Mr. Harris' ePortfolio

Opening a New Hatch to Undiscovered Space

Month: November 2020

Digital Citizenship: Conduct in the 21st Century

24 November 2020 / / 0 Comments

Digital citizenship (DC) is a concept integral to acting as a functional member of society in the 21st century and is it therefore imperative that it occupies focus in education with clarity and understanding. In general, DC refers to the responsibility and etiquette of one who uses digital technology (computers, the internet, etc.) to interact and engage with any aspect of society. Because there are differing views in academia as to what DC is and includes, formal definitions are variable. In an educational context, some authors have defined DC as “…a transversal dimension that involves the values, skills, attitudes, knowledge and critical understanding which citizens require in the digital era” (Frau-Meigs et al., 2017). Furthermore, a general but clear aspect of DC is to “…make safe, responsible, respectful choices online” (Common Sense Media, 2011).

In the traditional sense, citizenship is often viewed as a legal membership bounded within a nation-state which provides civil, social, political, and economic rights and responsibilities to legal citizens (Choi, 2016).  As a citizen of the digital world, such boundaries and societal norms are eliminated or disjointed because DC includes concepts like globalization and multiculturalism that emerge from a global network of information sharing like the internet. It includes self-representation and interaction through one’s digital identity on a platform that is lousy with misinformation, nefarious intention, permanent records, unrelatable contexts, and unregulated volumes of opinion (this is a “with great power comes great responsibility” moment from Spiderman’s Uncle Ben). Unlike the 20th century, where those who wanted no part in the technological movement had the ability to stay out of it, global citizens of the 21st century have no say over being integrated into a digital world—you can ignore the internet, but the internet will not ignore you. The dichotomy of the digital world is that is simultaneously a source of greatness and horror. It has given power to the people through the democratization of information and performed functions such as having broken down ancient systems of belief used to suppress and control marginalized groups while, at the same time, formed whole new factions of misinformation and rebirthed dormant ideology without context. The problem with a digital world, without digital citizenship, is that the rules for this new age are not yet discovered because they are rewritten daily; therefore, in order to use such a tool while protecting oneself and others, one needs to understand how to be an appropriate digital citizen.

I have tried to provide some indication to a spectrum of good and evil potentiated by the digital world, but why is digital citizenship important to a classroom? The internet and social media can be wonderful tools for connection, information sharing, learning, community building and more, but it is also a place of sexual harassment, catfishing, cyberbullying, psychological torment, and physical threat—particularly in school settings (Brailovskaia et al., 2018; John et al., 2018). DC is an antidote to many of these issues through understanding the risks, applying positive mental health to digital use, gaining experience in safe, informed settings, practicing self-regulation, and more.

Although digital literacy can be incorporated into any curricula with an educator worth their salt with digital technology, there are developed curricula in use. As of 2018, an organization named Common Sense Media has been a leader in the DC field providing curricula to 76% of all public schools in the US (Gleason & von Gillern, 2018). On the Common Sense Media website, educators, students, and parents can find resources that can be applied to K-12 education where it “[a]ddresses topics of concern for schools…, [p]repares students with critical 21st century skills…, [s]upports educators with training and recognition…[, and e]ngages the whole community through family outreach.” Personally, I would make a concerted effort to explore digital citizenship by integrating it into all classes I teach. I hope to teach in the sciences, and as part of the science curriculum, the scientific method is taught and maintained throughout scientific education. For those unfamiliar with the general basis of the scientific method, it is a set of principles (ie. Replicability, falsifiability, correlation vs causation, ruling out rival hypothesis, extraordinary claims, occam’s razor, etc..) that exposes why and how we are wrong with our hypotheses (informed and educated guesses)—a result could be positive, but that means that your hypothesis was not proven wrong, not that it was fact. Just as the scientific method is capable of putting our biases in check, it is a method for detecting misinformation and navigating the chaos and negativity on the internet. In this sense, the negative aspect of the internet is in fact a tool to use the scientific method against for learning! Other ways to engage DC is to build positive health in the classroom to provide students with the confidence and ability to handle misguided and ill-intended content on the internet; furthermore, to make good choices and gain awareness towards what is personally exposed on the internet and devices…and what that means.

 

References:

Brailovskaia, J., Teismann, T., & Margraf, J. (2018). Cyberbullying, positive mental health and suicide ideation/behavior. Psychiatry Research, 267, 240–242.

Choi, M. (2016). A Concept Analysis of Digital Citizenship for Democratic Citizenship Education in the Internet Age. Theory and Research in Social Education, 44(4), 565–607.

Common Sense Media. (2011). Digital Literacy and Citizenship in the 21st Century: Educating, Empowering, and Protecting America’s Kids A Common Sense Media White Paper. In Media (Issue March, pp. 1–16). Common Sense Media.

Frau-Meigs, D., O’Neill, B., Soriani, A., & Vitor Tomé. (2017). Digital Citizenship Education. Overview and New Perspectives (Vol. 1).

Gleason, B., & von Gillern, S. (2018). Digital citizenship with social media: Participatory practices of teaching and learning in secondary education. Educational Technology and Society, 21(1), 200–212.

John, A., Glendenning, A. C., Marchant, A., Montgomery, P., Stewart, A., Wood, S., Lloyd, K., & Hawton, K. (2018). Self-harm, suicidal behaviours, and cyberbullying in children and young people: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(4).

An Afternoon with EdCampUvic

9 November 2020 / / 0 Comments

I just finished attending an EdCampUvic conference via zoom, which is a form of professional development for teachers with some key differences from what a typical professional development workshop consists of. This specific experience was with the education cohort of the University of Victoria; however, it conceptually generalizes to the EdCamp organization which is simply broader in scope and attendance. When I think of a typical Pro-D day—in terms of format—I have expectations I will receive information that may contribute to my professional interests by choosing from a selection of given topics where contributing professionals are scheduled to share their knowledge and resources through a presentation, speech, workshop, and so on. A key difference utilized in the EdCampVic program is that it is participant-driven rather than presenter-driven, and thus, learning and engagement is distributed through conversation (where participants have equal opportunity to contribute) rather than planned presentations. For instance, it is the participating educators who collaboratively determine the topics of engagement through polling prior to the workshop. Furthermore, it is open to educators of all levels and specializations, and, in the interest of maximizing learning, educators are free to enter or leave any of the open sessions throughout, so their interests and needs are best met. This format follows a model of differentiated learning, which is an educational style that promotes opportunity for learner’s individual differences within a curriculum. It is education tailored to fit the variance of needs and strengths of a body of learners within a curriculum.

Although I had the opportunity to join and leave any session as I pleased, I stuck with one which was titled “Cross Curricular Inquiry in High School.” The open discussion format—which facilitated the experiences and ideas of both seasoned, expert educators, and teacher candidates alike—was immediately beneficial because it promoted relationship building and external awareness—aspects often absent in formats that facilitates a presenter and an audience. This way, I was able to express some of my ideas, experiences, questions, and concerns about applying cross-curricular instruction when I enter the teaching profession and I obtain dynamic feedback in multiple forms and perspectives. Moreover, my viewpoint as a teacher candidate may have—and hopefully—promoted thought and perspective in the more advanced educators in the session, allowing them to explore their wealth of knowledge through a different lens. An observation that stuck with me throughout the experience was the fact that discussions often took life of their own and freely explored the space of the intended topic, while constantly diverging into other topics, stories, resources, philosophies and so on. No matter what the divergence was, it fit nicely with the cross-curricular topic because it really examined the interrelatedness of knowledge and subjects and how robust learning can be when constraints are lifted. It also supported differentiated learning because it allowed participants to engage in any way they felt comfortable, including speaking, asking questions, posting resources, writing, and silently observing.

It is not hard to see how this format would benefit a classroom setting. I am entering into the profession of secondary education and in such a setting, allowing students to discover and select their interests and curiosities through low-risk, conversational discussion, would be extremely beneficial for learning in general, but more precisely, applying it to place- or community-based learning and cross-curricular education. Imagine a scenario where you ask students to engage in place-based learning in an outdoor setting. There are plants that have stories, are used as medicine, that have molecular physiology, that follow mathematical patterns in growth, and that are homes and food to other organisms—that is just one word, plant. If you constrain the learner by making only one subject (ie mathematics) open to observation, the student may have to abandon the object that spiked their learning curiosity. The fact is, most things are connected or interrelated in some fashion or another and by allowing for more dynamic and robust curricula (ones that are collaborative), the educational quality follows. Through my observational practicums, I have observed that teachers often don’t want to step on their colleagues curricular toes meaning that they might intentionally exclude learning about some topic because another class covers it in a different year or subject. This observation demonstrates how important building relationships and collaborating with colleagues is when trying to develop a cross-curricular program—you need others on board too. Getting others on board is often difficult because change is always of that nature; however, when I asked for suggestions in how to begin implementing cross-curricular education, I received some excellent feedback. From Christine, my Pedagogy, Curriculum and Teaching instructor at UNBC, I received feedback that really resonated, which was that you need to be disruptive and build relationships. To be disruptive alone can cause negative outcomes and a lot of stress, but if you are constantly doing your best to demonstrate how effective the change could be while building positive relationships and respect among colleagues, the problem is solvable. Another educational professional noted that you can start without colleagues on board by practicing cross-curricula within your own class to set an example and demonstrate success that will attract others. Going forward into my career as an educator, I hope to take this advice and develop systems of teaching that incorporate cross-curricular learning which includes place-based learning and department collaboration through example.

Learning Progressions!

5 November 2020 / / 0 Comments

Regardless of the setting or environment, learning is a process that develops with experience and time, it is not a discrete phenomenon (even though learning Kung Fu like Neo would be awesome). No matter who is learning or what is being learned, the process occurs in non-linear stages at variable rates. Take any learning goal, such as learning to play the guitar, learning how to use polar coordinates, or playing on a floor hockey team in gym class, and consider that it is not really a single goal at all, but a complex of many building blocks, and each building block is its own complex of subunits—and that this regression is infinite. Well these building blocks are the skills required to achieve the learning goals and each level of regression is a refinement of a skill at some level of precision. If we use the analogy of building a house, we can think of the general characteristics (foundation, framing, plumbing, electrical, etc.) as the skill sets that need to come together and coordinate to become the final product as something that provides shelter and a place to call home. As we regress lower in the analogy, the general characteristics—lets choose electrical—are comprised of many subskills that need to be learned in order to do electrical work (have and know how to use the proper equipment, knowledge around electricity, building code regulations, etc.). We can carry this regression indefinitely—in order to attend electrician school, you need to have completed a Grade 12 education to show you have a foundation in math and literacy…to get that you needed to be socialized to attend school throughout and so on—but the right answer to how far one should take this regression is as far as is needed to achieve the goal. The most important point of this analogy is that none of the building block used to achieve the learning goal are independent of one another or linear and are all predicated on developed skills.

With that analogy in mind, learning progressions are a format of education that takes into account this process of learning as a developmental progression where there are blocks of skills that students must master to achieve a curricular outcome. As an educator, learning progressions are the development stages of a learner’s journey that can be refined at particular points of need, from a place outside of, what Vygotsky would call, the Zone of Proximal Development to a high level of competency where the learning can excel. Students are usually not curricular experts upon entering the education system; however, they are full of individual strengths and curiosities that, if allowed to flourish and amplify, can potentiate confidence in that student that will perpetuate their learning in the next skill “block” in the curricular set and contribute positively to the collective. The very act of promoting strong skill sets in students should be the clarifying clue of why learning cannot be a linear process, because the building blocks are not independent nor necessarily hierarchically linear.

Today in groups, during our Theory in Context class in the B.Ed program at UNBC, we were asked to quickly explore ideas of how learning progressions would be considered if developing curricula based on some subject of our choosing. My group decided to model floor hockey through the developmental span between Kindergarten and Grade 9. We decided that during Kindergarten to Grade 1, the curricular focus should be on developing skills relating to working in groups, spatial awareness, and safety, and learning to enjoy the participating. At this stage, competition is not so much the goal as participation because the skills needed to compete safely and effectively have not been developed in most students. Next, over the span of Grade 2 and 3, students would focus more on developing game-related skills, such as developing proper stick grip, ball/puck handling, passing (awareness of self and others), and game rules to higher degree. In Grades 4 to 5, students would play more as teams within their class and/or school and team competition would be introduced. At this level, students should be competent in using the many skills developed over the previous years (coordination, spatial awareness, muscle memory, teamwork, etc.) and able to perform in a competitive setting among peers. In Grades 6 and 7, the level of competition expands to playing against other school and the concepts of comradery and responsibility are elevated. Finally, during Grades 8 and 9, the competition level expands higher to competing in competitions and tournaments across the province and this is where the teamwork, leadership, game knowledge, and technical skills are in highest demand. Now I know what you may be thinking: this seems quite linear, but it is not and here’s why. During this learning progression, the curricular requirements are stages or skills that need to be mastered throughout the learning process. But as we have all experience, students come to class with an extensively diverse set of skills and strengths, so rather than force the bored student in grade 2, who had been attending and playing in a minor league hockey since he or she was 4 years old, to work on stick handling, the student could use their strength to teach and help other students at a lower skill level. This way, the advanced student is developing new skills in leadership because they have the confidence to step up and display their strength for the good of others and themselves. The same could be said for a student far who is in the zone of proximal development for some skill. Vygotsky often referred to the process of facilitating learning, when the learner is at the point where he or she is ready to learn but not yet component, as scaffolding. If the class is averaged around the intended point in the curriculum, the number of scaffolding opportunities for the lower student increases along with the opportunity to learn from multiple perspectives, and thus, so does the rate of learning. Through treating the building blocks of the learning goal—the learning progressions—as a continuous and interconnected process, the students, who are also interconnected and have strengths across multiple domains, have the opportunity to build confidence towards new skills through the momentum given by providing their strengths opportunity to accentuate.

© 2024 Mr. Harris' ePortfolio

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑