EC&I 831: Upcoming Ed. Tech Grad Course

I am really excited about this coming semester. About a year ago, I received a Technology Enhanced Learning grant to begin creation of an online, Graduate-level, educational technology course. The result is EC&I 831, and here are just a few of the details.

    – I am developing the course with the help of Rob Wall who we’ve dubbed the “social capital philanthropist” for this educational experience.
    – We have an enrollment of 30 students, about twice what is usually expected in an online Graduate course, so Rob’s role will be especially important (no pressure, Rob).
    – We are trying our best to use as many free and/or open forms of technology as possible. Blackboard/WebCT were never options for the course. Exposure to and use of open, free, and social tools is a priority.
    – We have a tongue-in-cheek course trailer made up entirely of public domain video footage.
    – There are both synchronous and asynchronous components of the course. The synchronous components will take place Tuesdays (presentations/conversations) and Wednesdays (hands-on sessions).
    – And probably most exciting is our amazing lineup of presenters for the duration of this course. Presenters will include (couple yet to confirm, in order of appearance) Darren Kuropatwa, Richard Schwier, George Siemens, Sharon Peters, Dean Shareski, Clarence Fisher, Stephen Downes, D’Arcy Norman, Brian Lamb, and possibly others. There were many more I wanted to ask, but I know I am so lucky to have these individuals participate.
    – All sessions will be recorded and available. The course will be entirely transparent and open.

Throughout the course, we will be looking for ways to participate within the edublogsphere. If you have an edublog that would be of interest, please add it to the wiki.

To find out more details about the course, check out the course wiki (more info to come soon), subscribe to the course blog, or contact me.

I have very high hopes for this course. Please wish us luck!

Value Openness: Twitter On CSI

There’s a video clip of Twitter on CSI that has been making its rounds. I don’t watch the show (I watch very little television), but the scene features the dialogue between two detectives as they search the Twitter account of a homicide victim.

From the Clip:
Detective 1 – “Some people just don’t value privacy.”
Detective 2 – “They don’t expect privacy. They value openness.”

As I’m preparing for a digital citizenship/media literacy presentation with Dean Shareski tomorrow, I’ve been thinking about how differently youth may view privacy vs. openness. With social networks, blogging and services like Twitter, we are certainly seeing a distinct change. There is not much to the transaction above, but in some ways, it may help people glimpse differing views on issues of personal privacy and openness.

10 Worst Consumer Tech Trends – Education Edition

PC World has released an instantly popular list of the “10 Worst Consumer Tech Trends“. As soon as I read the list, it was easy to see the parallels in education. Thus, here’s my educational take on the list.

10. Closed Source Technology – I’ve been an advocate of FLOSS for quite a few years now, in fact, my dissertation had much to say about the topic. While we are nowhere near a world where Linux is ubiquitous, we’ve made a lot of progress through Firefox, Open Office and newer software like Google Android for mobile devices. In my courses, I make use of our Windows and Mac machines, but introduce many open source apps on the desktop. As well, Linux Live CD’s are used often to get beyond the tyranny of the desktop.

While we have a long way to go, my best indication of how far we’ve come is that the terms “open source” and “free software” (not simply a the “free in beer” sense) have become much more common in conversations with my non-techy students and colleagues. I think there are many experiencing a mental shift, however, we need to catch up through user interface and viral marketing approaches.

9. Over-promising and under-delivering: I’m still convinced that salesmen do more educational technology planning than educational administrators. I know of institutions locked-in to student administration systems like SCT Banner for periods of more than 10 years when (I’ve been told) there are other open source solutions available. I hear nothing but complaints from institutional users of Blackboard, people who’d rather learn Moodle on their own than go with the supported, Blackboard “solution”. IBM Learning Village is a common “instructional portal” in many school districts, one that has been abandoned by many teachers in favour of flexible, free environments, services like Ning.

And while we’re talking “over-promising, under-delivering” we can go beyond the issue of proprietary software. Larger, conceptual frameworks like course/student/learning management systems or just about any monolithic learning “solution” (or learning theory for that matter) can be critiqued in a similar manner.

8. Fanboys: “The definition of fanboy (or fangirl) is an individual who harbours a fanatic devotion to something without logical reason.” While at times I might be considered an Apple fanboy, I’d argue that I’m promoting a particular concept more than an specific product. I wrote a while back re: the Apple iTouch and the potential implications for learning. And while I love my iTouch, I was more critical to the fact that I needed to Jailbreak it before it actually became a usable, personal learning device.

And in relation to this point, I’m witnessing a disturbing trend in some parts of the edublogosphere as of late. I’ve ditched several, (once) trusted blogs from my reader in the past few weeks due to their less-than-critical, over-promoting of certain Web 2.0 tools and services. Note to those (few) edubloggers: if you’re on the take, your readers deserve full disclosure.

7. Region-encoding: I couldn’t think of how this applied to education in any significant way. Any ideas?

6. Licensing fees: Put simply, I do everything I can to avoid any content or products where licensing is required. I promote freely available media through such sources as the Creative Commons and Archive.org. As well, I nurture a learning environment where learners become producers nearly as much as they are consumers. At the same time, I do recommend exemplary copyrighted works, and do understand this livelihood model. However, the bar has been raised in relation to what I will spend money on. In this abundance economy, I need a strong demonstration of “value-added” before I ever consider pulling out my credit card.

5. Format wars: I haven’t much to say on this topic other than getting into a rant on the Open Document Format, and others have said it better. Anyone?

4. Proprietary file formats: Most proprietary products produce proprietary formats out of the box. Whether it’s a .doc, AAC or even .mp3, these formats can cause a huge issue, proprietary file format lock-in.

3. Annoying web ads: I won’t get into a rant against web-advertising. I am one of those people that pays to make my learning environments ad-free. For instance, I pay about $20/month to turn the ads off in my Ning groups, and I pay a smaller fee for my Wikispaces pages. For those in K-12, it’s great that you can turn off the ads in both of these services for free.

2. High cost of wireless data plans: It’s remarkable how many of my students have mobile phones. Even when I visit K-12 classrooms, the number of cell phones is high. For now, I can only dream of the possibilities for mobile learning. Our data plans in Saskatchewan and throughout Canada are simply too expensive to do anything creative. And beyond that, we’re not even at 3G yet. Maybe someday.

1. DRM: If DRM has done anything for our education system, it’s helped to nurture authentic, problem-based learning activities in our hacking communities. DRM does not work. It will never work. The system has to change. We are now seeing the power of an emerging, decentralized era. See Radiohead and Nine Inch Nails.

That’s it. Would love to hear your thoughts.

Grad Course Movie Trailer – Take #1

Here is the first draft of the movie trailer for the Grad course I’ll be teaching in January 2008, EC & I 831. It’s important to note that all of this footage was taken from archive.org. The use and building upon the public domain and Creative Commons will be important topics for this course. In my opinion, teachers should begin to demonstrate the learning potential of existing archives like these, and encourage students to participate in copyleft licensing.

Hi quality version here.

There’s a lot of this course that is invisible at the moment, but some course information is available at the course wiki. MUCH more to come.

Teach, Don’t Preach

My friend Peter Rock at gnuosphere always does a great job at voicing important issues that I’m sometimes weary to touch. Peter is confrontational on many important issues of freedom, such this one.

Peter reacts to a post from Teacher Jay who writes on his reflections in his classroom as he teaches his students why it’s wrong and illegal to download music content. Teacher Jay writes:

When the concept was explained that they were obtaining a product that they did not pay for and it was essentially stealing from the artist and the recording company they (the students) seemed to understand […]

Peter reacts, writing:

They “seemed” to understand because they’ve been told a subtle lie. What students need “explained” is that they have violated 20th century copyright law in need of reform to fit our 21st century technology. Then they need to see the difference between physical objects and intangible information. Then they need to see how Big Media ignores this difference every time it claims downloading to be “stealing” and that “piracy” must be fought to “protect the artists”. Students need to see that the analogy with sensate “products” is deceptive propaganda used to encourage thinking of copyrighted works as “property” when nothing could be further from the truth.

I may get some bashing here, but I agree with Peter. If you decide to react, read his point carefully. To describe the issue of music downloading without bringing in the contextual issues of corporate power over creative processes (read: culture), and simply telling your students that “it’s stealing, it’s illegal thus it’s immoral” is theft in itself. In very real terms, you are denying your students the liberty and freedom to critique issues of power in our society. Instead, what about being critical of the very idea of “intellectual property.” Or, what about discussing the potential benefits of free culture? No matter how you approach the topic, whether from a copyright or copyleft approach, critical debate on this topic is necessary. The world is changing for our students, there are many challenges ahead, and they need the tools to solve these issues themselves.

Additional note: I just noticed that Downes mentioned the book “The Starfish and the Spider” today on OLDaily. I read this a while back, and chapter one does an excellent job of explaining the need for decentralized leadership, and uses the music downloading developments since Napster as a key example.

Lessig On Corruption

In this video, Lessig explains his change of focus, from copyright law, to government corruption.

I agree with the majority of the views presented by Lessig. However, I think his argument loses a bit of steam when he explains how transparency of government can help to reduce corruption. I agree to some extent however, I believe that (1) not all corruption will be transparent (that’s the nature of corruption), and (2) even if all corruption were exposed, people still need to act upon that information. Unfortunately, I do not see this happening, and the major political events of the last few years have demonstrated to me that people can be empowered by information but more often, they are disempowered through inaction.

80 Open Education Resource (OER) Tools for Publishing and Development Initiatives

I received notification of this resource from Jimmy Atkinson quite some time ago, but I finally have found some time to explore it.

“… the list below — arranged in alphabetical order — includes 80 online resources that you can use to learn how to build or participate in a collaborative educational effort that focuses on publication and development of those materials. Although some choices focus solely on publication, development, or tools used to accomplish either effort, some provide multifaceted venues that offer communities a space to collaborate on one or all of these efforts. Collaborators can include institutions, colleges or universities, educators, students, or the general public.”

There are many excellent resources here. I am sure many of you are familiar with most, but there were a few that I had not heard of. Thanks Jimmy!

Link: http://oedb.org/library/features/80-oer-tools

Remixing/Coding For Kids

A few neat sites/tools I’ve come across lately:

I know I’ve read about Scratch some time ago, but this BBC article highlights this free coding tool aimed at kids. Scratch, a tool developed at MIT, is a “free programming tool that allows anyone to create their own animated stories, video games and interactive artworks has been developed.” The video looks pretty impressive, but I haven’t got a chance to download and use the tool.

The BBC article also points to hacketyhack.net, “The Coder’s Starter Kit”. The tool (available for Windows only … tsk tsk) helps to teach the Ruby programming language.

Somewhat related is the Zimmer Twins’ website. The website allows users to create animated movies, and the best are selected to be broadcast on Teletune. It’s really a neat process, and a clever tool. Here’s an example. Ahhhh … so much has changed since the days of BASIC.

Lessig’s Lecture At 23c3

If you have an hour and a quarter to spare, Lawrence Lessig’s 23c3 lecture (available on Google Video) is worth a watch. I particularly like the following passage, about 8.5 minutes in, after Lessig shows several creative, Internet videos.

So what’s important about these examples is not the technical facility they demonstrate. Since the beginning of film or television … anyone with access to a film or television studio could produce everything you’ve seen here. What’s important about these examples is that these tools have now been democratized. Anybody with a $1500 computer can take sounds and images and remix them in ways that say things differently, in ways that express ideas more powerfully than any written text could ever, given the character of the cultures we’ve become. These tools of creativity have become tools of speech. They represent a new potential to speak, a new potential to learn, they are a new literacy for the 21st century, doing for images and music and film what we took for granted growing up ,,, were our freedoms with the pencil and the typewriter. The freedom to capture and share and remix ideas in ways that express them differently.

I’m trying my best to get this message across to my own students in many ways, especially in focusing on some of these new literacies as course content.

Open Thinking Launched

I posted this earlier but my service provider had a bit of a meltdown, and took my blog down with it.

Openthinking.ca has recently been launched. The idea for this online community emerged from a discussion that Rob Wall, Heather Ross and I had at a recent conference as we tended to our open source software booth. Rob Wall has set up this Drupal-based website to discuss ideas around openness and open thinking in education.

In my dissertation, I defined open thinking in the following way.

Open thinking is the tendency of an individual, group or institution to give preference to the adoption of open technologies or formats in regards to software, publishing, content and practice. Open thinkers critique, question and seek to reject technologies or formats that compromise the power of adopters, especially in the freedom to use, reuse, edit and share creative works and tools. Open thinkers value group-based problem solving and give preference to tools that enable social collaboration and sharing. Open thinkers actively strive to replace adopted technologies and formats with open alternatives. Open thinkers advocate for the adoption of open technologies and practice.

Certainly, it’s not a perfect definition, nor is it meant to be. However, it’s something that appeared in my data analysis and I think it helps to capture a certain view of openness.

If you would like to share or discuss issues around openness and open thinking in education, we welcome you to openthinking.ca.

OpenThinkingBooth