Collective Intelligence Reflection

     This was my first time participating in a collective intelligence format.  It reminded me of a graffiti board.  I appreciated the openness of being able to place what I wanted, where I wanted it, when I wanted and how I wanted while keeping within a certain topic.  (I was disappointed that nobody replied to the article about NCAA I linked.)  The idea of sharing what is known, thoughts/opinions and things found on the internet, such as quotes and articles, is a great way to see things one may not find on one's own.
     It was interesting checking out other people's posts, but I felt it was a bit too disorganized and scattered for my style.  If I had to create or use one of these in my classroom, I would want it to be organized so that a person could find particular parts easier.  The educational system has determined that not all people learn in the same way.  If this type of education (collective intelligence) becomes incorporated into our current educational system, I believe it needs to be altered to accommodate all learning styles.  At least with a PLE, an individual can organize the information s/he wants or needs into a form that will meet his/her needs.  Just as I kept a paper folder for each class I attended, I can foresee a technology organization system that resembles the paper version:  a different color folder for each class and tabs to identify each subtopic.  Although I have been out of the classroom for over five years, I remember that one major issue with many students was the lack of organization.  One benefit that I foresee by organizing with colored folders with tabs is that it can follow students throughout their educational careers, instead of starting over with new teachers and new systems each August.      
     As a 7th grade math teacher, the way I would use collective intelligence is to have students create a math in history page in a timeline format and/or to create a page of famous mathematicians.  I can also see where I could post challenge problems where students can post their solution attempts.
   

PLE & Collective Intelligence

PERSONAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

     Personal Learning Environment, or PLE, is a way for individuals to gather and disperse information in the direction and in pursuit of their own learning goals.  The PLE may incorporate blogs written by an individual from information gathered across the world wide web, including sites such as YouTube or RSS feeds from new agencies.  Other resources beside the web may be included in this individual learning process.  Institutions who integrate PLE into their classes offer a place for students to store their blogs or other personal content where it can be shared or used in other ways. Once feedback is provided by professors, peers, experts in the field, or others, it becomes a true learning environment.  It appears that the educational roles of students and teachers are changing.  Students are taking more responsibility with their own learning by reflecting upon the information they gather and the feedback they receive from others.  Teachers are guiding students' reflections, as opposed to transferring the information to students.  Ultimately students may find that they are relying on their contacts to help keep web information updated as others post new findings.  It is sort of a web among webs - people, personal learning information, and the classic freeway of information (the worldwide web).

   

    PLE Example

     A student shared how she learns about network learning and how she pulled it all together on her own page known as her personal learning environment.  She showed how she organizes information which can be different from others since it is personal.  It was interesting how she found scientists to review and verify the information she gathered and how she even skyped a scientist to speak in real time. I like the idea of being able to ask questions, but is not that the job of a teacher?  If I was unable to answer a question, I would tell the students that I would get back to them with an answer.  Answers today, though, are basically instantaneous since we have the opportunity to use the web. 

     I am confused as to what kind of school she is attending and where these lessons originate.   Towards the beginning of the video, she said that she pulled up a science agenda to find out her daily assignment.  Is this from a public school, homeschool, charter school?  In other words, to whom is she reporting her findings besides herself and another scientist who is verifying the information.  Does she even need to get out of bed to complete these assignments that she pulls up on her computer?  She says that she can become certified to hold certain animals after doing research.  Where does she find the animals to hold once she becomes certified?  

     One comment she made that I found interesting was about the fact that there is so much information on the web, but one needs to take responsibility for accomplishing the task at hand without getting (too) sidetracked.  It is up to the student as to how and when the assignment gets done.

     What she is creating is basically what students until recently have been doing all on paper.  Instead of collecting and saving paper copies of reports, this student is saving everything electronically.  One difference that I can see is that paper copies will last whereas nobody knows the next format of technology and if her PLE will be available to her in years to come.  To me, it appears that all of her assignments become projects.  In other words, find a program to take notes and another program to organize and make things look pretty.  It is nice to be able to make one's way around the internet and computer, but I am not totally convinced of this type of learning.  I think a paper folder can do just the same.  (I guess I still have some old-school thoughts running through my brain.)

COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE:  WHAT IT COULD MEAN FOR EDUCATION

     Collective Intelligence is a combination of sharing, cooperation, collective production and collective action with regards to technology.  Basically its purpose is a place on the web where people can interact in various ways with other people who have the same interests.  Regardless of their backgrounds based on Prensky's "digital natives" and "digital immigrants," people can contribute via social interactions on the web to collaborate with others in order to create a commonplace educational society.  

     Some questions arise regarding collective intelligence.  How will teachers' roles change as collective intelligence develops?   Will academic social environments be available as a product of collective intelligence and giving students and teachers a place to collaborate?  The web has changed from Web 1.0 where there was little to no interaction to Web 2.0 where people can contribute to websites and learn from them.  Wikipedia is an example of a version of collective intelligence where people can contribute to articles and/or they can benefit by the knowledge of others.  

HOW COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE REDEFINES EDUCATION

     The educational system of today relies on teachers to share their lines of expertise.   Teachers today teach what they are required by the government so that the government can in turn command students to take tests to assure learning is taking place.  A problem is that this scenario does not necessarily prove learning has really taken place.  Basically the current education system has students learning to master up to certain points which does not necessarily assure or prove that thoughtful learning is taking place.  Education requires higher-level thinking and adapting those thoughts, ideas and concepts to something greater than a test to prove students have learned and that teachers have taught.  

     "The notion that knowledge can be built by groups of people, over a global network, using self-regulated norms is antithetical to the environment of learning within today's formal educational systems."  (p.1)  This form of education is called collective intelligence and it is redefining education as we know it.  Collective intelligence allows knowledge to be shared in (nearly) real time, it can change quickly, and it can take place anywhere.  This is unlike today's formal education where teachers teach certain, concrete information which remains stagnate (unless experts are on-hand to fix or add to the information).  Time constraints in formal classrooms do not allow teachers or students the chance to check other resources during instruction, such as the internet, for any additional information pertaining to the topic being taught.  Thus, collective intelligence appears to be a more efficient system as it relates to up-to-date information.

      Collective intelligence has "come into widespread use as technology has become cheap, in common use and linked globally and as knowledge innovation has become a major source of new value creation." (p.5)  The value that the collective intelligence system provides is really invaluable.  This type of educational system can grow instantaneously by people from all over the world.  It is truly amazing!  This system does not rely only on just one person to share knowledge in front of a classroom of students, but it relies on an infinite amount of experts to build a reliable and organized arrangement of information for anyone to benefit.  Again, invaluable.

     Issues that arise regarding collective intelligence systems are reliability and accuracy.  When my sister used to tell me that she would rely on Wikipedia to answer her daughter's homework questions, I cringed.  I was leery of using such a site due to the quality of the information.  As much as I thought she was the ignorant one, it was really myself who was the naive one.  "Collective intelligence usually swamps a few bad informants or has a way of isolating them against future participation." (p.5)  This makes me feel better.

   

My Thoughts

     The personal learning environment, PLE, style of learning appears to be a large, creative project where students can organize their assignments, websites they would like to revisit, and other information they would like to save.  The biggest difference I see between the current education system and PLE is the fact that that students collect and organize information on a computer (PLE) rather than papers (current system).  As my kids bring home papers, I pick and choose which of them to toss into a bin for them to look at later.  At the end of the school year, I have my kids go through their books and papers to decide which can be useful for the future.  

      One advantage I can see to holding onto the paper is that it will always be there when my kids want to peruse them.  Technology is ever progressive and therefore, I think PLE is an idea that will constantly need to have its format updated.  

       A disadvantage of holding onto the papers is the belief that they will probably not be looked at.  It is more likely that information and saved websites will be revisited in a PLE.

      Collective intelligence systems seem to be a good learning concept because:

1.  Experts and others can comment, add/delete/change information  

2.  Informational change takes place in (basically) real time

3.  It is a place to get the most updated information

     Some faults I find with collective intelligence systems:  

1.  How can people be certain of what is accurate and what is not.  When I was teaching, I noticed that students would jump on any information they could find when doing research for reports.  They believed everything they read.  I taught them ways to find out if sites (or other resources) were factual or not.  If they were still in question, then the answer was to not use the source.

2.  It appears that collective intelligence systems take time to organize and time to overlook so that misinformation is not printed.

     Change is the most constant word in any language.  Methods and styles of learning are always changing.

       

     

Lesson Plan - poor example

Fun n Sun Rent a Car Lesson Plan

I found the above lesson plan from Ohio Resource Center (ORC#600), but I do not think it is a well-thought out or well-written plan.  It is one in which students must do some calculations on traveling to Florida, graphing some information and answering some questions that do not offer higher-level thinking.  Plus, the graphs are already created for them.  Students just have to plot their answers.  Students are expected to write a paragraph based on the conditions that are best for each option of renting a car that is provided.
The lesson plan is incomplete because it does not have benchmarks posted.  There is nothing stated about using any media.

Lesson Plan

Glued to tube or hooked to books?

The above link will take you to a lesson plan where students are required to gather data over a certain amount of time prior to the lesson regarding the time spent watching TV versus the time they are reading.
CONSTRUCTIVISM:
1.  Students need prior knowledge of organizing and analyzing data, various types of graphs and the use of a graphing calculator
2.  Students will work in groups to organize and analyze data and to create graphs based on the information collected.
3.  Students will make predictions on real-world situations.
4.  The main lesson will be guided by a teacher, but the data collection, graphing, making inferences, and relating to the real-world situations will be done by students.

EXEMPLARY:
1.  Students will be taking the data they have gathered to make inferences and predictions on real-world situations.
2.  Students will make logical arguments pertaining to predictions regarding a real-world issue.
3.  Students will use higher-level thinking to design a variety of graphs to analyze their gathered information.
4.  Students will communicate via writing a letter about their mathematical solution to a real-world problem.

EQUITABLE:
1.  Each person will collect data for a certain amount of time.
2.  Group (pairs or threes) project will allow each member to play particular roles in the task.  For example, data organizer, graphic organizer, etc.
3.  Each person will have the opportunity to use a graphing calculator.
4.  Students can create a poster and write a letter together based on their data and findings.

Technology-Related Best Practices

The Media Debate*

*I realize I did not need to write a summary on this article.

     The idea of the media debate was started by Richard Clark and Robert Kozma in the early nineties.  Granted the nineties were quite different than current times, the ideas each person presented remain valid.  

     Richard Clark had the opinion that he could give or take media and that media is not necessary to have learning take place.  His concern was cost-effectiveness.  If you can get the same lesson accomplished without the costs, then media was not necessary.

     Robert Kozma, on the other hand, felt that there were certain aspects of learning where media was effective.  "The assumption is that learning with media is a complementary process within which a learner and a medium interact to expand or refine the learner's mental model of a particular phenomenon." (Kozma's Arguments)

     Another debater, DSchneider, felt that media was sometimes needed since "cognition is not only in the head."  DSchneider had the opinion that media is a part of learning and it should not be taken away or else it would change the learning outcomes.  Also, a variety of media could be implemented into "most instructional design methods" based on precise instructional goals.  

     My opinion is that:

1.  Media (technology) takes the time element away from researching.  It is no longer looking an article up in the green Reader's Guides to find out what newspaper/magazine has a copy of a certain article, then only to find out that the library where you are does not have that particular issue.  Nowadays, we save time by Googling it.

2.  With the extra time comes extra learning (unless there is a full-capacity mode for your brain).

3.  Extra practice on media saves time creating handmade media, such as flashcards.

Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media

     The abstract of this article states, "consistent evidence is found for the generalization that there are no learning benefits to be gained from employing any specific medium to deliver instruction. (p.445)  The method of instruction plays a direct role in learning.  Methods, such as "structure, shorter steps, reduced verbal loads, and self-pacing" (p.449) are examples of successful instruction.  As a former math teacher and a mom, I have guided my students and my own kids into understanding processes rather than relying on a calculator.  How can students be sure if the answer that appears on the screen is correct or remotely correct?    As a young girl working in my dad's store, I was taught to count back change to customers for a couple reasons.  First, it showed the customer that he was not being cheated; second, it was a sure way that my drawer would remain balanced.  This helped me learn simple math and be able to determine mathematical outcomes.  No computer needed to do those things.
     According to this article, "there is evidence in these meta-analyses that it is the method of instruction that leads more directly and powerfully to learning."  (p.449)  "The increased attention paid by students sometimes results in increased effort or persistence, which yields achievement gains.  If they are due to a novelty effect, these gains tends to diminish as students become more familiar with the new medium."  (p.450)  I believe this is saying that it is up to students' efforts or persistence that will lead to success.  However, using technology and other forms of media can become stale, thus a decrease in learning.
     Learning, in my opinion, does not require technology.  However, it can help instruction if learning comes from both text/verbal and technology.  Dissemination of information can be enforced through various forms of media.  For example, media can enhance some lessons by showing and narrating an in-depth video of a frog dissection in science.  There could even be an interactive portion, but it does not take the place of actually dissecting the frog.  Senses are what turn media into reality.  The smell of the formaldehyde and the slimy touch of the frog are things one cannot experience from the computer-generated lessons.

Learning with Media

       (Just a side note....There have been many changes technologically since this article was written.  For example, computers have become more portable and tablets have taken the place of some laptops.  There has been an increase of people reading text from these devices, contrary to the article stating that "characteristics such as size, shape, and weight makes it more likely that a student will learn with a book while on a bus but not a computer."  (p.2)) 

     This article was written in response to Richard Clark's "Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media" in which Robert Kozma regards media as being influential in the way learners use it and in the way they process information.  He also believes that using more than one medium can have a positive and/or different impact for certain students.

     Clark believes that ".....media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causes changes in our nutrition." (p.1)  In other words, it does not quite matter how the information gets to students; it is important that the content arrives.

     Kozma's article speaks of various methods of comprehending text and the stability of the symbol system.  There is the usual way in which people read from left to right at a certain pace. Some people may need to revert to previous words or phrases for meanings.  Other people may either slow down their reading paces or listen to an audio version of someone reading the text aloud.  If people choose to listen, the text is read at a slower pace which allows a couple seconds for people to store the information they hear into their memories.  These two ways of comprehension do not appear to be very different.  I see an advantage with the reading it yourself because you can take as much time as you would like to revisit words or phrases that you would like.  It may be possible to rewind an audio taping, but it may not stop at the exact place(s) you need, thus allowing a bit more confusion.

      In addition to learning by text alone, there is also the idea that combining text and pictures results in increased recall, especially when the picture illustrates the text precisely.  Depending upon the background of the learners, they could prompt prior knowledge or refer to it often as they are reading less-known material.

     Television represents a different type of learning since the objects or symbols are moving and there is an auditory accompaniment.  There are several factors that enable and disable attention to the television.  The first is the different types of voices:  male, female, adult, child, laughing, sound effects, etc.  The next factor is how the camera shows the moving objects:  special effects, zoom, lots of activity, etc.   The television studies "suggest that the perceptions students have about a medium and purposes they have for viewing influenced the amount of effort that they put into the processing of the message and, consequently, the depth of their understanding of the story."  (p.13)  Also, since television presents both auditory and visual senses together, they may work together increasing comprehension or each sense may have limits, thus limiting comprehension.  I believe the first thought, but the scenes and narration on the screen must engage a person's interest in order to be successful.

     Audio and video can be taken to another level by adding an interactive element.  A technology group from Vanderbilt University created interactive video and concluded that "its dynamic, visual and spatial characteristics allow students to more easily form rich mental models of the problem situation."  (p.23)  

     According to this article, Kozma believes that Clark needs to rethink his ideas that "media do not influence learning under any condition" (p.28) and that Clark's position must be changed.  Clark's contention that if learning outcomes vary, it is due to how something is taught and not by the medium used.  On the other hand, Kozma believes that media is needed to complement learning.

     Technology blows my mind by what it can do and how much it can do.  However, in my opinion, I tend to agree with Clark that students can learn without media and regardless of when Clark's ideas formed,  the hype of technology has played an integral role in all of society.  With that said, it is impossible to roll backwards in any media form and because it plays an engaging role in schools today, it is important to keep moving forward.  I cannot fathom a day without my technology, nor can my kids.  There are times when my kids are using the computer without realizing they are actually learning.  It is truly amazing! 

Redefining Equity:  Meaningful Uses of Technology in Learning Environments

      "Equitable access is necessary but not sufficient in of itself to ensure comparable benefits from using digital technologies."  (p.1)  Everyone should have access to and knowledge of technology.  However, it is how a person uses the technology that is in question and this is part of the definition of equity.  Using technology meaningfully means that a user exhibits three aspects:  "....motivation to produce content that is personally meaningful to them, activities that motivate the user to explore new ways of expression through the technology, and incorporation of the support systems for the student within their learning environment.

     The constructionist learning theory holds that students who actively design and create projects are acquiring new knowledge while becoming more engaged in learning.  Further growth is apparent as the learner becomes fully engaged when the community becomes involved.  In other words, students learn even more with recognition.  The one thing that could hold students back is the lack of technology in any sense:  not having any, outdated, teachers not up-to-speed, etc.  Granted people can use public technology at libraries or other community centers, it is important to have learning opportunities available.  There are computer Clubhouses in underprivileged areas where students can go after school to learn technology and design projects.  "Within the Clubhouse, there is fluidity between the roles of mentor and learner." (p.3)  Everyone there is there for the same purpose and that is why the roles can be compatible and on the same level.

     The Clubhouse sounds like a great idea where people can learn from each other with updated technology.  My questions are in the areas of having sufficient space and technology availability and in the funding.  I realize this is an article of information regarding the Clubhouse opportunity and not to get into logistics.      

   Thinking Technology

     This article claims that constructivism is how one creates their own reality based on their experiences.  It sounds like the K-W-L to me.  In other words, learners state what they Know first, then what they Want to learn.  They take their own knowledge and add to it based on past experiences and knowledge.  Finally, they state what they have Learned.  People's outcomes may differ slightly based on their initial experiences.  Also, constructivists focus on new outcomes and not recreating or reproducing what is already known or experienced.  Constructivists base their outcomes on real-world problems and issues.

     Although it is unlikely that constructivism will become a true form of instruction, there is a belief that there can be guidelines set that resemble this idea. "Constructivists emphasize the design of learning environments rather than instructional sequences." (p.35)  This sounds similar to the idea of Montessori.

     My personal idea of instruction is like the theme song from "Facts of Life," "You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have the facts of life."  In other words, there are many successful learning systems around the world and there are some that are not so good.  Pick and choose what works best.  I appreciate the constructivist's viewpoint and I agree that one should always look and act ahead.

How does the Clark/Kozma debate interact with the suggestion that constructivism underlies best practices in educational technology?  

Clark and Kozma are both strong advocates of education and both are forward thinkers, just as constructivism is.  However, one main difference it seems, is that Clark is more about instruction and not necessarily with the media available in today's society.  Kozma, on the other hand, cares more about creating learning environments where learners can utilize their knowledge and experiences by using a variety of media which is more on the lines of constructivism.

How do these ideas overlap and support one another, or how do they differ and contradict?  

I think Clark may be open to using technology, but just as a supplement to learning and not as the main source.  Kozma appears to want to use media in any way he can.

In addition, how does the way we as educators decide to use technology make it more or less equitable? 

The way educators decide to use technology to make it more equitable is by using forms of media to which kids can relate.  For example videos, interactive technology, text, etc. are familiar to students today.  (I am thinking of the district where I taught and the majority, if not all, is familiar with at least the basics of technology.  I would guess that most students own at least one device in their families.)  In order to make it more equitable, I think it would be worth a try to have students bring their own devices to school to use and allow the ones who cannot or will not bring in their own device, to use the school's chromebooks.  This is a far cry from the time when cell phones would be taken if ringers went off or if students appeared to be texting.  (It is even further from passing handwritten notes when the teacher was not watching.)  

edX Demo

As I entered the edX Demo, I felt overwhelmed.  There were many links to click and plenty of information to swallow.  I felt like I was entangled in a spider web until I reached one point where I could not figure a way to return to the main class.  I got stuck.  This is when I entered the Learner's Guide and I could not find my way back to the class.  I am sure that I could start over, if necessary, just to get back into the class.  
I do not foresee MOOCs becoming the future of learning, but I can see elearning (such as this class) being  successful at all levels.  I feel that MOOCs are geared towards so many people that I would be lost in the mix.  Granted these are go-at-your-own-pace classes, it feels impersonal to me.  This is coming from a person who got her Bachelor's degree from The Ohio State University (Go Bucks!) which is a huge campus.  The difference is that at the university, I was able to communicate with someone firsthand.  I did not find this with the MOOC.
During my second quarter of college and with perfect attendance, my grandmother passed away unexpectedly.  I had to miss class, thus giving up my perfect attendance.  Once I returned to class, I explained to my professor what had happened and she had allowed my work to be turned in late.  With a MOOC, there is no explanation allowed.  Assignments must be turned in on time, period.  No late assignments allowed.
MOOCs would be beneficial for people who just want to gain extra knowledge for themselves or for employees of a company in which particular MOOCs would be advantageous to their work.  I do not believe MOOCs are meant for people pursuing degrees.
MOOCs may have success in the K-12 classrooms since these classes are interactive and they provide worksheets/tests to find out how much students have learned.  This is obviously better than showing YouTube videos since the interactivity can make learning more engaging.  I do, however, think that it should be teacher guided since students could get off task easily and/or skip important steps.   
One reason that I am not keen on MOOCs could be that I am older so learning in a way where I am in control of everything as opposed to a teacher/professor guiding the class makes me feel uncomfortable.  I prefer a teacher/professor who is providing personal feedback.
I must say that there were some features I appreciated.  For example, I liked that the lecture was closed caption and that I could click on any word and it would take me right back to that place in the class.  Also, I liked the way the speech could speed up or slow up.  These were nice features.
Whether MOOCs become the future of education or not, I can see both pros and cons.  I am not totally against MOOCs, but it just does not feel like a good fit for me.

Equitable Access to Digital Tools and Resources

In this 21st century of learning, teachers are faced with many issues that have emerged in the educational field within the last generation.  Computers and other electronic devices are forever          changing the traditional school scene.  In addition to the traditional curriculum and instruction,            students must add more specific curriculum and skills into new learning environments.  The new           learning environments are those called MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) and BYOD                                                            (Bring Your Own Device).

     MOOCs are exactly what the letters state.  MOOCs are courses that are massive because they are available to the masses (all at the same time), they are accessible online and they are open to everyone.  MOOCs provide interaction among its users which include students, teachers and teaching assistants.  They began becoming popular in 2012, just four years after being introduced.

     As a participant in elearning, I am not totally convinced that MOOCs are the right choice for me.  Even though the basic courses can save students money, one must think that these MOOC companies are out to make a profit somehow.  If something sounds to good to be true, then it most likely is.  According to the article, "Framework for 21st Century Learning," the basic product is free, but premium services such as certification or placement cost.  Unless you are looking to enhance your own knowledge for yourself, you will end up spending money on the course(s) you choose.  It may be less than a traditional class, but MOOC providers need to keep themselves in business, too.

     Another reason why I do not feel like MOOC is for me is due to the massive size of the classes.  I may be showing my age a bit, but the course structure with possibly thousands of people participating in one class just seems overwhelming to me.  Too many people with so much input and so many opinions does not appeal to me.  Granted that students range from university students to degreed professionals to educators, business people, researchers and others, I prefer to remain in smaller class settings.  If I just want to learn about a certain subject on my own, I will let my fingers do the walking on the keyboard of the worldwide web.
      Since MOOCs are open to so many people at once, it does not appear to be the most conducive system for a student who runs into an emergency situation.  For example, work is not allowed to be turned in late, but for an elearning class, such as EDFI575, I have more immediate contact with a professor who can help me, especially if I need extra time to complete an assignment.  (I'm just trying to make a point, nothing more :-).)
     Completion rates are also questionable when it comes to MOOCs.  Learning with guidance versus learning individually can make quite a difference.  Individual motivation levels can guide towards success or can steer away from completing a MOOC.  In the article, "Framework for 21st Century Learning," completion rates are considerably less than traditional online courses.  As a matter of fact, the completion rate for a MOOC is less than ten percent.  

     Some reasons for low completion rates include too much time required for the course, it was too difficult or it was too easy.  Also, lack of introduction to course technology and format, and abuse on discussion boards were also listed.  Further, hidden costs such as required readings from expensive textbooks written by the instructor were also issues.

     There is obviously a demand for MOOCs or it would not be a multibillion dollar industry as the article, "Will the Future of Education Be Online, Open and Massive?" states.  Fortunately there is a variety of opportunity for learners today.  Whether you study via MOOCs, elearning or in the traditional classroom setting, the worldwide web will always be there to help guide you on your chosen path.

     Another form of having equitable access in the classroom is BYOD (Bring Your Own Device).  This not only refers to students taking their own devices into the classroom to use, but it also refers to business people using their own devices while working.  Like other things, there are pros and cons related to BYOD.
     Whenever I bought my devices, whether the phone, the tablet, or computer, I researched which would be the best option for me.  I looked for plenty of storage, format, brand, etc.  In other words, the device I ultimately chose was one that would fit my needs and wants.  BYOD is guided by "perceived enjoyment." ("Bring Your Own Device," Wikipedia.)  In other words, people are satisfied and comfortable with their own devices, so it makes sense to use them for everything they do, including school and work.
     People tend to get hooked on certain brands of devices.  For example, people are either totally in favor of Apple products or they are not.  Personally I am an android and Samsung fan.  I would like it if I would have the opportunity of using my own device at school or work to accomplish the tasks at hand.  I am used to the format and I can save my work in my cloud so that I can access it at any time.      Other countries around the world have adopted BYOD and have found an increase in productivity levels.  By allowing employees to use their own devices, they can have immediate access from wherever they may be.  I recently watched a movie where this idea could have fit perfectly if not for financial reasons (and timing since technology was not as extensive as it is today).  "Pursuit of Happyness" is a movie where a man, Chris Gardner played by Will Smith, is trying so hard to get on his feet financially so he and his son do not have to stay in homeless shelters.  He interned at Dean Witter trying to gain a permanent place in the company, struggling each and everyday.  Along the way, Chris met potential clients and all the while he collected business cards.  If the situation happened today, Chris could have made even more headway in the business than he did by having his own device in his hands as he met potential clients.
     Happy wife equals happy life is something I hear quite a bit.  In this technological era, I believe that own device equals more potential.  (I know that does not rhyme, but it is the sentiment that counts!)  When someone purchases a device, they look to get the best they can get which is usually more than what a company or school would get.  This is another advantage to BYOD.
     Familiarity is also another advantage to having access to your own device for business or school reasons.  You are most familiar with your own device and can zip through apps in no time at all.  There would not be restrictions on your own device either as there are on company or school computers.
     Finances are an important factor in businesses and schools.  If people use the BYOD concept, perhaps this will allow companies and schools to use the funds normally set aside for technology somewhere else.  For example, if schools did not have to purchase as much technology, will it enable extra finances to regain classes which were taken away, transportation and pay-to-play?
     By allowing people to use their own devices, it makes people more content and willing to put in the extra effort on their own time.  There have been many times sitting around the family dinner table when questions come up and all my son does is whip out his phone for an answer.  If something pops into his head, he adds it to his cloud immediately.  It is there when he wants or needs it.  There is also immediate gratification to have grades and notes from teachers accessible all the time.
     One way I think BYOD could have a negative impact is if a company or school puts restrictions on the network so either you cannot access something in particular or there is an extra eye on the network for checking out everything within your device.  In other words, it could be like a peeping tom to make sure everything you do complies with the company or school.  It is frightening to think that the watchful eye is on you every minute.
     Another way BYOD is not a good idea is if people misuse the whole idea.  In other words, people should stay focused on work or school during work or school times versus personal play on their devices.
     The bottom line in my opinion is that BYOD is a good idea.  I would like to give it a try.

Are students today fundamentally different than students in the past?

I believe that students for the most part are fundamentally different than students in the past. 

Students today:
1.  Rely heavily on electronics for a variety of reasons
     a.  Gaming
     b.  Answers
           i.  Thoughts
          ii.   Instant answers (Students today seem to expect answers that are readily available at all times                           whereas students in the past relied on the library Reader's Guides to direct them to different sources.                 Those sources were not always available, so it would be back to the old drawing board.)  
         iii.  Comparisons
     c.  Curiosities
2.  Think GOOGLE first, then other sources (such as experienced people or libraries)
3.  Are taught more high-stakes test-taking skills
3.  Have trouble reading/writing cursive; signing names
4.  Complain when they are required to write something out instead of typing
5.  Handwriting is not as neat as their predecessors 
     a.  Should there be a concern that handwriting is not taught in schools and that only keyboarding is?   
     b.  I believe that eventually all electronics will identify the users by fingerprints rather than signature.  Some            fingerprinting is already occurring.  It will be just a matter of time when the world will operate this way.

I believe, despite the above, that kids are kids and there are many similarities.

Kids:
1.  Imagine
2.  Are curious
3.  Can live without electronics (but when it surrounds their worlds, it becomes a challenge to do so)

The bottom line is that students today know no differently when it comes to using electronics.  They know electronics and students in the past know how to peruse the library better than students today.  People do what they know.  I consider myself envious of the technology afforded students today.  They do not realize, however, how fortunate they are to have such an extensive technological world that sees no end.  I am confident that when my kids become parents, they will have something bigger (or smaller!) and better of which to be envious of their kids. 

REFLECTIVE POST

Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants

Many changes have taken place in the world since technology has entered the scene.  According to Marc Prensky in "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants," students today learn very differently than students of the past.   Prensky refers to students today as digital natives, those who are born during the digital age and who are surrounded by everything digital.  On the other hand, Prensky refers to their predecessors as digital immigrants, or those born before the digital age.  Their differences are so great that Dr. Bruce D. Perry of Baylor College of Medicine believes that brain structures between the digital natives and digital immigrants may be different due to encountering different experiences.

Marc Prensky mentioned in the same article that in addition to multi-tasking, digital natives prefer graphics over text, random access (like hypertext), networking, instant gratification, frequent rewards and games as opposed to 'serious' work.  This type of behavior is noticeable in today's workforce in addition to the classrooms. Businesses are gradually changing their looks and ways to accommodate the digital natives.  Some of the changes include more casual clothing styles, riding segways through the office, and managing your own time. Apparently businesses realize the needs of the digital natives.  It is a win-win situation when a company recognizes those needs and they offer their (younger) employees to work within the environment to which they are forever accustomed. 

On the educational side it is difficult for digital immigrant teachers to grasp the concepts of different learning styles.  They believe that the way they were taught is the one and only way.  They prefer to do things in order and one thing at a time.  I think that eventually (and hopefully) teachers who have grown up in the digital age will overtake the teachers of yesterday to bring our educational system up to par with today's competitive society. In addition, I hope that the digital native teachers will teach and model their ways to the digital immigrant teachers, not just the students.

Life moves on is something I often hear.  Marc Prensky noted that it is unlikely that digital natives will move backwards in their learning styles.  In other words, they will not learn as their parents did.  They will move forward.  I consider myself a smart adult immigrant who will ask for help when I desperately need it.  I say desperately because I like to push myself to find an answer before giving up.  This is when I become the not-so-smart immigrant who wants to return to the ways when I grew up.  I stop myself.  I do not think that it is possible to step backwards.  There is only one direction to go and that is forward.  

As a foreign language teacher and an aunt to two nieces who grew up immersed in French and English, I understand the importance of students absorbing information from infancy.  Kids are like sponges, absorbing everything in their site.   Students today learn differently and teachers of the pre-digital age need to be aware of the differences.  Whether teachers need to revamp their attitudes or entire curriculums, there is a need that the educational world change accordingly in order to accommodate the needs of today's learners, rather than continue teaching today's learners in the world of yesterday.

In response to DT Quin: I disagree with Quin's response that there is no evidence for change of brain structures between digital natives and digital immigrants.  It makes perfect sense to me that based on experiences, brain structures can be different. Multi-tasking is not something digital immigrants grew up doing.  They did one thing at a time in a certain order.  Needless to say that some things need to be done in a certain order, the digital natives are able to do a variety of things at once.  If you grew up stacking one block on top of each other while in silence, this will be the type of behavior you will prefer and know best:  silence, one at a time.  If you grew up using both hands, one for texting and the other creating a 3D model from your printer while listening to XM2, then your brain would accommodate that type of learning throughout your life:  multitasking.

Also, I disagree that Quin thinks Prensky's article does not relate to today's society and that it is "relatively old now."  Yes, in terms of technological age the article is old, but in terms of content I believe that Prensky is accurate.  The terms he uses, digitial natives versus digital immigrants, clearly represent the older generation versus the newer generation.  Prensky makes his points come across very clearly.

I am glad to see that Quin and Prensky agree that "education must change how it does its business," but in the meantime it needs to just take the old and transform it into the new.  In other words, create an educational system where the core human values are transparent within the digital age.