Blog

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Trending Topics June 18, 2017

The Ultimate Guide to Using Open Educational Resources

The idea that knowledge is power is not a new concept, however the idea that knowledge, resources, and information should be widely available and also free might be a slightly newer concept. Before the advancement of the internet and today’s technology, the idea of access to free information, teaching resources, and even online books was unheard of. If you wanted to learn about a topic, you could pay for the materials and or books to learn about your topic of interest. If you want to teach about a specific area, you needed to develop the materials yourself or pay for them. Many educators now believe that teaching materials and other information should be free. As we begin to share our resources as copyright free materials, we also open the idea globally that teaching, learning, and research materials should be accessible to everyone. Edutopia notes that open educational resources can also save teachers significant time, planning, energy, and resources.

Why Use Open Educational Resources (OER)?:

Save time and energy – One of the most obvious reasons for using OER is to save time, energy, and also money! Teachers can search for OER on the internet, and share resources that they discovered with each other in person, on social media sites, in school meetings, and in professional development workshops.
Increases flexibility – As noted by Nicole Comforto on Edudemic.com, using OER also allows teachers to be more flexible and creative with their resources. For example, a game with a map that was developed for one area or region could be easily adapted for the area in which the teacher lives, states Nicole Comforto.
Adds to our existing materials and knowledge – Of course, it never hurts to expand our own resources and knowledge as teachers and also as learners! The more materials we can access for free, the more both our students and ourselves can benefit!

Our Top Recommended Resource for Educational Materials:

Sharemylesson: https://sharemylesson.com/ offers abundant resources for teachers to use for students of all ages, and also offers free webinars for teacher use.
OER Commons: https://www.oercommons.org/ is described on the website as being a “digital library and network.” OER Commons, as recommended by Andrew Marcinek in his article on Edutopia, states that OER Commons is the ideal database for free teacher-developed resources.
Math Solutions: Looking for great free math lessons? Try checking out this website: http://mathsolutions.com/books-resources/classroom-lessons-old/ where you can find math materials for varied level learners.
MIT OpenCourseWare: is a website that shares full courses and materials offered by MIT professors. View what resources are available at https://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm
UNESCO As recommended by Nicole Comforto, UNESCO found at http://en.unesco.org/womeninafrica/, provides reading materials, comic books, and histories of African American women for middle-level learners.

How Can You Be Confident the Resource is Copyright Free?

If you are still concerned about using materials you find on the internet, look for resources using a “Creative Commons” license. Nicole Comforto states that if you find any resources on https://creativecommons.org/ you can be certain that you can use the resources. Creative Commons is well known for being the best guide for finding OER and materials in the world of learning. Save yourself a few of hours of searching, and start your search at Creative Commons!

Where Can You Start?

If you are still unsure about where to start searching for copyright free lesson plans, materials, and ideas, speak with your colleagues and other educators. Swap ideas with people that you know! Other teachers may already know a perfect resource or website that they use for many lesson plans. You don’t have to struggle and spread hours upon hours making the perfect lesson plan thanks to the availability of OER. Edwige Simon, also on Edutopia, recommends looking for trustworthy resources by searching for websites that end in “.org,” or are produced by the government, or the Department of Education.

PBS and National Geographic are also excellent, reliable resources for online educational resources, states Edwige Simon. Whether you are just looking for one lesson plan, or are also interested in sharing your ideas with other educators, teachers, and students, the internet is now full of free and accurate resources. You should never have to pay for another lesson plan again if you search for OER on Creative Commons or even on https://sharemylesson.com/! Happy searching and have fun!

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics June 18, 2017

Pass or Fail: Alternative Strategy Factors to the Pass/Fail System

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

If previous efforts and employing one or another of the existing alternative strategies have not been effective, we’re left with this question: what can educators do to develop alternatives to retention and social promotion that will actually work?

Several key points emerge from the existing body of research. First and foremost, research shows that alternatives to grading, retention, and social promotion must represent a multi-stage process that has been carefully planned and tested. While this might seem obvious, especially the requirement that a strategy is carefully planned, we should remember the context in which retention and social promotion occurs, a context that includes significant historical dimensions.

Indeed, one need look no further than the Common Core Standards and one of the major complaints about them: that they are woefully under-tested and embody goals and that have little to do with the real educational needs of individual students.

A second key to developing an effective alternative is the identification of those factors that are most crucial to a successful education policy. What do we need to consider when choosing among alternative strategies? What does the research tell us about the most important elements to a strategy that would replace grading, retention, and social promotion?

Most studies of the effects of grade retention and social promotion are limited in one way or another. The statistical power of many such studies is limited by a small sample size. Even the larger studies are often hampered by inconsistencies in education policy or implementation that make it difficult to interpret the results.

Logic also plays a role in showing the problems with grade retention and social promotion, as well as in determining the basic elements of alternative education strategies for failing students. One of the first points to be addressed from the perspective of logic and common sense is the basis for assigning specific grades to student assignments. We should not only consider the grading process itself but, to gain a wider perspective, we should also consider the ultimate objective of the education system, as well as how we can determine whether that objective is being achieved.

Consider the individual that America’s public education system should be producing. What should that individual be prepared for? Why are they getting an education in the first place? And, as we have suggested already, the “why” should play a big part in determining the “how.”

Whatever we decide regarding the ultimate goals of the public education system, it is clear that students must be examined to determine the knowledge and skills that they have learned in school. We do need to test their readiness for college and employment. But the other side of this coin is that the education process must be capable of transferring knowledge and skills in targeted areas.

A successful educational system must not only address student weaknesses, ensuring at least a rudimentary understanding of mathematics, science, languages, literature, writing, and reading comprehension; it must also nurture individual strengths, giving students an opportunity to develop their unique interests and gifts in preparation for a productive career.

We must also consider the non-academic costs of retention and social promotion on students and the education system as a whole. Although they are inherently difficult to gauge, we know that grade retention and social promotion have impacts that are academic, social, economic, and even emotional in nature.

The American School Counseling Association (ASCA) has offered a model for managing grade retention and social promotion that concentrates on the psychosocial aspects of student learning.

The ASCA’s model for developing academic policies and is based on standards intended to be implemented by school counselors. The ASCA’s model assumes that educators would be more effective at bringing about educational reform if they were more aware of the psychosocial factors that impact students.

Recommendations for educators have included input and supports not only from school counselors but also from teachers, administrators, and parents. This is largely because of the recognized need for as many stakeholders as possible to collaborate in support of academically struggling students.

The ASCA identified many barriers to educational reform, including several that explain precisely why collaborative, comprehensive support strategies are needed to support struggling students. Barriers include family stressors, apathy towards school and potential personal success, academic deficiencies, disabilities, poor behavior to support educators’ efforts, and limited access to resources.

Awareness of barriers to academic success can translate into an awareness of strategies for providing support. For instance, educators are in a good position to be able to resolve academic problems in collaboration with students and parents; They can provide insight into learning strategies for the individual student that may help the to help themselves achieve academic success.

Research has shown that retention causes changes in the lives of adolescents who lack coping skills to recover from the experience itself. Indeed, pressures of certain life changes and life events can be the cause of academic struggles. The intertwining of problems inside and outside the schoolroom highlights the need for a comprehensive approach to supporting students. Bullying and teasing can impact retained or socially promoted students and create additional academic struggles. The development and implementation of a comprehensive guidance curriculum by school counselors can support struggling students and minimize the recourse to retention or social promotion.

The second standard of the ASCA model includes programs that address bullying and teasing of students. Such consideration should be an element of a viable strategy for reducing the need for retention or social promotion. Another suggestion from the ASCA is that educators become advocates for students at risk of retention. Effective educators can advocate for students by making other stakeholders in a school aware of particular struggles and the potential need for more significant supports in the classroom.

Click here to read all my suggestions for alternatives to social promotion and retention.

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Trending Topics June 17, 2017

The Edvocate’s List of 24 Must-Follow STEM Education Twitter Feeds

*The Edvocate is pleased to produce its “Best of the Best” resource lists. These lists provide our readers with rankings for education blogs, twitter accounts, influencers, products, etc. These lists are meant to be fluid, and for that reason, they are regularly updated to provide up to the moment information.*

It’s become a well-known fact that most students are woefully unprepared for careers in science, technology, engineering, and math (otherwise known as STEM). Students in the United States regularly score low on math and science tests, lagging behind other developed nations.

This is despite the fact that STEM careers pay exceptionally well—college students who graduate with STEM degrees earn quite a bit more than their counterparts with degrees in other fields. Not to mention, the demand for workers with STEM degrees is huge and continues to grow.

These facts should leave no question about the importance of preparing students for careers in STEM. The real question is, how can we get students ready for STEM careers? Well, the first step is for educators to keep abreast of what is happening in the STEM education field. This way they can be sure that they are preparing students for what’s to come.

Whatever method you use, making sure your are using reliable resources can be a daunting task. The best way of learning what to do (and what not to do) is through seeing what others have done before you. That is where Twitter can be immensely helpful – if you know where to go. The following are 24 of the best Twitter Feeds about STEM Education. Some of these are inspirational, (because that is required on tough days), infomational, and many are a combination of both.

Two things are taken into account for all entries on this list.

The feed must be relevant, at least some of the time. Most of these focus on STEM education, but a few of these have a slightly broader view of education, and these have a lot of other great information for those in the education field
They sites must be active. In other words, they should have someone posting to them on a regular basis, not just once a month or less.

@TeachingSTEM: Provides readers with articles on science, tech, engineering, and math.
@stemschools: Gives readers great tips on promoting STEM education.
@STEMschool: Disseminates excellent tips on how to teach a STEM subject.
@SciAfterSchool: A great place to find STEM resources.
@crsscience: Want to liven up your curriculum? This Twitter feed can help.
@STEMAhead: Follow this feed to learn about STEM Ahead, and their beautiful programming.
@stemnetwork: Educator schools twitter about STEM resources and initiatives.
@NSTA: The NSTA is the go-to place for resources related teaching STEM in the classroom
@STEM_Works: Ran by SMU, this resource helps teachers to find information on STEM instruction.
@leache: Edward Leach shares STEM-related news.
@STEMConnector: Tweets out STEM-related updates, articles, and resources.
@MITK12STEM: MIT-backed Twitter feed that will keep you up to date on all things STEM.
@changeequation: This feed is all about encouraging STEM literacy while providing you up to date STEM resources.
@ConnectMinds: A Wonderful community whose mission is to get more kids involved in STEM.
@almostrocketsci: Encourages kids to consider careers in the STEM fields, and provides them the resources to do just that.
@exploratorium: Allows children to explore a career in STEM, and provides educators with up to date news and resources.
@STEMChallenge: Uses video games to get kids involved in STEM.
@egfi: Allows children to explore a career in STEM, while providing them with information about careers in STEM.
@ScienceCenters: Tweets out pertinent information about science and technology centers across the nation.
@OppEquation: Ensures that kids underrepresented groups are exposed to STEM careers.
@SciGirls: Helps girls explore a career in STEM.
@cstemorg: Helps minority groups learn more about careers in STEM.
@NCWIT: Devoted to helping more girls and women to choose STEM careers.
@womenintech: Showcases women in tech careers, offers advice to women interested in tech careers and encourages young girls to become involved in tech.

Did we miss any?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics June 15, 2017

Pass or Fail: The Need for Alternative Strategies

If we know that our current pass/fail system isn’t working well — for our students, teachers, families or communities — then what can we do to turn that tide?

Most of the alternatives to retention and social promotion are half measures that do not challenge the validity of the traditional concept of retention. Too many of the established alternatives merely try to mitigate impacts; retention and social promotion are retained as key elements of the educational system.

Difficult and changing ideas, including philosophies and opinions of educators and parents, have complicated the development of effective alternatives to retention and social promotion. Despite the available alternatives, retention, and social promotion remain among the most common strategies for managing academic performance in the current system.

One of the most significant problems with applying alternative strategies is that many are far from comprehensive or well thought out. Many existing alternatives do not show an awareness of the various stakeholders and their potential contributions to a student’s educational success. The fragmented nature of alternative strategies also tends makes it hard to understand the struggles of the individual student.

The so-called self-efficacy theory suggests that adolescents perceive their academic ability regarding their perception of their ability to accomplish tasks. The cognitive function of adolescents reflects the way individuals feel about themselves. Students who experience failure at school have a higher risk of self-efficacy, according to Bandura. There are various other theories, including the family systems theory, which can further explain the risks to adolescents regarding their families and their position in a system that can impact self-efficacy and academic performance.

Although counseling students can help to address problems of low self-esteem, related to poor academic performance, the best interventions do not typically involve parents because of the risk of disrupting the support system as a whole. Furthermore, supports targeting academic and even social needs tend to be limited in scope, largely because there are so many pieces to the puzzle. Most alternative supports are fragmented and limited in their availability because of the degree of specialization (for instance, the availability of resources for specialized instruction in certain areas, or for individualized counseling for students).

Identifying the problems of social promotion specifically, Labaree notes that social promotion lowers the promotional standards in schools. The National Commission on Excellence in Education suggests that this both reflects and encourages the general decline of standards in American society. Labaree also notes that within the school system, a policy of social promotion symbolizes a more general lack of commitment to student achievement.

Establishing low minimum achievement levels for promotion is also, Richard Ebel suggests, a factor that fosters lower achievement expectations. Lowering the “floor” for achievement tends to lower the “ceiling” as well. Perhaps inevitably, there are some who consider social promotion a form of academic dishonesty. It can lead to accusations that schools are rewarding students for lack of accomplishment, instilling an inflated sense of their capabilities and a poor appreciation of the importance of hard work.

Ebel suggests that more rigorous promotional standards are effective at motivating stakeholders to sustain efforts toward higher levels of achievement. Using different standards for promotion can, however, create its problems. For instance, promoting students based on age rather than demonstrated achievement creates significant differences in ability and application of students in different grades.

Disruption becomes more likely when a student perceives a risk of retention. This disruption can affect both the classroom and the student’s family. Academic problems can create severe familial tensions, and these tensions tend to be more pronounced for low-income single parent and minority families, thus becoming entwined with socioeconomic factors.

Click here to read all my suggestions for alternatives to social promotion and retention.

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics June 12, 2017

Pass or Fail: The Economic Cost of Social Promotion and Retention

Repeating a grade is not that big of a deal, right? Think again! Both social promotion and retention has negative impact on the American economy and social services.

Grade repeaters are more likely to be on public assistance programs, unemployed, or imprisoned. Assessing family income for recent high school dropouts versus recent high school graduates, and looking in particular at households where students were still living at home, the median income for families of dropouts was $12,100, and the median for families of recent high school graduates was $22,700. For college-enrolled high school graduates, the median family income was $34,200.

Although these elements are not to be regarded as causal – low-income families causing dropouts or the need for retention or social promotion – these factors and statistics suggest that large numbers of dropouts come from single-parent households and households run by women. They indicate the social fallout of the education policy. That is, the current system cannot support at-risk students from families where there are challenges in addition to education.

Students who are retained or socially promoted tend to rely more heavily on social services. They usually earn less over the course of their lifetime than those who are not retained or socially promoted. The considerable long-term costs mean society must continue supporting affected students, rather than education serving its purpose and enabling individuals to be self-sufficient. Indeed, a study which examined the NCLB act, warned of a dropout crisis in the United States. The study determined that, every September, approximately 3.5 million young people in America are seen to enter the eighth grade, with roughly 505,000 of this number dropping out over the next four year, an average of more than 2,805 per day of the school year.

Individuals who drop out of school earn approximately $270,000 less than high school graduates over the course of working lives. Having a high school diploma rather than a skills assessment based on a minimum competency test, also helps to determine whether a person can obtain employment and how much money he or she stands to earn. In 1997, the employment rate of men in the twenty-five to thirty-four-year-old range who did not graduate high school was more than twice that of men who did graduate. Among women within that same age-range, the unemployment rate of those without diplomas was three times higher than those with diplomas.

Retention and social promotion policies tend to impact minority students disproportionately, as they are more likely to be retained or socially promoted and drop out of school. Policies of retention and social promotion potentially contribute to racial disparities. The same appears true for low-income families. Although the correlation between retention and social promotion and low-income families is not perhaps as definitive as the link between minorities and these policies, there is still an apparent link and basis for suggesting that there is a connection to poverty and both retention and social promotion policies.

The 21^st century, however, is not the age of overt prejudices or even necessarily direct and transparent racial, social, or economic discrimination. The disparities that exist, some of which may be growing more extreme, remain rather well concealed. In structured systems like education, they often go unaddressed until the situation requires affirmative action. The obvious example with education is that the discrimination against a minority or impoverished student, or even one with a learning disability, occurs from the first day they enter the education system and carries on throughout their career.

Indeed, the discrimination remains in effect, largely unnoticed and undetected, until the affected individual is so severely impacted that he or she is unable to demonstrate appropriate understanding of materials that have been the emphasis of their curriculum for a year. There are also secondary costs related to the lack of academic achievement, which includes the individual’s lost interest in school and decreased potential to excel in a variety of areas not requiring demonstration of academic achievement.

Some quantitative assessment of performance of students, as well as educators, administrators, and schools, will always be necessary, and solutions will not be easy to develop or enact. The alternative strategies are complex and require flexible implementation to overcome the subtlety and variety of prejudices that exist. However, the potential of growing costs and the expansion of those costs justifies the efforts.

With the figures at hand, how can anyone suggest social promotion and retention positively impact our economy and society at large?

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech & Innovation, Elementary Education, Trending Topics June 10, 2017

Why Digital Learning is Reshaping Education

Technology has changed just about every field, including education. Digital learning is reshaping education in unprecedented ways. The ways in which students learn are changing rapidly thanks to technology, and both students and teachers will benefit from it.

There are several specific changes that we can expect to see as digital learning takes over education. For one, the way teachers present information and how students work with that information has changed. Students are asked to be more hands-on and collaborative than ever before. There are also new skills that students must learn, such as digital literacy.

The Flipped Classroom

The traditional model of teachers lecturing in the classroom and students completing practice and homework on their own is changing. Instead, students are learning on their own and using the classroom as a place to dig more deeply into what they’ve learned. This model, known as the flipped classroom, is gaining popularity thanks to the rise of EdTech.

How does the flipped classroom work? Students watch lecture videos or complete readings at home. The following day in class, the teacher clarifies anything students didn’t understand. Students then work with the information to answer questions, complete projects, and do other activities that used to be reserved for homework.

The flipped classroom provides benefits for students and teachers alike. Teachers spend more time helping students with the content they don’t understand. This means more one-on-one help for students and less time listening to boring lectures in class.

Emphasis on Collaboration

Another change brought about by digital learning is a new emphasis on collaboration. Thanks to increased technology in the classroom, students able to collaborate online and work on projects together. With a flipped classroom model, teachers can spend less time lecturing and devote more time to collaborative activities and projects.

Technology has also created a more connected world, where everyone is reachable almost any time of day. Cloud-based apps, like Google’s Drive, allow students to share work and collaborate outside of school. Many teachers are already using social media or education apps to encourage students to communicate about class content or ask questions from home. As digital learning becomes more popular, this kind of after-hours collaboration will only increase.

More Higher-Order Thinking

Thanks to technology, students have instant access to all the information they could ever want or need. There’s no longer a need for students to memorize facts or dates. Today, there is much more emphasis placed on higher-order thinking.

Higher-order thinking occurs when students are asked not just to know a piece of information but to do something with that information. At the most basic level, this can mean analyzing information—comparing and contrasting, for example. At the highest level, students are asked to create something on their own that shows their understanding.

In nearly every classroom today, students are asked to do these types of higher-order thinking tasks. Gone are the days when teachers lectured and students regurgitated information for a quiz or test. Today’s students are learning how to be critical thinkers, a skill that is in-demand in today’s job market.

New Skills

There are other skills that students will need to stay competitive in the 21^st century. Digital literacy, the ability to use the internet and other digital technologies, is increasingly important for a wide variety of jobs. As technology becomes a bigger part of education, teachers will devote more time to teaching digital literacy.

In some states, digital literacy is already a part of the curriculum. More states are creating standards for digital literacy just as they would for reading or math.

These are just some of the ways that digital learning is reshaping education. As digital learning becomes a bigger part of the world of education, you can expect to see more changes in classrooms around the world.

How do you envison technology changing education?

Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Retention & Social Promotion Series, Trending Topics June 9, 2017

Pass or Fail: Social Promotion and Retention’s Effect on Families & Communities

When a student is subjected to social promotion or retention, he or she is not the only one impacted. If your child was retained, what effect would it have on you, your family and community? Likely, your experiences would be drastically altered, often in quite negative ways.

Families impacted by retention and social promotion policies are disproportionately among already disadvantaged groups. One study identified that children from low-income families, English learners, and Latinos were significantly more likely to be retained than the more demographically “average” student.

Retention rates during the 2009–2010 school year demonstrate that retention is highest among traditionally disadvantaged minorities. Among those deemed most likely to suffer from low academic performance, the rates of retention for black and Hispanic students were 4.2 percent and 2.8 percent, respectively. Among white students, the rate was just 1.5 percent.

Not only are retention and social promotion policies perpetuating social inequalities, they are also enhancing tensions within families by creating the additional stress of academic challenges. Retention and social promotion, or even merely the threat of these practices, places considerable pressure on the individual student.

Among older students, these stresses come into play at a point at which there is naturally occurring strain already. However, even for kindergarteners, retention has been strongly linked to risk factors like poverty, low maternal education, single-parent status, minority status, English language learner (ELL) status, and male gender, with these factors, also associated with poor school readiness.

A study by Wei Wu, Stephen G. West, and Jan N. Hughes explored the relatively short-term and long-term effects of grade retention for first graders and tracked the growth potential in mathematics and reading achievement over four years. They found that there was a large multiethnic sample below the median in literacy at the school entrance, and analyzed the effects of retention on the group studied.

They found that retained children experienced a faster increase in the short term and a faster decrease in the long term in both mathematics and reading achievement than promoted children. Although this data can be difficult to contextualize, the study indicates that retained students are less successful in reading and mathematics than students who are not retained. Retention and social promotion can also exacerbate existing problems within the family structure, although researchers have not examined this thoroughly.

There has been a fair amount of research regarding relationships between families and schools and how, with the right approach, it can prove a key factor in determining the academic success of a student. Similarly, challenges in the relationship between family and school representatives undermine the potential of a student to excel academically. It may be too much to suggest that a problem relationship of this type has a negative impact on a student’s success, but there is certainly indirect evidence that issues undercut a student’s ability to thrive academically.

In the relationship between family and school, the problems of retention or social promotion are sizeable. From the perspective of family members, and parents, in particular, the risk of retention and social promotion is immensely stressful because of the perception that either one of these policies is indicative of a limited future for the affected child. At least in some cases, parents look at retention or social promotion as an indication that their child is either unlikely to ever thrive academically or that their child is not adequately supported by the education system.

Although there are numerous challenges and limitations impacting the process of assessing the costs of retention and social promotion, as we have seen, the general cost of these policies is apparent from the evidence that is available and from a certain logical analysis of the scenario.

The various stakeholders in education, including students, teachers, education policymakers, parents, and employers, are all undermined by the pass or fail mentality of the current system. We disconnect individual students because of these policies. Disconnection from themselves, education, fellow students, teachers and other educators, their families and eventually from the community at large occurs when retention and social promotion comes into play.

Could you handle your child being retained or socially promoted without the stress and consequences of this decision negatively impacting your family? If you answer yes, you’d find yourself in the minority.

Matthew Lynch published in Digital & Mobile Technology, Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech, Higher Education, The Hechinger Report, Trending Topics June 8, 2017

Do classroom clickers improve learning? It depends.

by Nichole Dobo

Classroom “clickers” quiz students in real time, allowing instructors to gauge student learning and reinforce what is being taught.

New research suggests that the effectiveness of these devices hinges largely on the teaching methods being used with them, not the technology, and that instructors would do well to think about why they are using the devices and whether or not they dovetail with their teaching style.

“It’s super easy to just incorporate clickers into the classroom and to say ‘I am doing something new, something innovative,’ ” said Amy M. Shapiro, a professor of psychology at UMass Dartmouth. “But it’s not that simple.”

The study, published in the most recent edition of the journal Computers & Education, studied clicker use in classrooms of undergraduate students in an introductory biology class and a physics course at a university in the northeast.

The researchers discovered, to their surprise, that these devices encourage some students to focus on rote fact memorization, to the detriment of deeper, conceptual learning. Those students without a background on the topic covered in the course might fixate on the clicker questions when studying, rather than delve deeper into the material of the course, researchers suggested, adding that more study of this novel finding is needed.

The study builds on prior research that generally found that clickers had a favorable effect on student learning. But those earlier studies found it difficult to determine if the improvements in student learning came directly from the use of the clickers. This new research helps fill in the gap by studying how clickers combined with different styles of teaching – lecture halls full of students versus problem-solving in smaller groups, for instance – changed the results of student learning. The study notes that previous research showing positive results with clickers had hypothesized that teaching strategies probably had a major influence on the results. This new research seems to confirm it.

That said, limitations remain. Results could have differed because researchers were comparing courses in different subjects (biology and physics), for example.

The researchers were careful to note that they do no suggest eliminating the technology from the classroom. Instead, they say their research suggests this: The mere use of a technology isn’t enough; careful attention to how devices interact with teaching is required.

Shapiro, for example, said that she uses clickers in a large lecture hall during an introductory level course. There, the clickers are useful in improving attendance (students know the clickers track that), and the course requires a fair amount of rote memorization of new terms. But she does not use clickers in smaller, higher-level courses where students are more engaged in applying what they know to solve problems.

“We suggest that, while clickers are useful in motivating students to come to class, increasing enjoyment of the class, and enhancing rote learning in didactic courses, instructors interested in imparting deeper understanding must be mindful of their overall pedagogy,” the researchers wrote. “Incorporating activities that involve students in active inquiry and problem-solving may be much more helpful than simply offering clicker questions in class, even when the clicker questions are conceptual in nature.”

This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news website focused on inequality and innovation in education. Read more about blended learning.

Matthew Lynch published in EdTech Policy & Reform, Higher Education, Higher Education EdTech, Trending Topics June 7, 2017

Want more innovation? Try connecting the dots between engineering and humanities

Sophia Krzys Acord, University of Florida; Kevin S Jones, University of Florida, and Susan D Gillespie, University of Florida

_This article is a part of The Conversation’s series on unique courses. For other articles in this series, read here and here. _

Today’s college students may benefit from an exciting array of subjects to study. But they seem to miss the most important education of all: how to relate their specialization to others in an increasingly interconnected world.

The National Academy of Engineering has categorically stated that today’s engineers need to be more than individuals who simply “like math and science.” They must be “creative problem-solvers” who help “shape our future” by improving our “health, happiness, and safety.”

And in 2001, the engineering accreditation body ABET added a new criterion so as to ensure that students get “the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context.”

The point is that the connections between humanities and science have been lost in today’s separation of disciplines. Indeed, a recent report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences discovered that humanities and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) training majors largely dwell in different silos.

So, where and how did we lose our way? And how can educators and institutions change things?

Separation of disciplines

The founders of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) were well aware of the critical nature of this interdependence.

When the NEH and the National Science Foundation (NSF) were established in the 1950s and ‘60s, the NEH founders wrote:

If the interdependence of science and the humanities were more generally understood, men would be more likely to become masters of their technology and not its unthinking servants.

These founders, hailing from leading universities as well as the US Atomic Energy Commission, IBM Corp and New York Life Insurance, knew that connecting the humanities and sciences helps us make informed judgments about our control of nature, ourselves and our destiny.

Connecting the humanities and science helps us make informed decisions.
Phillip Barron, CC BY-NC

But, since the 1980s, political rhetoric has emphasized the need for less humanities and more STEM education. STEM is painted as a more profitable investment, in terms of job creation and research dollars generated.

A notable example is the Obama administration’s “Race to the Top” initiative, which both isolates and prioritizes the STEM disciplines from the humanities, arts and social sciences.

This rhetoric is also evident in the creation of separate political education organizations such as the bipartisan STEM Education Caucus founded several years ago by congressional representatives to strengthen STEM education from kindergarten to the workforce.

This separation of disciplines actually hurts education, and it also hurts our ability to innovate and solve big problems.

Connecting STEM with humanities doesn’t just provide the well-rounded education today’s employers want. As the American Academy of Arts and Science’s 2013 “The Heart of the Matter” report observes, connecting these fields is necessary to solve the world’s biggest problems such as “the provision of clean air and water, food, health, energy, universal education, human rights, and the assurance of physical safety.”

So, separating and prioritizing STEM from humanities ignores the fact that we live in a complex social and cultural world. And many different disciplines must combine to address this world’s needs and challenges.

Bringing the disciplines together

To address this gap, four years ago the faculty from materials engineering and liberal arts at the University of Florida began working with the Materials Research Society. We wanted to put together a new course on “materials.”

Why did we choose materials? Because everything is made of them, every discipline studies them and they are tangible (quite literally) to the average freshman.

An interdisciplinary course on materials prepares students for the challenges of the future.
Internet Archive Book Images

After all, grade school students still learn about the Stone, Bronze, and Iron ages. The Industrial and Information revolutions revolved around new uses for steel, aluminum and silicon. The human past has been shaped by harnessing and consuming materials and energy.

Materials will be important for our collective future as well. So, we thought, this is the future for which we should be preparing students.

And thus our course, The Impact of Materials on Society (IMOS), was born. Taught by a team of nine faculty from engineering, humanities and social sciences, the course explores the close connection between the “stuff” in our lives and our experiences as social beings.

Students discuss how materials benefit global trade and communication but also risk resource exploitation and political conflict. For example, we depend upon rare earths for our cellphones, iPads and wind farms, but accessing these rare earths from limited sources is not sustainable.

So, some of the questions that the course raises are: what materials do we depend upon in our daily lives? Does this dependence have social consequences? What social relationships form around the production and use of these materials? And how do our current uses of materials affect our ability to discover new uses for them?

Students also discuss the ethical and social aspects of using certain materials.
college.library, CC BY

Students are also asked to consider how our values shape our willingness to adopt new technologies. For example, Earl Tupper may have invented Tupperware, but it was Brownie Wise and her home parties with other women who first made his polymer famous!

Each week covers a different material (eg, clay, glass, gold, plastic), its scientific properties, demonstrations, and its past and present impacts.

Working together in multidisciplinary groups, students then contemplate the development of future materials. These include flexible electronic materials that can be used to create wearable sensors that can transmit important information, such as body hydration levels during athletic training. New polymer (plastic) materials made from renewable sources instead of petroleum may have fewer health risks and are more sustainable than today’s plastic cups and bottles.

At the same time, they discuss the ethical and social considerations that might affect the successful production and adoption of these new materials in different contexts.

Gap in education

The course is different from other freshman-oriented courses. It is not a “history course for engineers.” And it is not an “engineering course for humanists.”

It is an interdisciplinary course that uses multiple perspectives to understand materials innovation. A wide range of departments including engineering, anthropology, classics, history, English, sociology and philosophy participate in its teaching.

Students refer to IMOS as a “bridge course” that provides the “connecting dots” between different classes.

And the responses come from students across the different majors. For instance, one engineering major noted, “This class just further proves that you have to understand different aspects of how our world works and not just engineering to be a great engineer.”

Meanwhile a history major observed, “This class gives me a leg up in my other history courses because it reminds me to think about the properties of materials and how they shape our lives.”

These experiences point to a gaping hole in modern education: discipline-specific and general education courses provide important knowledge, but “bridging courses” are needed for students to capitalize upon that knowledge.

To engineer useful technologies, we need to connect scientific study with the cultural competencies of the humanities and social sciences.

Challenges of 21st-century learning

The “Renaissance” ideal was to produce elite men whose broad training prepared them for any endeavor. Thankfully, 21st-century education is more inclusive.

But it still requires intellectual and cognitive flexibility to harness large amounts of data.

This doesn’t mean simply knowing everything, even though we live in the “Age of Google.” Today, students need the ability to make connections across disciplines.

Celebrated innovators such as Einstein, Ada Lovelace and Steve Jobs credit the intersection of disciplines for their inventive thinking.

More boundary-crossing opportunities in higher education can break open the disciplinary silos. And that alone will unleash critical thinking and innovation.

Additional contributors to this article are University of Florida faculty Sean Adams, Marsha Bryant, Florin Curta, Mary Ann Eaverly, Bonnie Effros and Ken Sassaman, and Materials Research Society Outreach Coordinator Pamela Hupp.

Sophia Krzys Acord, Associate Director, Center for the Humanities and the Public Sphere; Lecturer in Sociology and Criminology & Law, University of Florida; Kevin S Jones, Chair Professor, University of Florida, and Susan D Gillespie, Professor, University of Florida

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Matthew Lynch published in Digital & Mobile Technology, Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech, Higher Education, Trending Topics June 7, 2017

How mobile phones are disrupting teaching and learning in Africa

Gina Porter, Durham University

Mobile phones have become ubiquitous in Africa. Among younger users, basic phones are most common. But more pupils are accessing smartphones that can connect to the internet – and taking them along to school.

Phones are often used in school whether they’re allowed or not. Although they can enable valuable access to information, they also bring new responsibilities and dangers. It’s remarkably common for classes to be interrupted by both pupils’ and teachers’ phones. Access to pornography as well as bullying and harassment through phones is widely reported.

We have conducted a study of young people’s mobile phone use in Ghana, Malawi and South Africa. Our findings emphasise the central place that mobile phones occupy in many young people’s lives. Before the mobile phone arrived in Africa, few people had access to landlines. The mobile phone represents far more of a communication revolution in Africa than in richer countries.

Researching phone stories

The study, involving a group of university researchers from the UK and Africa, was funded by the UK’s Economic and Social Research Council and Department for International Development. It covers many aspects of young people’s phone use, from generational relations to job searches and health advice. Use in school has emerged as a leading issue, echoing concerns around the world.

We conducted more than 1,500 face-to-face interviews and focus groups with young people, teachers, parents and key community members across 24 locations – eight in each country. These varied from poor city neighbourhoods to remote rural hamlets.

We followed this up with a questionnaire to about 3,000 young people aged between nine and 18 and 1,500 young people aged between 19 and 25 in the same 24 locations.

The survey of children aged nine to 18 years shows that mobile phone use is much higher than ownership figures might suggest. Ownership of phones was lowest in Malawi, the poorest of the three countries. Here only 8% of children in the survey owned their own phone, compared with 16% in Ghana and 51% in South Africa. Nonetheless, in Malawi 35% of children said they had used a phone in the week before the survey. In Ghana the figure was 42% and in South Africa it was 77%. Children often borrow phones from each other, their parents, other family members and neighbours.

Children’s use of phones

Some pupils, particularly in South Africa, use their phones to access sites like Master Maths for help with homework. But the positive benefits mostly seem to be limited to mundane tasks such as contacting friends to check on homework or using the phone as a calculator. Much information from pupils and teachers was more negative: academic performance affected by disrupted classes – due to teachers as well as pupils using their phones – disrupted sleep because of cheap night calls, time wasted on prolonged sessions on social network sites, and harassment, bullying and pornography.

Class disruption from pupils’ phones used to be mostly from ring tones when calls were received. Now, for those with smartphones, messaging on WhatsApp or checking Facebook have become common classroom activities. Teachers’ phone use in class can be equally disruptive, as some teachers admitted. A call comes in, or they make a call, and whether they step outside or take the call in class, the end result is that the lesson is interrupted and – as more than one told us – “You forget what you are going to deliver.”

In Malawi, 60% of enrolled pupils said they had seen their teacher using a phone in lesson time during the week before the survey. The corresponding figure for Ghana was 66% and for South Africa 88%. Pupils are rarely given such an opportunity to comment on the behaviour of those in authority over them but even if not all were truthful, these figures are of concern. Many head teachers also spoke about the problem of teacher phone use, saying they found it difficult to regulate.

Other problems include disturbing levels of pupil bullying and harassment. In the survey of enrolled pupils who use a phone, 16% in Ghana, 28% in Malawi and 55% in South Africa said they had received unwanted, unpleasant or upsetting calls or texts. This was almost equally true for boys and girls.

Distribution and viewing of pornography is also widespread, as older boys were often willing to disclose. A few – even primary school pupils – mentioned sexting.

Promoting responsible phone use in school

Many head teachers have asked us how to promote responsible phone use in school. Here are some suggestions:

Pupil phone use: It is important to have a clear school policy on pupil phone use, to inform parents about this and to explain the reasoning behind it. If the school has decided to allow pupils to bring their mobile phone to school – for instance, because of travel problems – but not to use it in school, then pupils could be required to put a name tag on their phone and deposit it with a staff member, using a register, before school begins. In this case parents or carers must be given a phone number for urgent messages.

If the school allows pupils to use mobile phones in class as calculators or to access the internet, pupils and their parents could sign an “acceptable use” agreement each term. This would promote effective use of class time and their own and other pupils’ safety.

Pupils also need reminders not to publish personal information on the internet and to tell their teacher, a parent or carer if they access any information that worries them. Parents must be encouraged to help their child follow the school’s guidelines. Asking them to sign an acceptable use agreement together with their children will help.

Teacher phone use: Teachers’ mobile phones should be switched off and left in a safe place during lesson times. If teachers are using their phones when pupils are banned from doing so, pupils may become resentful. Staff should not contact pupils from their personal mobile phones or give their mobile phone numbers to pupils or parents. This would help teachers maintain sound professional practice.

Gina Porter, Senior Research Fellow, Durham University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Matthew Lynch published in Digital & Mobile Technology, Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech, Higher Education, Trending Topics June 7, 2017

Fighting online trolls with bots

Saiph Savage, West Virginia University

The wonder of internet connectivity can turn into a horror show if the people who use online platforms decide that instead of connecting and communicating, they want to mock, insult, abuse, harass and even threaten each other. In online communities since at least the early 1990s, this has been called “trolling.” More recently it has been called cyberbullying. It happens on many different websites and social media systems. Users have been fighting back for a while, and now the owners and managers of those online services are joining in.

The most recent addition to this effort comes from Twitch, one of a few increasingly popular platforms that allow gamers to play video games, stream their gameplay live online and type back and forth with people who want to watch them play. Players do this to show off their prowess (and in some cases make money). Game fans do this for entertainment or to learn new tips and tricks that can improve their own play.

When spectators get involved, they can help a player out.
Saiph Savage, CC BY-ND

Large, diverse groups of people engaging with each other online can yield interesting cooperation. For example, in one video game I helped build, people watching a stream could make comments that would actually give the player help, like slowing down or attacking enemies. But of the thousands of people tuning in daily to watch gamer Sebastian “Forsen” Fors play, for instance, at least some try to overwhelm or hijack the chat away from the subject of the game itself. This can be a mere nuisance, but can also become a serious problem, with racism, sexism and other prejudices coming to the fore in toxic and abusive comment threads.

In an effort to help its users fight trolling, Twitch has developed bots – software programs that can run automatically on its platform – to monitor discussions in its chats. At present, Twitch’s bots alert the game’s host, called the streamer, that someone has posted an offensive word. The streamer can then decide what action to take, such as blocking the user from the channel.

Trolls can share pornographic images in a chat channel, instead of having conversations about the game.
Chelly Con Carne/YouTube, CC BY-ND

Beyond just helping individual streamers manage their audiences’ behavior, this approach may be able to capitalize on the fact that online bots can help change people’s behavior, as my own research has documented. For instance, a bot could approach people using racist language, question them about being racist and suggest other forms of interaction to change how people interact with others.

Using bots to affect humans

In 2015 I was part of a team that created a system that uses Twitter bots to do the activist work of recruiting humans to do social good for their community. We called it Botivist.

We used Botivist in an experiment to find out whether bots could recruit and make people contribute ideas about tackling corruption instead of just complaining about corruption. We set up the system to watch Twitter for people complaining about corruption in Latin America, identifying the keywords “corrupcion” and “impunidad,” the Spanish words for “corruption” and “impunity.”

When it noticed relevant tweets, Botivist would tweet in reply, asking questions like “How do we fight corruption in our cities?” and “What should we change personally to fight corruption?” Then it waited to see if the people replied, and what they said. Of those who engaged, Botivist asked follow-up questions and asked them to volunteer to help fight the problem they were complaining about.

We found that Botivist was able to encourage people to go beyond simply complaining about corruption, pushing them to offer ideas and engage with others sharing their concerns. Bots could change people’s behavior! However, we also found that some individuals began debating whether – and how – bots should be involved in activism. But it nevertheless suggests that people who were comfortable engaging with bots online could be mobilized to work toward a solution, rather than just complaining about it.

Humans’ reactions to bots’ interventions matter, and inform how we design bots and what we tell them to do. In research at New York University in 2016, doctoral student Kevin Munger used Twitter bots to engage with people expressing racist views online. Calling out Twitter users for racist behavior ended up reducing those users’ racist communications over time – if the bot doing the chastising appeared to be a white man with a large number of followers, two factors that conferred social status and power. If the bot had relatively few followers or was a black man, its interventions were not measurably successful.

Raising additional questions

Bots’ abilities to affect how people act toward each other online brings up important issues our society needs to address. A key question is: What types of behaviors should bots encourage or discourage?

It’s relatively benign for bots to notify humans about specifically hateful or dangerous words – and let the humans decide what to do about it. Twitch lets streamers decide for themselves whether they want to use the bots, as well as what (if anything) to do if the bot alerts them to a problem. Users’ decisions not to use the bots include both technological factors and concerns about comments. In conversations I have seen among Twitch streamers, some have described disabling them for causing interference with browser add-ons they already use to manage their audience chat space. Other streamers have disabled the bots because they feel bots hinder audience participation.

But it could be alarming if we ask bots to influence people’s free expression of genuine feelings or thoughts. Should bots monitor language use on all online platforms? What should these “bot police” look out for? How should the bots – which is to say, how should the people who design the bots – handle those Twitch streamers who appear to enjoy engaging with trolls?

One Twitch streamer posted a positive view of trolls on Reddit:

“…lmfao! Trolls make it interesting […] I sometimes troll back if I’m in a really good mood […] I get similar comments all of the time…sometimes I laugh hysterically and lose focus because I’m tickled…”

Other streamers even enjoy sharing their witty replies to trolls:

“…My favorite was someone telling me in Rocket League “I hope every one of your followers unfollows you after that match.” My response was “My mom would never do that!” Lol…”

What about streamers who actually want to make racist or sexist comments to their audiences? What if their audiences respond positively to those remarks? Should a bot monitor a player’s behavior on his own channel against standards set by someone else, such as the platform’s administrators? And what language should the bots watch for – racism, perhaps, but what about ideas that are merely unpopular, rather than socially damaging?

At present, we don’t have ways of thinking about, talking about or deciding on these balancing acts of freedom of expression and association online. In the offline world, people are free to say racist things to willing audiences, but suffer social consequences if they do so around people who object. As bots become more able to participate in, and exert influence on, our human interactions, we’ll need to decide who sets the standards and how, as well as who enforces them, in online communities.

Saiph Savage, Assistant Professor of Computer Science, West Virginia University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Matthew Lynch published in Digital & Mobile Technology, Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech, Higher Education, Trending Topics June 7, 2017

How can we learn to reject fake news in the digital world?

Thomas P. Mackey, SUNY Empire State College and Trudi Jacobson, University at Albany, State University of New York

The circulation of fake news through social media in the 2016 presidential election has raised several concerns about online information.

Of course, there is nothing new about fake news as such – the satirical site “The Onion” has long done this. Fake news satire is part of “Saturday Night Live”‘s Weekend Update and “The Daily Show.”

In these cases, the framework of humor is clear and explicit. That, however, is not the case in social media, which has emerged as a real news source. Pew Research Center reports that Facebook is “the most popular social media platform” and that “a majority of U.S. adults – 62 percent – get news on social media.” When people read fake news on social media, they may be tricked into thinking they are reading real news.

Both Google and Facebook have promised to take measures to address the concerns of fake news masquerading as real news. A team of college students has already developed a browser plug-in called FiB to help readers identify on Facebook what is fake and what is real.

But these steps don’t go far enough to address fake news.

The question then is: Can we better prepare ourselves to challenge and reject fabrications that may easily circulate as untruthful texts and images in the online world?

As scholars of library and information science, we argue that in today’s complex world, traditional literacy, with its emphasis on reading and writing, and information literacy – the ability to search and retrieve information – are not enough.

What we need today is metaliteracy – an ability to make sense of the vast amounts of information in the connected world of social media.

Why digital literacy is not enough

Students today are consumers of the latest technology gadgets and social media platforms. However, they don’t always have a deep understanding of the information transmitted through these devices, or how to be creators of online content.

Researchers at Stanford University recently found that “when it comes to evaluating information that flows through social media channels,” today’s “digital natives,” despite being immersed in these environments, “are easily duped” by misinformation.

Digital literacy may not be enough.
Digital devices image via www.shutterstock.com

They said they “were taken aback by students’ lack of preparation” and argued that educators and policymakers must “demonstrate the link between digital literacy and citizenship.”

The truth is that we live in a world where information lacks traditional editorial mechanisms of filter. It also comes in various styles and forms – it could range from digital images to multimedia to blogs and wikis. The veracity of all this information is not easily understood.

This problem has been around for a while. In 2005, for example, a false story about a political figure, John Seigenthaler Sr., was posted by an anonymous author on Wikipedia, implicating him in the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy. Seigenthaler challenged this fake entry and it was eventually corrected. Several other hoaxes have circulated on Wikipedia over the years, showing how easy it is to post false information online.

Indeed, in 2007, FactCheck.org, a website that monitors the accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players, urged readers to ask critical questions in response to a false story that had been placed about House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. At the time, people were being misled into believing that Pelosi was proposing a tax on retirement funds and others to help illegal immigrants and minorities.

In 2016, FactCheck.org published a set of practical steps to encourage closer reading and critical thinking.

As we see it, metaliteracy is a way to achieve these goals.

So, what is metaliteracy?

Digital literacy supports the effective use of digital technologies, while metaliteracy emphasizes how we think about things. Metaliterate individuals learn to reflect on how they process information based on their feelings or beliefs.

To do that, first and foremost, metaliterates learn to question sources of information. For example, metaliterate individuals learn to carefully differentiate among multiple sites, both formal (such as The New York Times or Associated Press) and informal (a blog post or tweet).

Metaliterates learn to question the sources of information.
Jon S, CC BY

They question the validity of information from any of these sources and do not privilege one over the other. Information presented on a formal TV news source, such as CNN or Fox News, for instance, may be just as inaccurate as someone’s blog post. This involves understanding all sources of information.

Second, metaliterates learn to observe their feelings when reading a news item.

We are less inclined to delve further when something affirms our beliefs. On the other hand, we are more inclined to fact check or examine the source of the news when we don’t agree with it. Thinking about our own thinking reminds us that we need to move beyond how we feel, and engage our cognitive faculties in doing a critical assessment.

Metaliterates pause to think whether they believe something because it affirms their ideas.

Metaliteracy challenges assumptions

Metaliteracy helps us understand the context from which the news is arising, noting whether the information emanates from research or editorial commentary, distinguishing the value of formal and informal news sources and evaluating comments left by others.

By reflecting on the way we are thinking about a news story, for instance, we will be more apt to challenge our assumptions, ask good questions about what we are reading and actively seek additional information.

Consider the recent example of how fake news was put out through a single tweet and believed by thousands of readers online. Eric Tucker, a 35-year-old cofounder of a marketing company in Austin, Texas, tweeted that anti-Trump protesters were professionally organized and bused to Trump rallies. Despite having only 40 Twitter followers, this one individual managed to start a conspiracy theory. Thousands of people believed and forwarded the tweet.

This example shows how easy it is to transmit information online to a wide audience, even if it is not accurate. The combination of word and image in this case was powerful and supported what many people already believed to be true. But it also showed a failure to ask critical questions within an online community with shared ideas or to challenge one’s own beliefs with careful reflection.

In other words, just because information is shared widely on social media, that does not mean it is true.

Developing deeper understanding

Another emphasis of metaliteracy is understanding how information is packaged and delivered.

Packaging can be examined on a number of fronts. One is the medium used – is it text, photograph, video, cartoon, illustration or artwork? The other is how it is used – is the medium designed to appeal to our feelings? Does professional-looking design provide a level of credibility to the unsuspecting viewer?

Metaliterates learn how to discriminate between fake and real news.
Hand image via www.shutterstock.com

Social media makes it easy to produce and distribute all kinds of digital content. We can all be photographers or digital storytellers using online tools for producing and packaging well-designed materials. This can be empowering.

But the same material can be used to create intentionally false messages with appealing design features. Metaliterates learn to distinguish between formal and informal sources of information that may have very different or nonexistent editorial checks and balances.

They learn to examine the packaging of content. They learn to recognize whether the seemingly professional design may be a façade for a bias or misinformation. Realnewsrightnow, for example, is a slickly designed site with attention-grabbing but often false headlines. The About page of the website might raise questions, but only if a reader’s mindset is evaluative.

Becoming a responsible citizen

Because social media is interactive and collaborative, the metaliterate learner must know how to contribute responsibly as well.

Metaliterate individuals recognize there are ethical considerations involved when sharing information, such as the information must be accurate. But there is more. Metaliteracy asks that individuals understand on a mental and emotional level the potential impact of one’s participation.

So, metaliterate individuals don’t just post random thoughts that are not based in truth. They learn that in a public space they have a responsibility to be fair and accurate.

So how can we become metaliterate?

Schools need to urge students to ponder these questions. Students need to be made aware of these issues early on so that they learn how not to develop uncritical assumptions and actions as they use technology.

They need to understand that whether they are posting a tweet, blog, Facebook post or writing a response to others online, they need to think carefully about what they are saying.

While social media offers much promise for providing everyone with a voice, there is a disturbing downside to this revolution. It has enabled sharing of misinformation and false news stories that radically alter representations of reality.

Thomas P. Mackey, Vice Provost for Academic Programs, SUNY Empire State College and Trudi Jacobson, Distinguished Librarian, University at Albany, State University of New York

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Latest Posts

Main Links

Pedagogue

My Profile

Pedagogue Blog

Separation of disciplines

Bringing the disciplines together

Gap in education

Challenges of 21st-century learning

Researching phone stories

Children’s use of phones

Promoting responsible phone use in school

Using bots to affect humans

Raising additional questions

Why digital literacy is not enough

So, what is metaliteracy?

Metaliteracy challenges assumptions

Developing deeper understanding

Becoming a responsible citizen

Latest Posts

Main Links

Blog

Pedagogue

My Profile

Are you sure you want to delete post?