Point/Counterpoint: Shold Schools Be Required to Teach Digital Citizenship?

Author Jason Ohler argues that digital citizenship should be integrated into basic education with teachers encouraging the development of the digital footprints of their students. He proposes to expand the view of digital life past just cyber-bullying and online safety. While these issues are important, Ohler suggests that teaching about them should take place concurrently with studying the impact and scope of students' technology use. Furthermore, Ohler asks for digital citizenship to be infused throughout the day at school rather that just for an hour or two at a computer lab and then back to learning without technology. He concludes with a suggestion that schools and teachers reward exceptional digital citizenship of their students which currently does not occur often enough.

Marianne Malmstrom takes the opposing view but does not entirely disagree with Ohler's arguments. She asks that schools do not teach digital citizenship but rather provide a safe environment for students to learn the best digital practices on their own. For example, Malmstrom points out the absurdity that the same schools that ban access to all social media sites then expect their students to use such sites safely and effectively. I think Malmstrom's approach is to leave more open to the students because like it or not, a large portion of them will get it at home from a young age anyways. So rather being taught directly, students "explore," alongside their educators, the digital world.

I think both authors offer valid points and make some mistakes. I am uneasy with the idea of putting every student in a digital environment before every student has easy access to that world. I know while at school, computers are becoming increasingly available and campus wide wifi keeps everyone online. However at home it is a different situation for many students. Not every student has access to a computer or an internet connection. Poorer students already at a disadvantage may be pushed further down the ladder if these policies are implemented before there is total digital access.

The article best addresses Nets Standard three, "Research and Information Fluency," because that standard involves the application of digital tools as an educational resources.

Apps Without Tablets/Smartphones

Venegas's short article presents the possibility of using apps without the pricey iPad/tablet or smartphone. This is especially good for lower elementary level students where cell phones and tablets are less commonly owned by the students. That is not to say it is not helpful to high school and middle school students as well. Although Venegas doesn't mention it, the ability to use school computers with Chrome could help deteriorate the advantage students with more access to technology have. No doubt the students with iPads and smartphones will still have an edge based on the portability and constant accessibility of their devices but incorporating Venegas's ideas makes app based projects a viable possibility. Teachers could allow students to either use their own devices or the computers owned by the school. This still creates a small issue of whether the students who opt to use the school computers will be ostracized by the students with access to their own devices. From my own classroom observation and discussions with teachers in the Carlsbad Unified School District, I have learned that administrators are no longer speaking up about the presence of technology in the classroom. In one class I observed, nearly every student had their cell phone on their desk while the teacher was talking. One student even asked a history question and the teacher responded by telling him to look it up on the phone on his desk. I mention this experience because I think it just goes to show, no matter what, students are going to bring technology into the classroom. However that does not have to be a bad thing. I think Venegas's idea to incorporate educational apps without the need for every student to own the technology needed to use it offers educators a great opportunity to introduce their students to exciting new educational tools without too much concern about favoring the students with access to technology.

The article best addresses the first ITSE standard because it facilitates and promotes student creativity and learning.

 

Citation:

 
Venegas, Juan C. (2013). Learning Connections: You Don't Need an iPad for These Web Apps! Learning & Leaning With Technology. Retrieved, from http://www.iste.org/learn/publications/learning-leading/l-l-march-april-2013/LC

From Degrading to De-grading

http://voicethread.com/share/4277538/

Computational Thinking: A Digital Age Skill for Everyone

By David Barr, John Harrison, and Leslie Conery

I think the authors of this article want to see computational thinking grow and come into wide use within the classroom because they see it as a tool that can go along with other learning to offer a higher standard of learning and the ability to solve more complex problems. The authors seemed to want to garner support for CT by giving a basic overview of what it is and how it can help in schools. From my understanding of the article, CT is like a tool that makes learning more efficient. I could not find a clear definition of the term and it looks like one of the drawbacks to CT is the lack of a clear definition. I saw this as a major weak point of the article, how are the readers expected to have a great appreciation and support for CT if the three authors cannot even clearly explain what it is? Nonetheless, it seems like the authors are trying to say CT is a multitude of computer-based tools dedicated to solving a wide array of problems.

When I read the article I immediately thought of using calculators in school. Getting the basics 2 + 2, simple multiplication and division has real life applications so calculators should not replace the process of working out a problem. That being said, when students get to high school and start working on trigonometric equations, to do the work on paper would be tedious and frustratingly pointless, knowing there is a tool that will complete several minutes of work with the click of a few buttons. I see the use of CT as similar to the use of graphing calculators in education. I think the roadblocks to CT are similar to the roadblocks standing in the way of every student having a calculator at least capable of helping to solve precalculus equations. For one, the cost of CT or advanced calculators seems high at first. I imagine making every school ready for CT would mean purchasing more computers for the classrooms and additional software and time to train teachers how to integrate CT in their lesson plans. Even so, once that initial cost is paid it looks like the benefit to using CT would be exponential.