Patterns of internet use by English students

Introduction

The children who participated in this research are ahead of the technology itself in some ways, demanding a higher level of performance and efficiency than it is often able to deliver. Issues such as speed, filtering (especially at school), viruses, spam, spy and other malware are seen as an irritation. Restrictions that are placed upon them at school, whether through web filtering, timetabling, access or other issues, are however tolerated and children are phlegmatic about their schools’ provision of internet services. By contrast they usually find their access at home more enjoyable, beneficial and helpful to their school-related, recreational, private and social lives.

 

According to their own report, it seems that children regard themselves as having a well-developed, sound and perceptive sense of the accuracy and veracity of the information that they commonly access from the internet. They are likely to use the design, web address and general ‘feel’ of a website to assess its potential and likely accuracy. They use their personal experiences when evaluating the accuracy of information obtained from a specific website, and will often self-filter websites that they have discovered in the past to be unreliable, inaccurate or misleading. This is especially true of wikis. Children often evaluate a website by quickly assessing the amount or type of advertising or pop-ups encountered. Websites that include excessive advertising or inappropriate (e.g. gambling) advertising are often avoided by children as they self-censor websites they encounter. This is true of both home and school usage, although the school will usually filter out inappropriate websites before they reach the students’ desktop. Children often indicated that they use effective methods of triangulation or verification when obtaining information of doubtful authenticity. Methods of verification include comparing data extracted from a number of websites, seeking information from an adult or peer or referring to books for confirmation of information.

 

Unsurprisingly, children used search engines more frequently at school than any other category of website. This was stated by them in their surveys and during interviews and was also validated by logs recording their usage. For recreation, in their out-of-school environments they liked playing games, browsing and downloading music and videos. For social communication, across both genders they preferred using instant messaging and social networks as their mode of social communication. Most children reported using the internet extensively for helping with homework and revision, with a preference for using the internet in private areas out-of-school such as bedrooms or other private living and recreation areas.

 

Both online and offline literacy practices were seen to be strongly related to internet use,  with children who reported spending significant amounts of time reading books and magazines also reporting moderately high internet use. The internet was certainly seen by children as forming an important part of their social and educational activities with words such as “accuracy” and ”learning” occurring frequently during the interview group discussions. The internet is clearly valued as a dependable source of information and as a means of social communication.

 

As has been noted in the presentation of findings, some gender differences in internet usage were observed in the survey. Girls generally indicated that they were more likely to use social software such as instant messaging or social networking sites than boys, whereas boys were more likely to use internet games for recreation than girls. Girls’ usage of social networking generally focused around keeping in touch with existing friends rather than making new ones. Children of both genders reported not only downloading music and videos as favoured activities but also the creation and publishing of music and videos as popular pastimes. They also described how they enjoyed constructing artefacts on the internet such as web pages, virtual postcards and other internet-hosted construction activities. Whilst acknowledging the possible gender stereotyping that these conclusions may imply, girls’ higher use of social networking and boys’ higher usage of games may be seen as being consistent with both genders’ offline interests. This is also supported by the apparent greater likelihood of boys undertaking more risky online behaviour than girls, such as visiting chatrooms.

 

Unsurprisingly, children generally perceived themselves as having a greater degree of freedom in internet usage out-of-school than in-school. Those children who felt they had the greatest amount of freedom also reported the highest levels of confidence in internet usage. Relatively moderate usage (up to two hours per day) of the internet seemed to be mostly appropriate, being focused on a range of recreational, social and educational activities. Relatively low levels (less than one half-hour per day)  of internet use were often associated with low levels of reading generally, whereas relatively high levels (more than two hours per day)  of internet use was often also associated with low levels of reading.  Usage at the high end was often also associated with unfocused, random use of the internet such as browsing. Those children who reported structured home supervision and the application of some usage rules also reported a balance of recreational, social and educational usage at both home and school.

 

Notwithstanding children’s observations as noted above on the accuracy of information obtained from the internet, there was also a fascination with its fallibility. Children were interested in encountering information that was apocryphal, misleading or just plain wrong and believed they were efficient and adept at uncovering such websites, although they were unlikely to revisit them for research purposes. Children also found the potential of the internet to distract interesting, depending on the context of what they found and were often intellectually engaged by stimulating diversions.

 

Many of the above observations are supported by postmodern theories. Butler (2002) and Sellinger (2004) have described the internet as being a postmodern phenomenon. Their separate pieces of research have picked out three key postmodern descriptors of the internet, namely its non- hierarchised nature, its virtuality and its mutability. These three descriptors can be related to much of the children’s use of the internet as described in this paper. Its non-hierarchised form relates to and appeals to children in the way in which they can create, share and seek information and communicate using internet-based technologies. The virtuality of the internet places sources of information, recreational spaces and their network of friends in an easily accessible and synchronous environment created by them wherever they have an internet-enabled device, but especially out-of-school.

 

These ideas are also consistent with theories expressed by other researchers. Hernwell has described the internet as being a function rather than an object and describes it in virtual terms (Hernwell, 2005). Gee (2004) expresses similar ideas, placing experience ahead of information and seeing the internet in terms of process rather than product. Again, children’s process-oriented usage of the internet is consistent with ideas such as these.  At an early stage in the  popular use of the internet, Nune was also writing in similar terms (Nune, 1995), realising quickly that the internet had no frontiers and as such was not bounded in the same way as other systems of communication or methods of storing and retrieving information. These descriptions closely match, in spirit anyway, the ways in which children spoke, sometimes naively but often perceptively about the internet.

 

The children’s use of and perspectives  on the internet are also supported by the ideas of Granic and Lamey (2000) who have spoken about postmodernism in terms of perspectivism, multiplicity and decentralisation and by relating  these three concepts to both the internet itself and to learning on the internet. Children’s discussion of the internet and the various viewpoints and relativism that pervades both the content and the spirit of the internet is consistent with Granic and Lamey’s, and although children did not exactly describe the internet in those precise terms, the perspectivism can be related to the points of view that children expressed and encountered on the internet,  the multiplicity related to the variety of people and information sources with which they interacted, and the decentralisation related to the hyperlinked, shared and democratic nature of their online communication and research. This is also coherent with Chapman’s description of the internet and postmodernism in terms of the multiplicity of competing and subjective narratives (Chapman, 2005). These competing narratives can also be seen in terms of how (in)formal  learning itself is seen.  Sefton-Green (2004) describes informal learning as being no longer seen in terms of being merely casual, disorganised and accidental but as being an integral part of the same learning process that occurs in more formal settings. This certainly appears to be validated by the comments by children on the way in which they used the internet informally for educational, social and recreational reasons.

 

Children discussed their use of the internet in very human and interactive terms, in turn revealing many of their values with respect to honesty, respect and other ethical issues. The revelation of these values and beliefs are consistent with the theories of Butler (2002) who has written about how technology reveals the outcome of our human values. However, and the children in the study have indicated this, the use of the internet is not a utopian state of being. There are challenges, idiosyncrasies, frustrations and blind alleys, all of which can on the one hand reduce the effectiveness of the internet for research and communication but on the other hand can help raise the social and intellectual capital gained through working through these issues. Zembylas and Vrasidas (2004) have spoken of the pedagogy of discomfort with respect to online learning and this can be translated to the postmodern context of children’s use of internet where there are unprecedented freedoms, but also challenges, new rules and new responsibilities for parents, teachers and those who care for children in both in-school and out-of-school contexts.

Patterns of Usage

There appears to be some common patterns between students’ responses to the online survey, their discussions during the interviews and the logs on internet usage. The logs show that search engines are by far the most common category of website accessed by students at school. This is supported by the results of the survey where 72% of children use the internet for obtaining information. It is worth noting that the logs indicate that there is often little use of the schools’ websites and the use that is recorded often relates to those schools that set their website as the default homepage upon logging in, with students quickly navigating away. The survey indicates that only 24% of students use the schools’ websites, which raises the issue of the purpose and role of the school website. Is it purely for marketing? Could it be used more effectively for children’s learning? Should it more effectively incorporate learning platforms, blogs, e-portfolios or other more interactive elements?  These are issues that schools may be prompted to consider.

 

The interviews yielded a large number of children’s comments on the accuracy of content on the internet, especially with respect to their learning. The interviews included much discussion about online games, and this is also supported by the survey which reported 81% of students using the internet for games. There appeared to be little variance between what children say they did and what the logs reported as actual usage.

 

I believe that the methodology chosen for obtaining and analysing the data in this paper has worked effectively. Both the survey and the interviews produced rich data that assisted my understanding of the area being researched. My positionality as a keen advocate of the internet and as a senior member of my organisation placed me in a privileged position to interpret the data made available through the methodology. At the top level of questioning, the main research question was: How do year children use the internet both in-school and out-of-school? This was broken down into four subsidiary questions.

 

In retrospect, the main question has been a little less about the children’s actual behaviour and more about their perceptions about how they use the internet, their beliefs and the way they report these perceptions and beliefs. . With respect to the question How is out-of-school internet behaviour of year 7 students similar to in-school internet behaviour? a number of conclusions can be drawn from the data and analysis in the preceding sections. Children were critical of the accuracy of information on the internet, especially with respect to their learning. This was drawn out of experiences with a number of websites that were cited as examples. They did, however, demonstrate good ways of checking and validating information, and felt the internet was a valuable resource. This was consistent with both in-school and out-of-school access.

 

Children complained about the things that got in the way of their internet use. This included their experiences with viruses, spyware and pop-ups at home, yet they also complained about the restrictions placed on them by firewalls and filtering at school. This shows their impatience with the technology and their need for immediacy and reliability of access. Children disliked things that got in the way of them using the internet when and where they liked. I believe this needs a curriculum response, educating children about skilful practices on the internet and explaining the reasons and the technologies involved for firewalls and filtering. However, generally children demonstrated a good awareness of internet safety issues. Schools could further encourage and nurture safe practices whilst providing adequate safeguards such as filtering and caching facilities. A good safety policy and code of practice is important.

 

With respect to the question  How does out-of-school internet behaviour of year 7 students differ from in-school behaviour? and its corollary If the behaviour of year 7 students differs, is this important?, there are a number of observations to be made and conclusions to be drawn. There often appears to be a different relationship between the children and their informal learning and that which occurs in a formal educational setting. Schools should look at ways of making the formal educational experience more related to and built upon that which the children bring from home. In order to do this a deeper understanding must be developed of what children do and how they interact with others online. Bringing the home and school practice together is important. This is more relevant than trying to emulate home practice at school. New kinds of learning are taking place involving, amongst other things, online exploration, collaboration and networking and this should be embraced and contextualised by schools to allow young people the opportunity to practice, enhance and apply their skills in a transferable way both in-school and out-of-school.

 

Children mainly used the internet at home in private or other designated areas, whereas at school, usage was more public and exposed. However, children believed that teachers were less likely to know what they were doing on the internet at school than parents were to know what they were doing on the internet at home. Videos and games were favourite activities for children at home, whereas search engines were favourites at school. Children unsurprisingly preferred using the internet at home, mainly due to the privacy and freedom afforded to them. Those who spent the most time on the internet at school also tended to spend the most time on the internet at home.

 

The use of the internet by young people differs in informal, formal and non-formal settings. However, there are perpetual and changing overlaps between these settings, and the contexts will be largely determined by the learners themselves. In this sense, although we might aspire to a framework for learning with the internet, it is a framework that itself is in perpetual beta form. Children develop self-organised learning practices (or contexts) using the tools which are sometimes taught in schools and sometimes learnt informally. It is apparent that children bring informal learning to school. Schools should use this, but not necessarily appropriate it. This has also been commented upon recently by other researchers (Green and Hannon, 2007).  Schools should also however, look at ways of developing context-based models for learning, and seek to understand ways in which informal and formal learning can be realigned. Children should also be encouraged in the school setting to be creators of content as well being articulate and discerning consumers. This is consistent with trends observed in the 2007 Ofcom report on the communications market where the most notable impact of the internet in recent years was seen to be the conversion of consumers into content producers (Ofcom, 2007, p. 97). It is also consistent with recent research into the CBBC online game ‘Adventure Rock’. In 2008, Gauntlett and Jackson conducted a case study on ‘Adventure Rock’, a virtual world for children aged 8-11 (Gauntlett and Jackson, 2008). This free, downloadable program from CBBC provides creative studios where children can draw pictures, animate cartoons, choreograph dance, compose music and construct machines. CBBC has taken up the challenge of providing safe and appropriate social networking and interactive games for children in this age group. At the time of writing, Adventure Rock is the latest in a series of virtual worlds, created specifically for children in the past two years. Others include Club Penguin, Nicktropolis, Moshi Monsters and My Tiny Planets.  Gauntlet and Jackson describe eight types of players in these virtual worlds: explore-investigator, self-stampers, social climbers, fighters, collector-consumers, power users, life-system builders and nurturers, all engaged in a series of online activities ranging from solitary to sociable. Gauntlett and Jackson found a number of benefits to be apparent in children’s usage of Adventure Rock including the creation of mental maps, rehearsal of responsibility and self-expression. Research such as this is important in informing the future appropriation of in-school and out-of-school online experiences for children.

 

Schools need to listen to children and their use of the internet, and develop strategies to bring together the richness that both informal and formal learning can provide. Schools also need to provide the opportunity for children to practice the skills that they bring from informal learning and enable them to use those skills in a range of contexts and settings. In doing this, schools should not attempt to mimic out-of-school use, but concentrate on enabling responsible and effective use of IP-based technologies by students. The development of a set of ethical, safe and critical approaches to the internet is crucial. However, it also apparent that children already have some good critical skills in finding and analysing information, and that they are good at verifying and validating information found on the internet. On the social aspect of the internet, there is a need to further develop safe practices with respect to social networking, blogging, e-portfolios and other online activities.

 

Given children’s frequent interest and participation in internet games, there is further scope to explore the educational possibilities available through these activities. The fun elements of the internet greatly appeal to children of this age, and the appropriation of creative and constructivist activities continue to be a desired outcome for children. Teaching children to be disciplined users is important too. My research showed that those who spent a lot of time just browsing were often those who had unrestricted use of the internet at home. The encouragement of supportive, responsible parental supervision is important and schools should have a role in promoting this. Where the response from home is apathetic or negative, schools should look towards the education of parents and the provision of the internet during out of hours time in the form of after school, or homework clubs where good out-of-school internet behaviours and habits can be demonstrated and developed.

 

Informal learning using the internet often appears as self-motivated with a strong sense of ownership both of content creation and social networking. It is often generated by a real purposeful need by the children themselves, often with the assistance of their peers.

 

Schools should be places where literacy in new media can be developed. The sample of schools in which children were consulted in the research represents a broad set of demographic profiles across England. As the sample was restricted to children at year seven, responses from other year levels would most probably have shown a different set of responses. This is especially likely with respect to the ownership of social networking sites. Older children may be more inclined to use the internet for communications, to explore and test boundaries and to behave in a more independent manner.

 

All the students included in the sample were from schools with good internet provision and it also appeared that children were also generally immersed in the internet in their out-of-school contexts. In this sense, perhaps the internet is a non-issue, being such a natural part of their lives that it holds no awe or surprise for them. This contrasts with my own response, where I am still easily impressed by new internet-based applications. The danger is that school and home practices will diverge to the point where school provision of the internet becomes increasingly irrelevant to children’s lives, especially if a significant gap between teacher and student competencies emerges and grows.

 

Perhaps a more longitudinal study is required, following the patterns of usage over a number of years and possibly examining other types of ICT usage such as mp3 players, mobile camera phones and emergent technologies.

 

Both internet use and reading are popular activities and seem to be related i.e. children who like using the internet also like reading. This clearly links internet use as being a literacy activity. Games, homework, browsing and instant messaging are favourite activities and the literacy activities associated with these are worthy of exploration. As internet use and reading are closely related, literacy is a key skill for internet use and also a key way of improving and practicing that skill. The motivational level for activities such as these is high, as children enjoy the levels of engagement that are afforded by use of the internet.

 

There appears to be a mixed set of rules for home usage, and education of parents is important, especially if their skills and understandings of children’s social practices on the internet are low. Because of children’s high levels of confidence with the internet (66% think they are good users), rules for both school and home usage should perhaps be constantly reviewed.

 

There is a bigger gap between those with access and those without access for boys and girls, and this inequity of access should be explored further. Certainly, the research shows that more emphasis is needed on reading for boys. Girls’ interest in social networking applications also demands a curriculum that teaches responsible use. My research shows that social networking owners are more independent, less likely to look at recommended websites and although children are quite aware of safety issues and can recognize dangers, we must continue to equip them with the necessary skills. The use of resources from Childnet International and the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre is to be encouraged.  Resources outlined by the Cyberspace Research Unit’s 2004 report (O’Connell, Price and Barrow, 2004) into emerging trends amongst primary school children’s use of the internet has been taken up by many schools and local authorities. This trend is also to be encouraged and cascaded into the family homes of children. As noted previously, boys tend to use the internet more for chatrooms, games and music, possibly partially because they have less strict rules at home than girls but possibly just because this is what boys enjoy doing anyway. A curriculum response that teaches responsible use is also required here.

 

The role of the internet in schools certainly needs constant examination. Students generally don’t see its usage at school as being as relevant as might be hoped. Indeed, Lankshear and Knobel describe how “…much classroom appropriation of new technologies is ineffective, wasteful, and wrongheaded. For a start, they [educators] are likely to see that effective use of the internet calls for sustained continuous periods online with minimal constraints” (Lankshear and Knobel, 2006b, p. 258).

 

A response is required to address this relevance, possibly through further research into teachers’ perceptions and usage, and there is arguably a need to revisit professional development models for the use of internet applications in the classroom for learning and teaching. Much of what the young people appear to do on the internet is play, not just with respect to online games but playing with video, music and social networking. The institutional rationale for the expense of providing the internet in schools is primarily for the transmitting of information to learned. This is how the cost can be justified. The dichotomous nature of the internet for play/learning is managed by young people, although ‘play’ is still the key word. This is consistent with Sandvig’s view of the internet as a place for ritual and play as well as for information retrieval and work (Sandvig, 2006). Again, Lankshear and Knobel “…do not advocate turning schools into ‘playgrounds’ for new literacies at the level of popular cultural engagement, Educational practice is distinct from and different to popular culture. The day we give that distinction away is the day we give formal education away” (Lankshear and Knobel, 2006b, p. 259).

 

Some authors speak of the necessity of engaging children with the use of the internet (Pritchard and Cartwright, 2004). Most children who responded to my research were soundly engaged, with the engagement being a natural and embedded part of a child’s habitus. I believe that the issue here relates more to giving children the critical and ethical capabilities to use the internet more skilfully.

 

Lack of access to the internet at home by children can mean exclusion from a range of social, creative and constructivist skills. Children not using the internet for communicating with friends, music, games and homework are missing out on a great deal. Perhaps this is a future role of schools’ internet provision, not just as an enabler of access, but also a promoter of innovative practice. Teachers employing strategies such as personalised learning, formative assessment and other contemporary approaches to education may find in the usage of the internet mechanisms by which children can become more independent, directing their own curriculum and managing their assessment for learning. Internet tools such as learning platforms require teacher engagement at the same time as letting go of the locus of control. The negative side of increased online engagement is that excessively heavy use of the internet is often related to music downloading and chat room use and the dangers of internet addiction should be an area of future concern both for parents and schools. Children who use the internet for more than two hours per day could be prone to internet addiction, and excessive internet use should be monitored by parents and teachers, as has already been noted by researchers (Yoo et al, 2004). The issue of internet addiction is also explored by Cao and Su who found that, certainly in China, young people with internet addiction possess different, and often disturbing psychological features when compared with those who use the internet less frequently (Cao and Su, 2007). The reality at the time of writing of this paper (2006-2008) is that a significant proportion of children use the internet to watch videos and claim that they are more likely to use the internet than television to learn about things (Ofcom, 2007, pp 94-95). As they get older (and approach the age of my sample group) they are also more likely to use the internet to keep in touch with other people (Ofcom, 2007, p. 96).

 

Both parents and teachers need to listen to and observe children’s online behaviour whilst at the same time respecting their privacy. Byron talks of how “in terms of adult input with the young person and technology, this is a time to move towards collaborative management” (Byron, 2008, p. 38). Zembylas and Vrasidas discuss the principles of Levinas’ view on ethics and how they relate to internet use. Internet use has an ethical significance which all parties must discover on a journey together. The ethics will evolve through a sensitive and sympathetic partnership (Zembylas and Vrasidas, 2005). With respect to the education of both parents and students, parental and child use of the internet together as a shared experience could improve the effectiveness of parental monitoring. This is supported by the findings of Wang et al (Wang, Bianchi and Raley, 2005). This also is supported by other writers who stress the importance of understanding parents’ and children’s interaction with the internet at home (Valentine and Holloway, 2001).

 

Looking back on my own research process in examining these areas, I can see issues relating to the time sensitivity of the data. The internet has changed significantly during the time of writing of this paper (2011) and in a short period of time the internet will further mutate and children may become engaged in a range of online activities that are yet to be invented. Activities described in this paper may be discarded by children in favour of new technologies affording fresh opportunities for leisure, for learning, communicating and collaborating. In this sense, this paper is an artefact representing a snapshot of the state of children’s internet usage during 2011.  

 

Further work will certainly need to be undertaken to ensure that we are constantly revising our own practices as educators, parents, builders of schools and collaborators with children’s online and offline worlds. New theories will in time emerge to support these and we must constantly reflect not just upon what is happening, but on what new ideas could emerge from future research.

References

BUTLER, C. (2002) Postmodernism: a very short introduction. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BYRON, T. (2008) Byron Review: Children and New Technology. London, DCSF.

CAO, F. and Su, L. (2007) ‘Internet addiction among Chinese adolescents: prevalence and psychological features.’ In Child: Care, Health and Development, 33 (3) pp. 125-132.

GAUNTLETT, D. and JACKSON, L. (2008) Virtual Worlds: users and producers (Case Study: Adventure Rock). London, Communications and Media Research Institute, University of Westminster.

GEE, J. (2004) Game-like learning: an example of situated learning and implications for opportunity to learn. Madison, University of Wisconsin.

GRANIC, I. and LAMEY, A. (2000) ‘The self-organization of the internet and changing modes of thought.’ In New Ideas in Psychology, 18 (1) pp.93-107.

GREEN, H. and HANNON, C. (2007) Their Space: Education for a digital generation. London, Demos.

HERNWELL, P. (2005) ‘Children and 21st century challenges.’ In Childhoods 2005 Children and youth in emerging and transforming societies. Oslo pp. 47-53.

LANKSHEAR, C. and KNOBEL, M. (2006b) New literacies, Buckingham, Open University Press.

NUNE, M. (1995) ‘Baudrillard in cyberspace: internet, virtuality, and postmodernity.’ In Style, 29 (22) pp. 314-327.

O’CONNELL, R., PRICE, J. and BARROW, C. (2004) Emerging trends amongst primary school children’s use of the internet. University of Central Lancashire, Cyberspace Research Unit.

OFCOM (2007) The communications market 2007. London, Ofcom.

PRITCHARD, A. and CARTWRIGHT, V. (2004) ‘Transforming what they read: helping eleven-year-olds engage with internet information.’ In Literacy, 38 (1) pp. 26-31

SANDVIG, C. (2006) ‘The internet at play: child uses of public internet connections.’ In Journal of Computer-Mediated Communications, 11 (4) pp. 932-956.

SEFTON-GREEN, J. (2004) Report 7: literature review in informal learning with technology outside school. Futurelab series. Bristol, Futurelab.

VALENTINE, G. and HOLLOWAY, S. (2001) ‘On-line dangers?: geographies of parents’ fears for children’s safety in cyberspace.’ In Professional Geographer, 53 (1), pp. 71-83.

YOO, J. Y., CHO, S. C., HA, J., YUNE, K. Y., KIM, S. J., HWANG, J., CHUNG, A., SUNG, Y. H. and LYOO, A. I. K. (2004) ‘Attention deficit hyperactivity symptoms and internet addiction.’ In Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 58 (5), pp. 487-494.

ZEMBYLAS, M. and VRASIDAS, C. (2004) ‘Emotion, reason, and information and communications technologies in education: some issues in a post-emotional society.’ In E-Learning, 1 (1) pp. 105-127.

 

Social Networking

Social networking software such as Facebook and Twitter are providing opportunities for personal expression, the creation of communities, collaboration and sharing. Other examples include blogs (personal web-based journals), moblogs (blogs sent from a mobile phone), wikis (modifiable collaborative web pages), and podcasting (subscription-based broadcast over the web) supported by technologies such as RSS (really simple syndication – an XML format designed for sharing news across the web). They enhance or gain value from social interactions and behaviour. They can also provide opportunities for collective intelligence and thus add value to data. Digital video, photography and music technologies have democratised the process of content creation and distribution. Recent studies of children and young people’s online behavior indicate that there are a wide range of activities undertaken, from using the internet for homework and research to a wide range of entertainment and edutainment activities. The benefits for children are well documented, but so too are a number of risks of which young people must be made aware.

Risks

Initial concern for children was largely centred on their use of social networking sites and the possibility that young people could be ‘groomed’ by those with a malicious intent. This is made possible by the amount of personal information that children can disclose online allowing predators to manipulate children by becoming their online friend, often hiding their true age and identity and developing close friendships by pretending to share common interests in music, personalities, sport or other activities for which children have expressed a specific liking. The huge publicity surrounding chat rooms and the decision by some leading commercial companies to close their chat rooms to children led to the focus switching to social networking applications. In some respects these are more of a problem than chat rooms, as young people share ‘friend lists’ and pass on contacts one to another. As instant messaging programmes allow private one-to-one correspondence with or without the use of webcams, they also can give even greater privacy to predators developing relationships with children online. It is important to understand that social networking sites are public spaces where adults can also interact with children, which obviously has an implication on child safety. Whilst encouraging young people to be creative users of the internet who publish content rather than being passive consumers, there is a balance to be weighed in terms of the personal element of what is being published. The concerns are shifting from what children are ‘downloading’ in terms of content to what they are ‘uploading’ to the net. In some cases very detailed accounts of their personal lives, contact information, daily routines, photographs and videos are acting as an online shopping catalogue for those who would seek children to exploit, either sexually or for identity fraud purposes. These sites are very popular with young people as not only can they express themselves with an online personality, but they can use all the applications the site has to offer to chat and share multimedia content with others – music, photos and video clips. Unfortunately, these sites can also be the ideal platform for facilitating bullying, slander and humiliation of others. The better sites are now taking this issue seriously and ensuring that they have safety guidelines and codes of practice in place. In drafting an AUP, students, where appropriate additional consideration should be given to boarding pupils. For example, additional privileges may be given after school with access to allow less restrictive filtering but keeping in line with the overall ethos of providing a safe environment. The management of mobile devices and laptop dongles that allow unrestricted access in dormitories should also be carefully managed with a view that such usage should be viewed on its merits and with due consideration to the in loco parentis nature of boarding supervision.

Implementation

Clearly banning activity of any sort merely heightens the desire of young people to explore and push the boundaries. We have a responsibility to understand what children are doing by talking to them about their online activity and educating them to the possible downsides – encouraging safe use and enjoying the benefits whilst minimising the risks. It is recommended that schools and academies use CEOP materials to educate children about risks and benefits, look at recommending social networking sites that safely enhance education experiences. Schools and academies should also look to provide timely and accurate information for parents and teachers, provide safety tips and good advice and stay up to date on developments.

Sexting, Griefing, Piracy, Privacy and Massively Multiplayer Thumbwrestling

Last week I was fortunate to be at the First International Symposium on Digital Ethics hosted by The Center for Digital Ethics and Policy at Loyola University, Chicago. The first keynote speaker, Jan McGonigal (author of “Reality is Broken”) had us playing Massively Multiplayer Thumbwrestling, a good way to boost oxytocin levels and a metaphor for online gaming. All the presentations were excellent indeed but for me there were several highlights: Jo-Ann Oravec talked about the ethics of sexting and
issues involving consent and the production of intimate content. Richard Wojak examined griefing through the virtual world and the moral status of griefing. Brian Carey took a controversial look at piracy and the times when it may be ethically permissible. Alex Gekker offered some fascinating insights into ‘Anonymous’ and the governmental oversight of the internet. A lunchtime treat
was Julian Dibbell reprising his seminal 1990s piece originally published in the Village Voice entitled “A Rape in Cyberspace“. Charles Ess provided an insightful view into privacy, the self and new media.

There is much to be learnt in this provocative and emergent area, and I look forward to hearing and sharing some further thoughts
on digital ethics.

ELSE Conference in Bucharest, Romania

I have had my paper on an analysis of national patterns of learning platform use by students in schools and academies accepted for the  8th International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest Romania,  April, 26th – 27th, 2012. Conference details are at http://elseconference.eu/. I hope to see some of you there.

Tweetcloud for @albinwallace Twitter feed for past 3 years

Tweetcloud for @albinwallace Twitter feed

Bubbles, white noise and why it all seems so familiar

As the postmodern storm clouds gather on the social media
horizon, partially fuelled by research by such eminents as Turkle and Pariser,
I am inclined in my middle years to reflect on my own social media bubble and to
nostalgically reminisce on my interactions with technology and how it was in
some ways ever thus; up close and personal with the technology.

As a child in working class London we had a valve radio,
a thing of great beauty and resonance and I used to sit with my ear pressed up
against the musty cloth of the speaker listening to the Clitheroe Kid,
oblivious to the domestic hum around me. Whatever happened to that valve-driven
beauty, resplendent in its walnut cabinet? Its sound was warm and inviting, the
glow behind the dial alluring as my eyes gazed upon the exotic places listed on
its circular face; Paris, Luxembourg, Munich.

Then television hit. And it hit hard. Sharp edges, tinny
sound, primal, violent Warner Bros cartoons. Always going out of tune, replaced
with visual and aural static that also captivated me. Alone in the lounge room,
Bugs Bunny and the white noise alternating as the station went in and out of
tune in time with the London buses that passed our basement flat. The static
fascinated me and in time I suspect I became the only person who actually
bought Lou Reed’s Metal Machine Music and listened to it late at night whilst
studying. But I am getting ahead of myself.

The first record player I got was a portable, blue
machine best suited to playing 45s. I saved up and bought Sergeant Pepper and
as a 10 year old I was terrified, fascinated and thrilled by what seemed like
music from the abyss, albeit played on a machine ill-suited to the purpose.

Then I got my first stereo and things became even
weirder. A cheap, plastic artefact with a cool, smoked lid I put on the White
Album and was transfixed by the sinister voice of Revolution 9 passing between
the speakers. For my birthday I received a pair of cosy, padded headphones and
for the first time was able to recapture the in utero warmth of the valve
radio, albeit with the “Number 9” loop passing from one ear to the other via my
brain. This was my first truly immersive technological experience.

Cassette players became part of the scene and along with
them the commodification of music as we swapped albums, copied them onto
cassette, made mix tapes and innocently engaged in music piracy. All those
years ago.

The CD revolutionised everything. All of sudden, gone was
the crackly, hissy warmth of co-constructed worlds of popular music. Replaced
with precision, minimalism, exactness without authenticity. We listened to each
and every instrument without hearing the whole piece. We painted by numbers and
bought CDs which demonstrated the clinical excellence of digital recording,
mixing and delivery.

My first computer was a VIC-20. I wrote programmes in the
middle of the night. I was thrilled by the control the new technology offered
me. When, in the mid-80s, I used an acoustic coupler to hook up to my first
bulletin board I was amazed at the seeming possibilities. “Hello”, I wrote and
then could not think of anything else to say.

My first laptop gave me portability which was in fact no
portability at all, and my first skirmish with the internet made me realise that
the world was about to irrevocably change.

In rapid succession came the WAP phone, broadband, the
Smart phone, the iPod, the iPhone and now the iPad and I eagerly consumed each
one until before I knew it I was hooked, linked into a world of tweets,
messages and emails that were starting to resemble the static and the white
noise of early television. Lou Reed would be proud.

Last night I was trawling iTunes on my iPad looking for
episodes of the Clitheroe Kid. The bubbles change but the song remains the
same.

Digital Ethics Symposium

I will be fortunate to be attending the International Symposium on Digital Ethics, October 28th, at Loyola University Chicago.
This day-long symposium will feature Jane McGonigal, author of the NY Times bestseller Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. 

Featured presenters will include:
Charles Ess, Aarhus University
Miguel Sicart, IT University Copenhagen
Sally Wyatt, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts & Sciences
Michael Zimmer, Univesity of Wisconsin Milwaukee
Luciano Floridi, University of Hertfordshire
Erin B. Reilly, Annenberg Innovation Lab
As well as a group of papers accepted through a juried competion.
The conference will be exploring ethics in regard to privacy, gaming, research, green computing, identity, citizenship and more.
Follow me on Twitter @albinwallace for regular updates during the symposium

Digital Indigestion

About 12 years ago, an event occurred in my personal life that changed everything dramatically. The details are not important but the net result was that I lost nearly all my stuff. Except for my clothes, some CDs, a lot of books and various bits of ephemera. The event was traumatic and changed my life considerably. On the bright side, it resulted in a new, streamlined me. A thinner, more economical, sleeker and low-maintenance version of myself that revelled in a new asceticism. Never, I swore would I accumulate stuff again. Unnecessary baggage.

Ha. Fat chance. 12 years on and I have more stuff than ever. Too much stuff. I put it down partially to my slightly obsessive personality. Music for example. My iPod, which started off with a modest collection of some 500 tunes now has over 20,000 pieces of music on it. I mean, what’s the point? I might as well listen to the radio as use the shuttle function. And when you get a collection that large it becomes impossible to choose. It’s like a wine list that’s too long. In the end, you throw your arms in the air, shut your eyes and point at random. My Kindle is the same. Swollen with hundreds of free ‘classics’. It has become increasingly hard to choose what to read. My television has over 1000 channels. I cannot choose what to watch. My listening, reading and watching habits have been sabotaged by too much choice which is really no choice at all. In desperation I turn to the Internet and type ‘cats’ into Google. I receive 100 million pages to choose from.

There is no alternative. I put the iPod on shuffle, read two pages from each of the squillion books on the Kindle, whilst simultaneously surfing the web, browsing the television and for good measure checking Facebook and Twitter. Oh, and a quick burst of COD. But something is missing. Oh, yes. I need to do my homework too. Just as well I can multitask. Or not.

YouTube and the Death of Nostalgia

Given my chrono/geodislocation I am particularly drawn to a time and geography that I am mythologising in the context of my current identity. Let me explain. I am an expatriate Australian who has lived in England for the past 11 years. I am also a child of the 1970s. As I reach the transient point of no-return I am drawn to the Kodachrome memory of Australia at that time with its colonial naivety and modernist sensibility embodied by the era of the triple-fronted-brick-veneer-nuclear-(free)-family.

I think with remembered adolescent affection about that Pre-Dismissal era of Nation Review, Gough Whitlam, Barry McKenzie, Auntie Jack, Pre-outed Patrick White, Moomba and the sample bags of the Royal (?) Melbourne Agricultural Show. How to revisit those times?

Ebay, YouTube, Flickr and Wikipedia let me revisit/reinvent these shabby romanticised times which of course is covered by the eternally ironic cloak of Edna Everage. I can even virtually and literally buy back the rusty toys of my childhood.
In the future, the past and present will be perpetually connected by the umbilical cord of social media, removing the spatial and temporal dislocation which nostalgia feeds on. Perhaps the only nostalgia we will have will be for nostalgia itself. Future generations may live as T.S. Eliot describes in Four Quartets.

“Time present and time past
Are both perhaps present in time future,
And time future contained in time past.”

Who would’ve thought that a modernist poet could be so postmodern. I relish the fact that social media happened during my middle age. I relish the gap between “What might have been and what has been”. It gives me a nice warm feeling. And listening to the theme song of ‘The Adventures of Barry McKenzie’ still makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck. I look fondly back to an imagined time of Carl Ditterich, Sunny Boys, Happy Hammond, Zoot and Polly Waffles. Australia grew up and I never even noticed. But I can relive my past through YouTube on an endless loop. Social media in an intravenous feed. A place where I am doomed and blessed to recapture the mythologized past. Future generations don’t know what they are missing. For them, nostalgia may already be dead.

“Amazing Web 2.0 Projects” edited by Terry Freedman

Download Terry Freedman’s new Web 2.0 book.

Viral Education 2.0

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about “Viral Education 2.0“, posted with vodpod

 

Open and transparent consensus

Open and Transparent Consensus: a snapshot of teachers’ use of Wikipedia  

 Dr Albin Wallace   

 Introduction  The title of this paper (Open and Transparent Consensus) is derived from Wikipedia’s own description of itself, and reflects its philosophy and approach to collaborative knowledge production and use. Wikipedia is a popular, multi-lingual, web-based, free-content encyclopaedia and is the most well-known of wikis, collaborative websites that can be directly edited by anyone with access to them. Many teachers and students have experience with Wikipedia, and in this survey teachers were asked how Wiki-based practices might contribute to teaching and learning. This survey was conducted in England with 133 teachers from a wide range of schools, who have used Wikipedia in some way. The survey was anonymous to protect individuals’ and schools’ privacy; there was no way of identifying individual responses. The survey was conducted online and respondents were encouraged to be as open and honest as possible. Participation in this survey was entirely voluntary. Many of the questions are based upon descriptions by Wikipedia about itself and these are intended to elicit responses from teachers that reflect how closely their usage relates to the original intention and philosophy of the encyclopaedia. Other questions are intended to probe different ways in which teachers use the website.  

 Presentation and analysis of data  

 What gender are you? Female 77 58% Male 56 42% Total 133 100% Although there were an equal number of male and female teachers invited to participate in the survey (100 of each), the actual percentage of female respondents was 58%. 2 2. What subjects do you teach (please tick all that apply)? Art and design 8 6% Citizenship 6 5% Design and technology 13 10% English 31 23% Geography 14 11% History 9 7% Information and communication technology 16 12% Mathematics 16 12% Modern foreign languages 14 11% Music 5 4% Physical education 11 8% Personal, social, health and economic education 15 11% Religious education 12 9% Science 33 25% Other 28 21% A fairly broad range of subjects were represented in the sample with the highest number of respondents coming from English and Science faculties. This does not necessarily indicate a greater percentage response rate from those faculties as the numbers of invited respondents were not evenly distributed across all the subject areas. It was therefore expected that there would be a sample bias towards subjects such as English, Science, Mathematics and ICT. 3. What Key Stages do you teach (please tick all that apply)? Key Stage 1 10 8% Key Stage 2 27 21% Key Stage 3 104 79% Key Stage 4 107 82% Key Stage 5 83 63% Although there was some representation from primary school teachers (Key Stage 1 and 2), the greater number of respondents came from Key Stage 3-5. This clearly biases the sample towards secondary school teachers. 3 4. Have you ever written a Wikipedia article? Yes 7 5% No 125 95% Total 132 100% Only a very small proportion of teachers surveyed had written a Wikipedia article, indicating that they tended to be consumers rather than producers of information for the website. Of the few that wrote articles, most tended to be Science teachers. 5. Have you ever edited a Wikipedia article? Yes 15 11% No 116 89% Total 131 100% Twice as many teachers had edited rather than produced an article for Wikipedia indicating a higher critical engagement with the content on the website. From all the teachers surveyed, Science, ICT, History and Geography teachers were most likely to edit articles. 6. When using Wikipedia, do you tend to: Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never View random articles? 2 7 29 52 31 2% 6% 24% 43% 26% View featured articles? 2 19 32 32 37 2% 16% 26% 26% 30% View topic areas? 15 39 37 19 16 12% 31% 29% 15% 13% Use the search box? 55 42 22 6 4 43% 33% 17% 5% 3% Teachers tended to view random articles rarely, preferring to use the search box to find specific information. Featured articles were quite popular as was the use of topic areas. Those who tended to view random articles most frequently were Modern 4 Foreign Language teachers. Geography teachers were the most frequent viewers of featured articles with Music and Geography teachers most frequently viewing topic areas. 7. Do you use Wikipedia in languages other than English? Yes 18 14% No 114 86% Total 132 100% Although, unsurprisingly most teachers used Wikipedia in English some did use the website in other languages. Modern Foreign Languages, Science and Art teachers made most use of Wikipedia in languages other than English. 8. When using Wikipedia, how often would you agree with the following words as descriptors for information found? Always Often Sometim es Rarely Never Balanced 7 79 47 0 0 5% 59% 35% 0% 0% Neutral 7 72 48 3 0 5% 55% 37% 2% 0% Encyclopaedic 18 72 33 6 1 14% 55% 25% 5% 1% Comprehensive 18 58 47 7 1 14% 44% 36% 5% 1% Notable 9 40 61 14 1 7% 32% 49% 11% 1% Verifiable 8 52 50 17 3 6% 40% 38% 13% 2% Accurate 8 78 38 6 0 6% 60% 29% 5% 0% Reliable 6 76 39 8 1 5% 58% 30% 6% 1% Respondents found the articles in Wikipedia to be generally balanced, neutral, encyclopaedic, comprehensive, reliable and accurate. They were slightly less inclined to view the articles as being notable or verifiable with less than half of respondents agreeing that articles were always or often either notable or verifiable. 5 Those teachers who reported Wikipedia as being less balanced were teachers of Art, Citizenship, Design and Technology, Geography, ICT and Mathematics. 10. How important are the following factors in using information found on Wikipedia? Very important Somewhat important Neither important nor unimportant Unimportant Irrelevant Neutrality of point of view 42 63 22 0 1 33% 49% 17% 0% 1% Originality of research 17 45 49 10 7 13% 35% 38% 8% 5% Verification of content against external sources 65 46 14 2 2 50% 36% 11% 2% 2% Reliability of sources 86 36 7 0 1 66% 28% 5% 0% 1% Citation of sources 50 57 18 3 0 39% 45% 14% 2% 0% Most respondents rating neutrality of point of view as being an important factor in using information found on Wikipedia. Likewise, verification of content against external sources, reliability and citation of resources were usually seen as being somewhat or very important. Originality was seen as being a less important factor. Those who greatest concern about the neutrality of articles were teachers of Art, Citizenship, Design and Technology, Geography, Mathematics, Modern Foreign Languages and Science 11. Have you ever posted feedback on Wikipedia? Yes 6 5% No 125 95% Total 131 100% Very few respondents ever posted feedback on Wikipedia. 6 12. Do you believe that student access to Wikipedia at school should be blocked? Yes 10 8% No 121 92% Total 131 100% Most respondents believed that access to Wikipedia should not be blocked within school. 13. Do you believe that Wikipedia should be censored for student use? Yes 48 37% No 82 63% Total 130 100% Despite most respondents believing that Wikipedia should not be blocked at school, a significantly higher number believed that it should be censored through the schools’ filtering software. However, a clear majority favoured uncensored access. Those respondents who most favoured censorship were teachers of Citizenship, Design and Technology and Music. 14. On Wikipedia, have you ever encountered any of the following? Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never Censorship 0 2 28 28 72 0% 2% 22% 22% 55% Bias 0 12 59 42 17 0% 9% 45% 32% 13% Blatant vandalism 0 3 21 35 71 0% 2% 16% 27% 55% Subtle viewpoint presentation 1 13 48 37 28 1% 10% 38% 29% 22% With respect to censorship on the site itself, most respondents had never encountered censorship of Wikipedia articles. Bias was sometimes or rarely encountered and vandalism was not highlighted as a problem. Respondents did not generally report the encountering of subtle viewpoints on the site. 7 15. On Wikipedia have you ever encountered information that is: Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never Outdated? 0 13 62 41 13 0% 10% 48% 32% 10% Factually incorrect? 0 12 45 56 18 0% 9% 34% 43% 14% Respondents usually found that information encountered was not outdated and was usually factually correct. 16. Have you ever used the Wikipedia tutorial? Yes 2 2% No 130 98% Total 132 100% Only a couple of the respondents had ever used the Wikipedia tutorial. 17. Do you encourage your students to use Wikipedia for research? Yes 11 8% Yes (depending upon subject areas) 16 12% Yes (depending upon year level) 14 11% Yes (under supervision) 11 8% Yes (depending upon a number of factors) 18 14% No (I leave it to their discretion) 44 34% No (I actively discourage it) 10 8% Other, please specify 7 5% Total 131 100% 8 With respect to student research on Wikipedia, the picture was quite complex. Most teachers did not actively encourage use of Wikipedia by students, although some encouraged usage depending upon either the year level or the subject being taught. Very few teachers unconditionally encouraged its use with students. 18. How important an issue is student plagiarism of Wikipedia? Very important 68 52% Somewhat important 43 33% Neither important nor unimportant 14 11% Unimportant 3 2% Irrelevant 2 2% Total 130 100% Most respondents rated student plagiarism of Wikipedia as being either somewhat or very important. 19. Have you ever encountered student plagiarism of Wikipedia? Constantly 4 3% Often 22 17% Sometimes 49 38% Rarely 19 15% Never 36 28% Total 130 100% Although some respondents often encountered student plagiarism of Wikipedia, most only sometimes or rarely encountered it with over a quarter of respondents never encountering it. Teachers employed a variety of techniques in the classroom to combat plagiarism, including education of students about plagiarism, checking for stylistic anomalies and employment of robust consequences for students who persistently plagiarised. The techniques were not limited to Wikipedia itself, but were applied to a variety of digital and non-digital resources. Some teachers used a plagiarism module built into their school’s learning platform 9 21. Have you ever encouraged use of the “Schools’ Wikipedia”? Yes 7 5% No 125 95% Total 132 100% Very few respondents encouraged use of the “Schools’ Wikipedia”. 22. Do you usually use Wikipedia as: A starting place 75 63% An ending place 5 4% Both 39 33% Total 119 100% Although most respondents used Wikipedia as a starting place for research with very few using it as an ending place, a third of teachers reported using it both as starting and ending points. 23. Do you use any of the following Wikipedia features? External links 63 82% History tabs 20 26% Discussion 14 18% Community portal 4 5% Current events 12 16% A very high proportion of respondents used external links from Wikipedia articles. Some used the history tabs, but fewer reported using the discussion, community or current events facilities. 10 24. Are you confident that your students know about internet safety practices? Yes 74 56% No 57 44% Total 131 100% Internet safety practice represents one of the most significant concerns of teachers. Despite respondents generally believing that Wikipedia access should be neither blocked nor filtered, nearly half of the teachers were not confident that students knew about internet safety practices. Although this purely the teachers’ perceptions, it does highlight internet safety as being a (real or perceived) issue within schools and one that needs to be addressed When asked to describe the ways in which they used Wikipedia as a tool for teaching and learning, teachers almost unanimously described how they used it for their own research, to provide resources for teaching and to seek clarification of facts related to their subject areas. There was not a significant difference in the way in which male and female teachers responded to the questions with the exception that male teachers were more inclined to contribute and edit articles and also expressed fewer concerns about plagiarism than female teachers. There was also no significant difference in which primary and secondary teachers responded, with the exception that at Key Stages 1 and 2 greater concerns were expressed about internet safety issues, with a slightly higher proportion of teachers advocating either the blocking or filtering of access to Wikipedia.   

 

Conclusions 

 

Teachers used Wikipedia across a wide range of subjects, mainly focussed in the secondary school phase. Although few teachers had written articles for Wikipedia, a larger number had edited existing articles. Several had also posted feedback. Most teachers tended to use the Wikipedia search box for locating information, although use of topic areas was also popular. Teachers were less inclined to view either featured or random articles. Teachers had high levels of confidence in the balance, neutrality, scope, accuracy and reliability of Wikipedia although this varied according to subject areas. Teachers were less confident about the notability and verifiability of Wikipedia articles. 11 A small minority of teachers wanted student access to Wikipedia blocked at school, although a larger minority advocated censorship, with a clean majority advocating no censorship. Very few teachers had consistently encountered articles showing bias, subtle viewpoint presentation or blatant vandalism although all of these were reported to have occurred on occasions. There were also high reported levels of articles found being factually correct and current. Teachers took a variety of viewpoints with respect to the encouragement of students using Wikipedia for research. It was often left to students’ discretion, with teachers neither encouraging nor discouraging its usage. Plagiarism was seen as an important issue with respect to Wikipedia with many teachers sometimes encountering student plagiarism. The approach to dealing with plagiarism varied to a great extent. Teachers were divided in their confidence of students’ knowledge of internet safety practices, with the balance tipped towards those who were confident. This left nearly half, however, who were not confident that students knew about internet safety.   

 Recommendations 

 As the survey was restricted to a small group of teachers, recommendations drawn from this study are restricted to teachers rather than students at this stage. The use of websites such as Wikipedia appears widespread and popular with teachers. Teacher training organisations and those responsible for the continuous professional development of teachers could incorporate the exploration of the use of wikis into their development programmes, especially issues relating to collaborative knowledge production through writing and editing. Teachers could be encouraged to contribute to the development of ways in which wikis can be a valuable part of teaching and learning, through the development of new approaches to research and publication. Teachers awareness of internet safety issues and the role of all staff in promoting responsible internet usage by students should be a priority with schools striving to achieve a balance between internet filtering and educating children to use the internet in a safe and reasonable way. All teachers could be involved in internet safety training. Issues relating to website vandalism should be addressed too, with consideration being given to the risk of vandalism if editing and writing on wikis were actively encouraged. Plagiarism also needs to be considered with teachers being given the tools to educate against and combat the occurrence of plagiarism of wikis by children. As well as the employment of online plagiarism filters, teachers could employ a range of strategies to ensure that children’s production of work is their own, 12 with material obtained from wikis by children being interpreted, triangulated with other sources and produced in forms that adds intellectual value to the source material. Teachers gave some interesting responses to the open-ended question Beyond finding information from the encyclopaedia what, if anything, can students learn from Wikipedia? and many of these responses may be useful in formulating innovative ways in which wikis can be used to enhance teaching and learning. New concepts of information neutrality and reliability emerges, with teachers recognising that information is sometimes unreliable and that knowledge is often subjective. They often highlighted the need for teaching of research skills and the important of crossreferencing and triangulating information. Associated with this is the need for teachers to be able to help students to discern bias and prejudice in information and the different ways in which misinformation may be presented. Teachers balanced out these concerns by discussing the ways in which Wikipedia lends itself to collaborative criticism and self-review. Teachers often saw the power of internet sites such as Wikipedia as being examples of democratic tools, representing a thirst for information and desire to contribute for free to the collective wisdom of society. Teachers discussed Wikipedia as being an outstanding example of the way in which knowledge may be openly maintained, created and shared. It is a challenge to schools to respond in ways that promote the learning opportunities of wikis whilst educating about the responsibilities involved in the use such open and transparent systems . Albin Wallace March 2009

Professor Stephen Heppell

Vodpod videos no longer available.

 

more about “Professor Stephen Heppell“, posted with vodpod