It should be added that as educators we are involved with coaching our
students in almost every facet of life. The fact that we are
introducing new tools to access worldly information we thereby
increase our role in teaching what is responsible use. We have all
learned that all the technological wonders of hardware and software
available to us doesn't solve our problems or make us better teachers.
It is how we apply those tools. So why do we make an exception when it
comes to filtering and sheltering our children. The technology by
itself is not the answer. Careful monitoring and coaching whenever a
child strays is. We can't be a constant policeman but make a sincere
effort in an age appropriate manner.
Do we plan to do away with the LAN filters? No. Are we going to freak
out whenever the filters fail to shelter everything? No. Do we plan to
increase our student and parent population education on Internet
Safety and responsible surfing/gaming? Yes. (We do some already but
could always do more).
Great discussion. The smart phones are rapidly taking all of this to a
new level. The laptops were personal enough, now the phones are in
their pockets!
Fred Austin
The Oakwood School
On May 17, 2009, at 8:34 PM, Jason Johnson wrote:
> Agreed. It is sort of like implying that children riding the subway
> alone is a technological issue. We worry more about what occurs on a
> computer because it is visible after the fact (i.e. browsing
> history, log, etc.). We never really see what they observer from the
> drunk on the subway, sneak from a news rack by the station, or watch
> on a passengers DVD player.... so we ignore it. Technology can feel
> a bit like a bait and switch. I give my children a computer to
> learn and they use it to watch 4Chan. It is no different than
> saying, "I give my children a hammer to build and they bash holes in
> the wall". And yet, we remain surprised and insist more technology
> is the answer. The impulse seems to be to put more foam around the
> hammer ....... instead of waiting until they are ready for a hammer
> and teaching them that an hole they make, they have to repair. Yet
> some times the foam makes the best of a bad situation.
>
> _J
>
> ____________________________
> Jason at jasonpj@yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Bill Fitzgerald <dwfitzgerald@yahoo.com>
> To: ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 6:23:46 PM
> Subject: Re: iphone/itouch
>
> In following the various responses in this thread, I'm wondering if
> we are doing our students and our parents a disservice by positing
> this as a technological issue that can be remedied via filtering, as
> opposed to a critical thinking issue that needs to be addressed via
> age-appropriate training and education.
>
> Most every kid can walk. They can use their ability to walk to go to
> good places, bad places, and places in-between, yet no one wants to
> advocate that kids stop walking.
>
> Obviously, this comparison breaks down in a few ways, but I think it
> helps illustrate an essential point: using technological
> interventions to attempt to mediate what are essentially "problems"
> related to humans having free will misleads about both the reach of
> technology and the power of free will.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> [ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons,
> attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=ISED-L
>
>
>
>
>
> [ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons,
> attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=ISED-L
[ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=ISED-L
