Learning your copy(rights)...

"Copyright 101," by attorney Kate Thompson, is a great outline of the key points in intellectual property or copyright laws. The basis of copyright law is that people should be able to receive compensation for creative works and have control over how their work is distributed or used. Only the owner of the copyright may reproduce the work, create works derived from it, distribute or sell the rights to their work, and perform or display it publicly. However, fair use allows copyrighted material to be used for educational use, as long as you aren't just trying to avoid buying the materials. Educational use means that it copyrighted materials can be used for "teaching, scholarship, and research." Courts use four criterion to decide whether or not using copyrighted materials falls under fair use. They example the purpose of the use, and determine whether or not it had any commercial benefit, the nature of the work (if it's fact-based or creative), how much of the work was used, and whether or not the use would hurt the income that could be generated by the copyrighted work. Thompson provides examples of fair use and instances of copyright violation. For instance, a teacher can copy an article from a magazine and use it in their curriculum as long as the article is only for personal use, and he or she could even make multiple copies to solely be used in the classroom of that specific article. Videos can also be shown for educational use, as long as no admission price is charged. An example of copyright violation would be copying an entire textbooks (or a large majority) for a classroom so that the textbook doesn't have to be purchased. Finally, Thompson talks about works that in the public domain, meaning their copyrights were created before 1923, or the works were created by the U.S. federal government. She mentioned to be careful because many works do have exceptions, and a book form may be in public domain, but a film of the same story may not be.

I thought this was a good outline, and applicable to our class since we are starting to incorporate copyrighted materials into our presentations and coursework. I would say it was VERY broad, and brought up questions of how much is too much to use of a work before it becomes a violation. I also began to wonder especially how music falls into this category. Because I teach piano, I often have to tweak certain music arrangements for students, but I often wonder if this is copyright infringement, or if it falls under fair use for education and how much I can change, and whether or not it could be performed. Anyway, I believe this article made me want to learn more about the "gray areas" of copyright law, and made me think more consciously about making sure that I am very careful not to partake in copyright infringement.

This article can be found in ISTE Learning and Leading with Technology Vol. 32. No.9 , June/August 2005.

Point/Counterpoint: Is Gender Still an Issue?

"Has the Gender Gap Closed?" poses this very question to both contributors of the article, Gertrude Abramson and Chris Stephenson. Abramson argues that both genders now have an equal opportunity and college courses have a mix of female and male students that would have been unheard of even twenty years ago. She argues that women are represented and excel in professions that have been historically "male" and that women are certainly catching up in the domains of science, engineering, and math. Abramson does admit that she feels women are not nearly as equipped in educational technology and that the "digital gap" still exists. Stephenson argues that while the gap is closing, there is still a huge gap between male and female students when it comes to computer science, and that national studies on computer science curriculum have found it to be distant, unappealing, and at times, even hostile towards women. She also agrees that math, science and engineering have become much more accessible careers and areas of study for women, but that computer science is an area that women not only do not excel in, but are not given an equal opportunity to do so. While it has improved in the last twenty years, Stephenson highlights that only 28.4% of the bachelor’s degrees in computer science are awarded to women, and only "5.7% of full-time professors in computer science were women." She argues that the entire culture of computer science discourages women from studying it and certainly from pursuing a career in the field.

After reading this article, I began to think that both of these authors actually held fairly similar views, it's just that Stephenson highlighted how huge the gap between men and women in computer science actually is. I tend to see valid points in both arguments. I think today that in most fields, women do have an equal (or nearly equal) opportunity as men to succeed academically, BUT that their social and cultural expectations, background, and manner and attitude in which certain subjects are presented may hinder their ability to fulfill these potentials. When I read Stephenson's article, I also began to wonder if the gap in computer science comes down to more than just a hostile environment, but a general lack of interest. To me personally, that sounds like a horribly boring major, in all honesty. That doesn't mean that I don't want to learn about technology and have a good working knowledge of computers and their software. There are definitely fields that women tend to excel in, but that more males are entering such as nursing, etc. In speech-language pathology, the field I wish to pursue, there are far more women than men, but it's probably more of an accessibility and general interest issue. However, if coursework and general attitudes towards women studying and entering the fields of computer science are in fact, biased and hostile, this needs to be changed to give both genders an equal opportunity.

This article can be found in ISTE Learning and Leading with Technology Vol. 34. No.2 , May 2006.

Mentoring: A New Way to Help Girls Step Outside of the Gender Box

"Getting Girls E.X.I.T.E.D. about Project Management," by Bjorn Norstrom, Carol Smith, Annika Haglund, describes a program, called E.X.I.T.E., that paired female IBM engineers with female students at a middle school in Colvester, Vermont. The hands-on project hoped to get female students who typically don't pursue careers in science, technology, and engineering to develop a proactive interest in the field, and to become more assertive in project management. The mentors from IBM formed a long-term relationship with the students from Colvester Middle School and visited them several times during the given school year. The students were assigned the task of designing, building, and managing a pet day care, and were required to keep "documentation" of their interactions with their fictitious client. The girls involved in this project learned how to use a number of technological tools, including basic skills such as proper phone etiquette, word processing, basic database management, voice recorders, and Internet use. However, these students also utilized more sophisticated tools such as design software, web and video editing programs, and multimedia programs to create a commercial advertising their program. At the completion of their project, the Colvester students presented what they had learned to their parents, school staff, and their IBM mentors.

I particularly enjoyed that the girls were able to build a mentorship relationship with the IBM engineers, and make engineering, math, and science more appealing to female students. I personally believe that many of the testing and performance differences between male and female students in math and science simply have to do with socialized concepts of which genders are good at which subjects approaching the subject material in an unappealing manner. I think we see a similar performance gap in male students in language arts because traditionally, they are not presented in a hands-on, approachable format. This project was fantastic because it was long-term, and is certainly something that the students will remember. The fact that these girls became excited and personally involved in such a complex project was not just a way to get them excited about math and science, but also seemed to build their confidence. The writers of the article said that many girls that were noticeably introverted gained confidence in managing the project and were actually excited to present their work at its conclusion.

This article can be found in ISTE Learning and Leading with Technology Vol. 36. No. 3, November 2008.

Schools: The New Prisons?

The response to U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's proposal to increase the length of the school year and weekly schedule comes with alarming responses as Diana Fingal highlights in her article, "One Man's School is Another Man's Prison." According to the article, Duncan stated that he believes that schools should be up and running 6 days a week for 11 months of the year. Because of the failing economy and job outsourcing to other countries, Duncan believes that more time in school will help students improve their test scores in order to compete with international students. Diana Fingal listed several responses of educators that were outraged at this suggestion, including a blogger named David Warlick, who suggested that school would become a retention facility similar to jail should these changes be implemented. One comment that I personally resonated with was that "They (kids) don’t need more school. They need better school." An American educator who works in Korea, named Kelsey Freeman, discussed how Korean students are in school on a similar schedule, but have no passion for learning and "have no lives outside of school." All of the comments believed that extending school hours would be a decision with huge negative consequences for both students and teachers.

When I read this article, my guttural response was, "Six days a week?!?" Really?" This is a heated issue that has incredible political implications, but I truly believe that the budget cuts and shortage of teachers that have resulted from our flailing economy could not support extending school hours. The teaching programs that currently exist are struggling to survive in spite of massively decreased funding. The test scores of American students especially in mathematics and science are appalling, I won't disagree with that, but forcing students to attend more school time isn't going to motivate students or ensure that they receive quality, efficient instruction. Comparing American students to students in India in China isn't necessarily the best basis of comparison, either. Perhaps, they are both two unhealthy ends of the spectrum. In my personal experience, I teach music lessons to a family that recently moved to California from Chinese Taipei, and have listened to their opinions regarding the American school system. Their consensus is that American school standards are too low. I tend to agree. However, they believe that their education in Taiwan was far too time consuming and didn't allow them to pursue any other interests besides homework. While I don't have any specific solutions as to how to efficiently improve the quality of the American school system (that''s a complex issue that would take more than just a blog to address), I'm not at all convinced that just adding more hours into the school week is the best solution.

This article can be found in ISTE Learning and Leading with Technology Vol. 36. No. 8, June/July 2009.

Shows Us the Money! How to Petition for Tech Tools in Your Classroom.

Davis Brock realizes that school districts won't just throw money around for technological tools when educators demand them, as he discusses in his article, "Show Us the Money! Planning and Preparation Can Help Get You Ed Tech Stimulus Funding." In order to get adequate funding for new technology, he suggests that creativity and a lot of preparation is required. He recommends that anyone trying to tap into stimulus funding for educational technology ought to consider several factors before they try and snag this much desired "moo-la." He believes that teachers should research the technology policies and plans of their schools, find empirical evidence that actually proves the technology is beneficial, and make a pitch for funds. Including success stories of other schools that have implemented and gained great benefit from such technology is key, as well as including training and professional development for all educators that will use the prospective tools so that they are being used at full potential. Brock also emphasizes the importance of having professional and aesthetically pleasing documents to present to higher-ups and that building relationships with these people is just as important. This should not only include "schmoozing" board members and principals, but also asking for widespread input so that your proposal is truly a collaborative process. Lastly, the article says that you must "keep knocking on the door." Ask for feedback, send updates, and don't become discouraged if the "fish doesn't bite" the first time. Tenacity is key. Even if your school doesn't approve funding this time, they are more likely to consider you in the future if you show determination to gain funding for technology tools.

I thought this article was a great way to encourage teachers and those working in schools to form sound strategies for funding proposals. Being specific in what is needed in the classroom, how it will help students, and how it can practically be purchased and implemented is a better way of asking for money than just a simple request for new tools. I can foresee using a lot of technology software to help students with speech and language disorders, but it is incredibly expensive at times. If I find research articles that can show how specific programs helped students with speaking or reading abilities, I already have improved my pitch greatly. Technology shouldn't just be frivolous in the classroom. It should be carefully selected and useful, not just purchased for the sake of having it. I also think that persistence is key, and even if you're sure that you will be initially denied funds, you should still try by continuing to use research to convince higher-ups that you are asking for beneficial tools that will truly transform students' educational and life experiences. This may mean that I will have to revise my initial plans or compromise when I am requesting funds, but the goal is not just to gain spending power, but to help students with technology tools in whatever ways possible.

This article can be found in ISTE Learning & Learning with Technology Vol. 37, No. 1, August 2009.

As You See "IT:" Educators, Attitudes, and Learning Styles

Kimberly Ketterer's "Coach, Nurture or Nudge: How do you do technology best?" proposes three styles of learning that educators prefer when they are instructed about how to best integrate technological tools into pedagogical practice. The three styles that Ketterrer proposes are coaching, nurturing and nudging. (As if the title didn't give that away!) The learning category that I neatly placed myself into was the coaching style because I self-identify as someone who is generally computer literate, and I am willing and able to learn new programs when they are given to me. Like those who wish to be coached, I need to be challenged to try new and innovative ideas and need a trusted individual to encourage and push me into improving my technological abilities rather than becoming complacent in my skills. The next category was the educator who required a nurturing mentor who could help them build confidence in his or her "fuzzy" and underdeveloped skills. Finally, the educator who needs a nudge is the probably that teacher that refuses to learn how to operate WebCT, can't respond to e-mail, and generally don't see a need for technology in the classroom. These educators lack the initiative and drive of the first two types described and have to be pushed, pulled, and possibly coerced into using even a computer and other types of tech tools in the classroom (and probably at home too). Ketterer argues that educators who are unwilling to integrate technology into the classroom are creating a "hole" in students education.

With all of the emphasis on learning styles today, I think that this article makes the point that people learning technology also have varying methods and attitudes towards the process. I remember having some very primitive computers in the classroom when I was growing up. However, they weren't really integrated into our learning well. In fact, I only recall using my classroom computer to play Oregon Trail during days when I finished my work early. The lack of technology wasn't a problem, but the teachers' attitudes towards learning and integrating computers into our classroom certainly was. To this day, I have an association between teachers and poor computer skills. My teachers could not and did not want to use technology in their curriculum or instruction and had no desire or real incentive to do so. However, this article reminded me that we are in a new age of teaching and technology, and not all teachers fall into the "nudge" category that Ketterer described. In order to better equip students for the technological world we live in, educators must integrate these tools into the learning process. As a future speech pathologist who will be working alongside educators, I have to be aware of their level of technological abilities and encourage and educate those who need help by identifying their learning style and guiding appropriately. I also have to keep an open mind and constantly be searching for new technological tools while looking to colleagues and experts for new ideas and input on which tools are effective so that they can personally "coach" me. Using the learning styles described in this article, I can identify students and colleague's learning styles and help them according to how they prefer to learn.

This article can be found in ISTE Learning & Learning with Technology Vol. 34, No. 8, May 2007.

"Too Cool for School?" Probably not...

Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler discuss the fusion of fun and learning through the use of technology in their article, "Too Cool for School? No Way!"

With the growing use of technology for recreational purposes, this leaves educators with the question of how gadgets and technological tools generally used for convenience can be transformed into educational resources. Specifically mentioned by the authors is the need to "repurpose" technology for the classroom, keeping in mind that technology that is considered "cutting edge' to students is far more advanced than the tech tools that many teachers generally use. Through the use of their proposed TPACK model for integration of technology into learning, Mishra and Koehler believe that technology must be combined with a pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge of specific learning objectives, or the use of tech tools are rendered useless in the learning process. I examined three specific examples of microblogging, specialized search engines, and DJ software that can be adapted for more than just casual use, and through the tweaking of an intentional educator can become relevant means of allowing students an exploratory educational experience. I especially appreciated the example of using DJ music mixing software as a means of explaining mathematical concepts by comparing them to music tempos and patterns. As a pianist and music teacher, I thought that this was a fantastic idea because I often inadvertently teach my students fractions when I teach them about tempo in music.

Personally, I felt the underlying theme of using creativity and adaptability in regards to using technology in education was incredibly important. Many teachers would never consider the idea that blogging or using a search engine could be a valuable learning experience in their classroom. The idea that teachers use technology that seems incredibly outdated to their students is generally true. In an age where assignments and homework are going paperless as well as the general workforce, it's time that the classroom caught on. As far as how I would personally apply this article to my future profession, I would say that keeping an open mind to the use of technology is the best lesson I can take away from this article. If I find that I have students who might be able to improve their speech through the use of a music software program or could use a video chat program to make a conversation more comfortable, then I would consider using it as part of their therapy and always keep an open mind to new technological possibilities. I also can't use technology for the sake of using technology. It's often a valuable tool when integrated in the learning process, but it absolutely must be relevant and effective for students and not just a novelty.

This article can be found in the Learning & Leading with Technology Archives, May 2009, Vol. 36, No.7.