral disruptions. Of course, studying and reflecting on one’s own practice is helpful, too.

However, I can’t help but think about that gal stranded in seventh period with her out-of-control class. She’s a nice person. She tries to be positive. She tries to teach. She reflects on her practice. She works hard. Praise and opportunities to succeed seem like simple solutions to implement, but this gal needs tools she can use today. Maybe she needs to write down a list of praise phrases that she can look at when she can’t think of anything but the final bell ringing. Maybe she needs some teaching strategies to give her students more opportunities to respond.

Do you have some ideas that might help this gal survive her seventh period? How do you give your students 6-12 opportunities to respond per minute? Let’s start a list in the comments.

Reference:

Partin, T.C., Robertson, R.E. Maggin, D.E., Oliver, R.M., and Wehby, J.H. (2009) Using Teacher Praise and Opportunistic to Respond to Promote Appropriate Behavior. Preventing School Failure. 54(3): 172-178.

As teachers we know that the schoolhouse gate doesn’t serve as a barrier to information from the real world. The sexual text messages and instant messages (sexting) our teens send to one another during their online evenings can create a lot of trouble during the offline school day.

But these cyberbullying events take place off school grounds. Really, should teachers get involved in this sexting mess? What can we do about sexting, anyway?

The case for intervention. In their book, Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to Cyberbullying, Sameer Hinduja and Justin Patchin make the case that teachers are in the best position to help students with cyberbullying issues. Many students spend more time with their teachers than they do with their parents, the authors write. Teachers see students interact with one another every day and might pick up on unusual behavior or a subtle cue that something is wrong with a student.

Hinduja and Patchin write that adults who are aware of teen sexual harassment, but fail to respond, can be held liable for not assisting the teen, even if the event takes place off campus.

Students who circulate sexting messages or other forms of cyberbullying can’t limit their messages’ reach or timing. Teens who check their cell phones during a school break or lunch can find a surprise sexting video waiting for them in their InBox. If the video is of someone the teens know, the whole school day can be disrupted.

The important legal principal to guide teachers and other school officials, the authors write, is this: School officials cannot discipline students for off-campus speech or behavior with which they simply do not agree unless the school environment is significantly affected.

Media as sexual exploration. Teens are curious about their bodies. They’re curious about one another’s bodies, too. This generation of kids didn’t invent sexual exploration, but they have many more ways to explore and share.

That’s both a problem and a benefit of digital media, the authors of “Sex, Sexuality, Sexting, and SexEd: Adolescents and the Media” wrote. Among gay and lesbian youth, online media give the teens a safe outlet to explore their sexuality in a way that they can’t offline.

“On the Internet, GLBT youth discuss a variety of sexual identities and queer politics, as well as seek partners, navigate the coming out process, and frankly discuss sexual practices, including safer sex,” the authors wrote.

However, teens who post or send sexting messages can also give the wrong idea about sharing sexual content. The authors wrote that teens who see risky sexual behavior online with no consequences are more likely to experiment with the risky acts. Girls who send sexting photos practice self-objectification.

The biggest worry, the authors wrote, is that teens whose sexual images appear online or in text messages have an increased risk of victimization.

Health information and the Internet. Research shows that 44 percent of teens turn to the Internet for health information, and one-quarter or more of them research sexually transmitted diseases, sex, and pregnancy. One study found that 41 percent of teens who researched a health issue online changed their behavior because of the information they’d found. The Internet can be a great place to discover answers to life’s embarrassing or awkward questions.

The problem is that they’re not sophisticated Internet searchers. They judge a site not by the site’s authors, but how slick the design is. If the site looks professional, most teens think, then it’s credible.

Some teens also don’t have the vocabulary to search the Internet for credible sexual information. Instead of using anatomical names, they search with slang terms. Of course, these teens find sexually explicit sites, the “Sex, Sexuality, Sexting, and SexEd” authors wrote. Teens who are exposed to sexually explicit images are more likely to become sexually active at an earlier age than their peers.

What teachers can do. Kids are always going to be interested in their bodies. Cell phones and the Internet aren’t going away any time soon. Inappropriate photos have been around since the invention of the camera. So how can we prevent the spread of sexting messages?

• Educate students about how to assess the credibility of Web sites
• Offer teens appropriate Web sites and vocabulary in health classes
• Encourage students to visit their privacy settings on social network sites to make sure that their privacy is protected
• Review the district rules about cyberbullying with students and make sure they understand the consequences of their actions
• Invite students to come to you privately with questions or concerns about sexting or cyberbullying
• Give students guidelines about posting images online and over cellphones
• Hold parent meetings to discuss cyberbullying and sexting

MTV has a program called A Thin Line, which is trying to stop digital abuse, Amanda Paulson wrote in The Christian Science Monitor. Parry Aftab is the executive director of WiredSafety and an adviser to A Thin Line. Aftab says that teens rarely think about the consequences of their actions. They look at sexting as a safe alternative to sex.

Paulson quoted Aftab: I tell kids the five P’s. If you don’t want your parents, your principal, a predator, the police, or your potential coach, college recruiter, or boss to see it, don’t post it publicly.

References:

Brown, J., Keller, S., and Stern, S. (2009.) Sex, Sexuality, Sexting, and SexEd: Adolescents and the Media. The Prevention Researcher. 16:4, 12-16.

Hinduja, S. and Patchin, J. (2009.) Bullying Beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to Cyberbullying. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.

Lenhart, A. (2009) Teens and Sexting: How and why minor teens are sending sexually suggestive nude or nearly nude images via text messaging. Pew Internet & American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2009/PIP_Teens_and_Sexting.pdf Accessed 2/1/10

Paulson, A. (2009.) Sexting: at least 15 percent of teens take part. Christian Science Monitor. 12/16/2009, p1.

According to the Norton Online Living Report 2009, parents believe their children spend 21 hours online. The reality is that students in twelve countries reported spending 39 hours online. Don’t tell me these kids don’t have time to finish their assignments or clean their rooms.

Multitasking. Researchers for the Kaiser Family Foundation’s report, Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds, found that our students aren’t just watching YouTube or downloading from iTunes. When they’re on the ’Net, they’re likely to be IM-ing, texting, watching TV, or listening to their music players.

The Kaiser Family Foundation’s researchers found that rates of teen media use (TV, cell phones, computers, video games, audio, print, and movies) are up an hour and 17 minutes over teen media usage five years ago. A teen’s cell phone, smart phone, or gaming device is never out of arm’s reach.

“[…] cell phones and iPods have become true multi-media devices,” the study’s authors wrote. “In fact, young people now spend more time listening to music, playing games, and watching TV on their cell phones (a total of :49 daily) than they spend talking on them (:33).”

The authors of the Norton Online Living Report found that, “[…] six in 10 adults worldwide say kids spend ‘too much’ time online, and what’s more 45% of kids agree.”

Students as digital trailblazers. In another study from the Speak Up National Research Project, researchers disagree with parents and kids: students aren’t spending too much time online; students are the early adopters and adapters of new technology. Our students are not wasting time, they’re innovating. The authors write that our students are the “digital advance team,” the people who will lead educators and other adults into the technology age.

“The findings illustrate how K-12 students are leading the way in re-thinking education delivery and career exploration,” the study’s authors wrote. “These insights can be used to inform our nation’s education leaders in communities all across the United States, as they plan on how to use the stimulus funds for education effectively.”

The researchers believe that our students are ready and able to show adults how to use technology in innovative and educational ways; it’s our responsibility to take notes and make the kids’ 21st century technology ideas happen.

Online use and academic success. The problem is that when kids are online, they’re not likely to be doing school work. The Generation M2 report’s researchers found that students from all races and from all family education backgrounds spent an average of just 16 minutes online working on classroom assignments. Most of the time (25%), they hang out on social network sites, play online games (19%), watch YouTube or other videos (16%), and IM one another (13%).

The good news from these studies is that all of this online time and short hand text message language isn’t rotting students’ brains as much as we might think. The Generation M2 report’s researchers did find that 8- to 18-year-olds are spending five fewer minutes reading hard copies of books, magazines, and newspapers for pleasure than they did in six years ago. However, they’ve made up about two minutes of that deficit with online magazine or newspaper reading.

They also found that the same number of students who read for pleasure six years ago is about the same number who do so today. It’s also an activity that prohibits a lot of multitasking. Students might glance at the TV or play music in the background, but for the most part, when they read print, they are focused on their reading.

The Generation M2 report’s researchers also found that the time students spend online doesn’t affect their reading time. Heavy screen media users (16 or more hours a day) and light screen media users (less than two hours a day) read about the same amount of time: about 41 minutes a day. Even kids who watch TV all night long read about as much as those who don’t tune in much at all.

Students who have a TV in their bedrooms or live in homes where the TV is always on read less than other students, by about 10 minutes. Ten minutes might not seem much, but it’s a significant number that correlates to classroom achievement.

“Contrary to what is found for other media,” the Generation M2 report’s researchers wrote, “young people who are heavy readers (those who spend an hour or more per day with print media) are substantially more likely to say they earn high grades than those who are light readers (those who report no print reading on a typical day): 72% of heavy readers report high grades, compared to 60% of those in the light-reading group.”

Media use and well being. Not only do the heavy media users earn lower grades, but they’re not as happy as the kids who are offline. Of the light media users (fewer than three hours per day), 22% reported that they have a “high level of personal contentment,” the Generation M2 researchers found. On the opposite side, 20% of the heavy media users (more than 16 hours per day) reported that they had a “low level of personal contentment.”

Twenty-one percent of 8- to 18-year-olds are heavy media users. The problem is that we need to teach these kids to channel their media use. According to the Norton Online Living Report’s authors, parents know that they’re responsible for their children’s media use, but just 7 in 10 kids have rules. Thirty-three percent of the parents in the survey said that it’s hard to make media rules because so much new technology wasn’t around when they were kids.

The Norton Online Living Report researchers found that one in five students admitted they did something online that their parents wouldn’t approve. One-in-five students reported that their parents caught them, too.

“Supervision is inherently difficult when it comes to the online world,” the study’s authors wrote. “Not only is the Web’s content available to anyone with a search engine, it’s easy for kids to bypass parents altogether by logging on from outside the household.”

Educators have the tough job of balancing the curriculum with the students’ digital obsession, of incorporating 21st century skills with 21st century safety, and encouraging academic success in a world of media excess. I think we’re up to the challenge, but our role will be more to guide the digital natives with their technology use while they lead the way.

References:

“Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year Olds.” (2010) Kaiser Family Foundation. http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf Accessed January 26, 2010

“Norton Online Living Report.” (2009) Symantec Corporation. http://www.nortononlineliving.com/documents/NOLR_Report_09.pdf Accessed January 21, 2010.

“Selected National Findings: Speak Up 2008 for Students, Teachers, Parents and Administrators.” (2009.) Project Tomorrow. http://www.tomorrow.org Accessed December 8, 2009.

A Public Agenda Report found that 45 percent of students at four-year universities work 20 hours or more. More than half of the community college students work more than 20 hours a week and more than a quarter work 35 hours or more. Twenty-three percent of all college students have children.

The problem is that students start college, but many of them, just 40 percent, receive their four-year degree in six years’ time. At the community college level, just 20 percent finish a two-year degree in three years.

It’s not hard to see why these kids aren’t finishing college. It’s not that students don’t want to be there, it’s that they can’t afford to be there. When faced with the reality of work-schedule and school-schedule conflicts, many choose work instead.

The researchers for Public Agenda’s report, “With Their Whole Lives Ahead of Them,” found four myths and realities about why students don’t finish college. I think that secondary school teachers can address two of them.

Myth No. 3: Most students go through a meticulous process of choosing their college from an array of alternatives.

Reality No. 3: Among students who don’t graduate, the college selection process is far more limited and often seems happenstance and uninformed.

The Public Agenda researchers found that most of the college dropouts never went through a college selection process at all. They just went to the nearest school that offered classes they could attend while working. Over half of the students valued the cost of the tuition above the overall reputation of the school.

Students who drop out of college are less likely to have parents or other family members who attended or graduated from college. These are people who selected their college not for its excellent nursing program or because of its reputation as a good business school, but because it was on the way to work.

As teachers, the question is how can we help our students choose a college where they’ll be successful? The students who don’t finish college don’t have a family structure that will help them select or stay in school. Mentoring students about career choices, traveling to a college fair with students who might be the first in their families to attend college, and hosting a virtual campus tour are ways to introduce students to the college choices available.

Myth No. 4: Students who don’t graduate understand fully the value of a college degree and the consequences and trade-offs of leaving school without one.

Reality No. 4: Students who leave college realize that a diploma is an asset, but they may not fully recognize the impact dropping out of school will have on their future.

In high school, fewer of the college dropouts thought that they’d attend college than the college graduates. Fewer dropouts thought that their teachers believed they’d attend college. They didn’t have their family’s support, either. The dropouts’ families didn’t value a college education as much as those of college graduates.

Our mission as teachers is clear: we need to communicate the importance of higher education. The students who drop out of college don’t have a strong push from their families to finish their education. We need to provide that push while the students are still in secondary school. Just talking about possible careers and the career paths in our disciplines can help students visualize the steps they need to take to find a job in a field they love. The research shows that students who do not graduate from college didn’t have as clear of an idea of what career they were aiming for as those students who did graduate. Teachers can easily supply the information and support students as they develop their career goals.

The study also found that students want to take classes in the evenings and on weekends. They’d like more financial aid for part-time students who are trying to work and go to school. Many students would like access to affordable day care options while they take classes. These are important changes, but not really changes that teachers can make.

However, we can support our students, especially first-generation potential college students. Their families aren’t pushing college and they don’t have the home support to work, go to class, and eat Ramen noodles for four years. It’s a struggle for any kid, but it’s really hard for students who have a hard time picturing themselves in a collegiate cap and gown.

Reference:

“With Their Whole Lives Ahead of Them.” (2009) Public Agenda for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Accessed 12/9/09 http://www.publicagenda.org/files/pdf/theirwholelivesaheadofthem.pdf