StudyBlue provides a free service where students and teachers can create flashcards, notes, and quizzes online. A while back, we created a Facebook application where students could review their StudyBlue flashcards while logged in to Facebook. Our thinking was, “Students are on Facebook… so let’s meet students where they are.” Once we introduced our Facebook app, however, we heard vehement protests from students. Students wanted complete separation between Facebook and studying. Facebook is for online socializing. StudyBlue is for online studying. We quickly scrapped the StudyBlue Facebook app.

This experience taught us some valuable lessons about teaching with technology in the Facebook era. In order for technology to help students learn, it must meet each of what I call the “3 E’s.” It must be Engaging, Effective, and Easy to use.

Engaging Students in the Right Context

When teaching with technology, the learning task must align with the capabilities – and the –context – of said technology. The capabilities part is obvious. It goes without saying we wouldn’t ask students to write a long term paper using their phone as the sole input device. The context piece is less obvious. That is, it’s important to consider what state of mind students are in when they’re using a technology. When students are using Facebook, they’re thinking about socializing, not social studies. They’re getting distracted by pictures of friends and chat messages, not graphs and charts. They’re not thinking about studying, so creating an app for studying on Facebook is difficult.

That said, as Facebook becomes more of a utility, students might find it more and more conducive to studying. Case in point: phones are a utility. Sure, they’re a communications device and people use them for social calls. However, phones have gone beyond just talk and answer. Students use them for texting, but also for studying. As students do more and more things on Facebook – as it becomes more of a utility – there’s a good chance the context of Facebook will change so that it’s more than a social app and more conducive to studying.

Being Effective at Helping Students Learn

Technology must be grounded in the learning research. Students and teachers won’t use a technology if it doesn’t get results. What’s interesting is the research on how we learn has evolved over the past few years. Here’s what the research shows:

• Alternating study environments – studying in both the library and the coffee –shop – can be beneficial
• Our parents told us to turn off the T.V. and radio when we studied, but new research indicates that ambient noise in the background can help students learn
• Other recent research confirms what we’ve known for years: It’s important for students to give themselves time between study sessions
• And students who challenge themselves via “self-testing” retain more

When looking for technologies to assist student learning, check out the latest learning research. Developers should explain how their solutions meet students’ needs and help them learn. Beware of online gimmicks that will entertain or engage students, but not help educate them.

Enhancing What Students Already Do

For technology to get results, it first needs to help people make “baby steps.” Behavior change is hard; technologies that assist users in making baby steps have a better chance of being adopted and, in turn, helping students learn. Also, if teachers are going to implement a technology in their classroom, it needs to help students learn while also fitting easily with what’s already happening in the classroom. This seems self-explanatory, but there are many technologies out there that do not have simple workflows. Both teachers and students are extremely busy and inundated with information; technologies that don’t solve a problem in a simple way won’t get used. When evaluating a technology for use in the classroom, the important question to ask is: How does this technology enhance in an easy way a task I or my students already do? If there isn’t a ready answer to this question, be wary of adopting the technology.

What are your thoughts on how to best teach with technology in the Facebook era? I look forward to seeing your ideas in the comments section.

This is the first of a three-part series by Matt Messinger, Director of Learning at StudyBlue, a free online flashcard and note-taking tool.

Photo credits:
Facebook Like Button: FindYourSearch / SEO
Study Blue Logo: StudyBlue.com
phone LAN: Gustav H / Gustav Holmström

“Wow!” you say. “That’s nice. So…how does this affect me and my school today?”  As we prepare to answer the question, let’s take a very brief look at a couple other tech-related ‘concepts’ which most of us are quite familiar with: CIPA and E-Rate. E-Rate is the commonly recognized name for the FCC’s Universal Services Fund program which helps school districts (and public libraries) obtain access to state of the art technologies and tech services at discounted rates. To be eligible for these discounts, school districts must be CIPA compliant. CIPA requires that districts and schools with Internet access must filter that access to block visual depictions of obscenity, child pornography and other things which might be deemed harmful to minors. Districts must also have an Internet safety policy in place and an Acceptable Use Policy to address such things as access to inappropriate materials, safety and security, hacking and protection of personal information. We could spend hours just talking about CIPA, filtering and E-Rate compliance. However, let’s go back to the question: How does this Broadband Act affect me and my school today?

Over the last two decades or so, schools across the country have worked hard to bring technologies into their classrooms. Over those same decades, the reality of an age-related digital divide has also become ever more apparent. Young people have, use and experience technologies in very different ways than most adults – adults over 30, perhaps. The Broadband Act, with all its focus on broadband penetration, also recognizes that the education system must address this fact. We have been trying to provide hardware and software to schools; we have tried to train staffs to effectively implement these tools for pedagogy. However, we have neglected to systematically address how they impact the lives of our students – both inside and outside the school. To address this, Title II of the Broadband Act is called the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act. This is the answer to the question!

The Protecting Children Act states that in order to be E-Rate compliant, a school district receiving E-Rate discounts must now show that “as part of its Internet policy [it] is educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other individuals on social networking websites and in chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and response.” (47 USC 254(h)(5)(B)(iii)

As of today, districts have yet to receive guidance on exactly what will be required. That guidance is expected in the next month or so. However, after initial wailing and gnashing of teeth, educators generally have questions and/or comments which fall into three categories:

1. We need to write or change our current policy.
2. We have to teach something new.
3. We’re not talking about technology issues here.

With respect to policy, the law seems quite clear. It requires that a school district’s Internet policy reflect the fact that it is educating youth about online safety issues.  This alone can be a daunting task. It requires convincing the appropriate people within a district hierarchy that a policy must be written or revised. Once that is done, the creation or revision, itself, has to take place, followed by whatever internal processes the district has to move a new policy forward.  Below is a link to the recently revised Seattle Public School Internet Use Policy. Seattle Schools tries very hard to ensure that its policies are clear and concise. Policies are most often followed by more detailed procedures. It is often much easier to update procedures than it is to revise or create policy. http://www.seattleschools.org/area/policies/c/C23.00.pdf

With respect to educating minors about appropriate online behavior, from a very practical point of view, we are being required to create a new discipline, one which draws from several existing disciplines, but which looks at and reflects them back to students in contexts which may well be very foreign and uncomfortable for many teachers. There is a lot of talk within the online safety community about “The Three C’s”: cyber safety, cyber security and cyber ethics. In working with educators and parents, I often break these three into five, more easily chunkable “C’s.” These are:

1. Cyber safety, which is concerned with the personal safety of real, live people,
2. Cyber security, which focuses on our technologies, themselves,
3. Cyber Literacy, which recognizes that media-infused 21st century reading, writing, research are significantly different and more powerful than the reading and writing which most adults were raised with,
4. Cyber Citizenship, which includes the concepts of ethics and citizenship in a variety of communities, local and global,
5. Cyberbullying, which can be found woven throughout all of the above, but which is called out in laws and policies on the federal, state and local levels.

In looking at these 5 C’s, two ideas become apparent. They overlap. They are not separate and stand alone topics. If reflected in a fully-filled Venn diagram, there were be specifics for each, but there would be overlap in and among them all. The second idea is critical: with the exception of cyber security, which has some very direct technology components, educating minors about appropriate online behavior is not a technology discipline. It is a social, literacy, health and safety, prevention and intervention, school climate discipline. As a result, when educators, wailing and gnashing, ask, “Who’s gonna do this!?” The usual reply is, “Everybody.” At some point, it falls to each of us to do some part or other of that education.

Consider a PBIS-type model of implementation. On the universal level, everybody gets something. Be careful and selective as you examine the variety of materials which are available to you and your staff. On the Secondary level, those students who need more help, get a more focused “treatment.” This level will likely involve your counselors more. On the tertiary level, those students who need the most directed, specialized, professional attention, get what they need. However, that universal level ensures that all students are receiving Internet safety instruction.

Caveats:

1. Avoid one-shot inoculations. They wear off after a very short time.
2. Avoid “techno-panic” approaches. The kids are savvy; we can’t scare ‘em straight! They will see very quickly that it is the adults who are scared.

2a. As a side note to that, also avoid vendors who will try to scare you into buying their cure-all curriculum. Be selective in your selection of materials and trainings for your staff.

3. Remember that this is not “a tech problem” for the techies to solve. It is a broad-based educational opportunity.
4. Remember, too, to involve your parents and your students. Of course, we can’t forget our legal offices, local law enforcement and community partners. We all need to speak the same language when talking online safety.
5. Finally, remember that technologies change. Rapidly. Be ready to flex, adjust, modify, re-examine and revise regularly.

With that as background, look for federal and state guidance on the requirements of the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act coming to you in the very near future. In preparation, as stated in the current E-Rate Central:

“ A separate, but related, provision of the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act requires that the [Board] policy include measures for educating minors about appropriate online behavior.

“Prior to adoption, CIPA requires that “a reasonable public notice” and “at least one public meeting or hearing” be held to address the proposed Internet safety policy.

“The FCC has not established any specific criteria for evaluating an Internet safety policy, nor has it set any specific standards for what constitutes reasonable public notice or public meeting.”

Further, within a sample Internet policy, the document uses this wording by way of example:

“It shall be the responsibility of all members of the <School or Library> staff to educate, supervise and monitor appropriate usage of the online computer network and access to the Internet in accordance with this policy, the Children’s Internet Protection Act and the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act.”

Reference:

Internet Safety Policies and CIPA: An E-Rate Primer for Schools and Libraries http://www.e-ratecentral.com/CIPA/cipa_policy_primer.pdf

Mike Donlin has been an educator for decades and he was recently named Seattle’s most influential consultant by Seattle Magazine. 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:
Cable closet: waffler / Adrian Sampson on Flickr.com Creative Commons
Cables And Wires Galore: schoschie / Niels Heidenreich on Flickr.com Creative Commons
Patch panel cables: Wiki.will / William on Flickr.com Creative Commons
cables!!!: br1dotcom / Bruno Cordioli on Flickr.com Creative Commons

Yesterday on Twitter’s Tuesday #educhat, educators discussed student use of digital devices in the classroom. For the most part, cell phones aren’t allowed in schools; however, some schools are beginning to not only allow them, but also to encourage students to use their mobile devices in the name of learning. I had a guest post about using cell phones as clickers last year. I haven’t tried it myself, but I know that the technology works in classrooms.

I don’t have to tell you that the problem with personal digital technology in the classroom is that students use it not just as a clicker or a web search device, but also they use it to text their friends and look up answers on a test.  Sometimes they even communicate with their parents. True confession time: I have assisted my high school daughter during her study hall via both text and Facebook chat. The texting was for her biology project (recommend backyard birds for research) and the chat was for an essay (check thesis statement). It was for a legitimate educational purpose, not just gabbing, so I thought that my daughter’s cell phone use was justifiable, even though it was against school rules. (Good point for debate.)

How do we stop students from using the devices for unjustifiable uses? Bring the cell phones out of the students’ hidden pockets and onto the desktops. It’s time to start teaching students how to harness the phones’ power for education, not just for sending photos or texting about just how bored they are. Students will bring their phones with them wherever they go, despite all the rules we give them. Using the mobile devices’ allure brings our content into the 21st century and adds an engagement piece to our lesson plans.

Like the calculator, the graphing calculator, and the computer, cell phones have educational applications. Students can research statistics on the fly, record lab experiments, calculate sums, and text an answer to their teacher. Students can Tweet to their classroom’s #hashtag and post photos of their work to their class blogs. Teachers can send test reminders or a podcast lesson.

To curb student cheating with these devices, we need to teach proper use, monitor students during tests and quizzes, and provide assessments that require more than a Googled answer, a fill-in-the blank, or a darkened bubble. Authentic assessment is more labor-intensive for the teacher, but students demonstrate their knowledge in ways that are more meaningful than taking a multiple-choice test.

Cell phones aren’t going away any time soon and students will use them in class. We can choose whether that cell phone use will be overt or covert, with or without our instruction, and for an educational or recreational purpose.

What do you think about using cell phones in class? Am I nuts to advocate for their use in classrooms? Let’s not forget that I’ve been an accessory in breaking my daughter’s school cell phone use rules. How do you feel about that? I haven’t even addressed the issue of fairness – not every student will have equal access to technology. How do we level that playing field?

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

1. On April 15, 2010 a nine-year old was accused of hacking into the Fairfax County public school Blackboard Learning System (Article Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/14/AR2010041404159.html)
2. In May of 2008, four high school students were charged with hacking into the Fort Bend Independent School District’s computer network so that they could alter other students’ grades. It cost the school district an estimated $100,000 – $200,000 to recover from the damages the incident caused (Article Link: http://www.infoniac.com/breaking/students-hack-into-schools-computer-systems-to-change-their-grades.html)
3. In May 2003, Stoughton High School expelled one student and suspended others for installing key loggers on teachers’ computers so that they could gain illegal access into the computers to change other student’s grades. In some cases, these students were charging other students for this act. Article Link: http://archive.cert.uni-stuttgart.de/isn/2003/05/msg00049.html)

Attempts to gain unauthorized access to computer systems will most likely never stop. Cybercriminals are too motivated by the excitement and the personal advantages that can be gained by attempting these types of crimes. This is why it is important for K-12 and higher education school systems to invest time and money to implement and maintain controls to prevent, detect and correct computer system security breaches to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computers’ systems and the data stored on them. Some regulations require this protection, such as:

1. Family Education Rights and Privacy Act Regulation (FERPA) – that requires protecting the privacy of student education records (http://ed.gov/policy/gen/reg/ferpa/index.html) 
2. Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) – that requires protecting personal information of children under the age of thirteen when collecting the information using a web site or online service (http://www.ftc.gov/ogc/coppa1.htm) 
3. State Security Breach Notification Laws – that requires in some states that an entity is to disclose a breach when someone’s personal information has been compromised (http://www.ncsl.org/Default.aspx?TabId=13489)
4. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) – that requires protecting private health information (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/)

With the threats of cybercriminal attacks and failing to meet regulation compliance, it is critical that school systems have an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) program that includes long-term strategic planning and ongoing tactical practices that empower the school to maintain a sound security program. The ERM program should include these practices and controls:

1. Information Security policies, standards and procedures – that include clear expectations for what is required (policies) to protect data and systems and how controls (standards and procedures) will be implemented and maintained.
2. Technology controls to prevent, detect, and correct security breaches. 
3. Regular Risk and Vulnerability Assessments by an outside party – that evaluates the effectiveness of the ERM program from an unbiased perspective to determine these elements:

In order to implement a successful ERM program, these critical steps must be followed:

1. IT Administrators need to conduct a thorough Risk and Gap assessment to identify practices and technology controls that are weak or that do not exist. The assessment should include administrative practices, physical controls (door locks, video surveillance, private data locations, etc.) and technical controls.
2. The risk/gap assessment needs to be communicated to decision makers and remediation activities should be prioritized and approved with timelines for when the remediation project(s) should be completed
3. After the remediation projects are completed, another assessment should be done to ensure that the remediation activities occurred per expectations
4. After remediation projects are conducted, maintenance of the ERM program should be conducted per written policies, standards and procedures

Cybercrime and regulation compliance is a part of doing business for school systems. It is paramount that school systems conduct disciplined practices to reduce the risk of cybercrime or regulation non-compliance and protect the private information of students, parents, staff and board members.

Larry Boettger is the Director of InfoSec Security & Compliance Group, a service line of adtec Services, Inc. Boettger is a Certified Information Systems Auditor (CISA), Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP), and has various other security credentials that he has acquired during his fourteen+ years of experience in the computer security industry. He has lectured for the FBI’s InfraGard Program, Wisconsin Bankers’ Association, Lorman Education Services, and many other public and private events.

Has your school ever been the target of cybercrime? Have you experienced cybercrime in the classroom? Share your experiences in the comments.

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?

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.

Listed below are 10 such ideas.

1. Incremental Change: Change is always complex and difficult. Shifts to online teaching and learning are no different. We recommend that those who might be nervous or more hesitant start with small steps or minor course adaptations. Perhaps a training program might begin by having these individuals find online resources that they can later use. During training, they might also select from an assortment of low cost, low risk, low time strategies. At the end of such a training or orientation program, participants might indicate where they presently are on a risk continuum or meter as well as where they would like to be in a few years.
2. Shared Success Stories and Best Practices: Another option is to show teachers examples of what actually works. These examples and models might be found in books, newsletters, email messages, CDs, Web portals, testimonials, or some other media delivery format. Consider having these stories developed by peers and colleagues whom they trust instead of by vendors or external consultants.
3. Training and Development: I have found that starting with a simple technology tool or resource that can be mastered and applied is more important than explaining the underlying instructional approach, philosophy, or pedagogy. Providing incentives for the completion of the training is also important (e.g., a stipend, certificate, iPod, laptop, tablet PC, etc.).
4. Just-in-Time Support: Support staff might be on call when needed for 1:1 help and advice. Technical support personnel and trainers should not dictate a single approach or instructional philosophy but rather they should listen to teacher needs and respond accordingly. Allow teachers to select the training topics that they are interested in, rather than preselecting the topic(s) for them. I have found that when working with practicing teachers in schools that training them in the technologies that they had on their machines or had access to was far superior to training them in software that I just happened to like or use myself.
5. An Atmosphere of Sharing: Fostering change in terms of technology integration and use will only come when there is an atmosphere of change. Such an atmosphere can definitely build up over time. For instance, the final 5-10 minutes of a department, program, or unit meeting might be saved for a live presentation of an emerging technology or discussion of ideas related to how one is using technology or the Web in instruction. I often see this sharing occurring at the school and university level with annual technology in teaching events or awards for technology integration and innovation. Many schools also sponsor such events as brown bag luncheons wherein a teacher or visitor will present some interesting technology or online activity. Colloquiums, institutes, videoconferences, Webinars, and other events can also be employed to cultivate this change in atmosphere.
6. Awards and Incentives: As indicated above, training programs might include incentives such as stipends, travel monies, awards, and technology. For example, those who are innovative might be the first in line for hardware or software upgrades and replacements. The School of Education at Indiana University, for instance, has been innovative in sponsoring laptop programs wherein enlisted faculty members receive a laptop for their instructional uses after completing a set number of hours – here 16 – of technology-related training. Other incentives might include assistance in writing grants for technology and money for conference travel. There might be competitions for interactivity in online course development, outstanding course awards, and annual events for innovation in online instruction. Such efforts are vital since part of creating a community of online educators is to support success and then to celebrate such success when it occurs.
7. Modeling: I have found that modeling the use of online technologies and courses by one’s colleagues and superiors is highly valuable. In effect, when one’s leaders or supervisors are doing it (e.g., the school principal or technology coordinator), so can you. And when the high school superintendent generates a podcast or receives her training from one, people throughout the school district tend to take notice. Modeling also creates opportunities for discussion and interaction to occur around the topic or content area being shown, resulting in a sense of community among those who are interested in the new ideas.
8. Mentoring and Coaching: While technology-oriented training increasingly relies on technology-based tutorials, opportunities for 1:1 advice and consultation are bound to have a lasting impact. When new teachers or staff members enter into an online environment or situation, it is vital to provide some form of cognitive apprenticeship. For instance, someone savvy with technology or knowledgeable about online teaching and learning might be asked to support one or more novice teachers or assistants. And such individuals might receive modest stipends for such efforts.
9. External Supports: Most of the above ideas relate to internal forms of support within an organization or institution. Naturally, given the expansiveness of the Web, some external supports might be provided such as access to online teaching examples, online instruction certificate programs, and even master’s degrees. In addition, an organization or institution might subscribe to an online newsletter or enter into online discussions on a community using Ning or some other collaborative technology. For those in the K-12 world, the George Lucas Educational Foundation (GLEF) provides many examples of innovative teaching approaches with and without technology.
10. Frameworks and Models: One of the more significant ways to learn to teach online and become less hesitant, reluctant, and resistant, is to use models, overviews, and other frameworks. Frameworks offer a means to reflect on what works and what is not working. They lend a macro lens to any online teaching and learning situation. And they can help one to categorize or make sense of the never-ending mounds of information or data each of us deals with each day. In effect, they reduce the apprehensions and angst professional educators might have related to teaching as well as learning in online environments. The R2D2 (i.e., Read, Reflect, Display, and Do) and TEC-VARIETY models that I have designed are pedagogically-focused examples of such frameworks. With tools such as R2D2 at one’s side, normally hesitant or resistant instructors often become models and advocates of online education.

Anyone involved in organizational change will readily admit that change is typically systemic in nature. Consequently, I recommend you consider how most or all of the above ten categories of ideas can support teacher and staff development or perhaps even transformation within your school or school district. With such support, they can feel more secure in their online decision making and related adventures. Good luck.

Curtis J. Bonk is Professor of Instructional Systems Technology at Indiana University. He has a popular blog called TravelinEdMan and is the author of The World Is Open: How Web Technology Is Revolutionizing Education as well as Empowering Online Learning: 100+ Ideas, for Reading, Reflecting, Displaying, and Doing.

Students as technology guides. The latest research proves what you already know: our students are digital experts. Project Tomorrow’s Speak Up National Research Project has interviewed 281,000 K12 students in all 50 states for its latest report “Speak Up 2008 for Students, Teachers, Parents and Administrators.” The researchers call our students the Digital Advance Team. These students are an asset to adults, especially those whose job is to plan these kids’ education and prepare them for 21st century jobs.

Our students use technology for four purposes: communication, collaboration, creation, and contribution. The researchers write that educators need to rely on students demonstrate how to use technology and adapt it to educational purposes. Students are early adopters of new technology and they become the technology trendsetters for their peers, adults, and teachers.

Students feel unprepared for the future. In their survey of students in grades 6 – 12, the researchers found that only one-third of our students think teachers are preparing them for future jobs. However, 56 percent of principals think that their students are prepared for the technological world of work.

Why is there such a disconnect between what principals perceive and what students think? These trendsetters, our students, are frustrated with us and our schools. When they open up the double-doors and cross from the real world into the educational world, students know that they must power down their electronic devices and sit in classrooms more adapted for the 20th century than the 21st century.

Forty-three percent of the students surveyed reported that their school’s firewalls or content filters block their access to online materials and impede their learning. Over one-third of students report that teachers block their access to technology for learning. School rules frustrate one-quarter of our students and their access to technology. Outside of the school walls, students communicate freely with e-mail, text messages, and instant messages, but inside the school one-third of these students can’t communicate about learning with any electronic means.

Clear the way for technology. When the researchers asked students how schools could make it easier for them to work electronically, the number one response was: Let me use my own devices and tools during the school day.

As educators, we know that the problem with letting students use their own electronic devices during the school day is that not every student will have equal access to the learning tools. Some kids might have a smart phone that allows them to search for answers on the Internet, others might not have any electronic devices at all.

If given the chance, though, 53 percent of middle and high school students report that they would use their mobile devices to communicate with their peers about school work. Thirty-four percent would use e-mail, text messages, or instant messages to communicate with their teachers.

Both administrators and teachers believe that incorporating mobile electronic devices into the classroom would benefit students and increase student engagement, even beyond the school day.

Recommendations. The researchers recommend that schools find a way to allow students to use their own technology during the school day and to meet learners in the digital world where they live. Their research indicates that teachers should move more of their curriculum online and incorporate learning tools like simulations and games into their lesson plans. Students use Web 2.0 tools and collaborate with one another outside of the classroom; our lessons should take advantage of this and allow students to work with one another online to create new content. Schools need more digital resources available in the classroom so students can use the technology in a learning context. Teachers and students should take advantage of the instructional technology to connect with experts and bring their experiences into the classroom.

Above all, though, the researchers recommend that we let our students be our technological guides.

“We recommend that as policy makers move forward, we listen to the stakeholders with the most skin in the game – the students themselves,” the researchers wrote. “To listen, observe and learn about how they are approaching learning and living every day, their frustration points with their schools, the challenges they face in learning in the 21st century and their aspirations for how schools can be improved so all students will be successful.”

Reference:

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