Part1 Confronting the Challenges of the Participatory Culture

Interestingly enough, as I have had more experiences with the computer in the class we are taking with Bryan and as I have done more research on the internet concerning our last unit project, I have come to understand this article more. I have also realized I am agreeing more with the points and the conclusion of the article.
(But I'll get to some of this in Part 2: pages 32- 61.

O.K., at first I was irritated with this article. It seemed to be too long, going on and on forever. However, as I reconciled myself to the length of the article (Chapter?), I di begin to pick out some points I thought were worth summarizing and commenting on.

The article stated that most computer professional development focuses on how to use technology. I think this is often true; however, at this point many teachers still need the "how to do it" type of technology information. I do! I can see myself getting some of that info. on my own with my own money, perhaps at a community college. I can also see that just by "playing around" I am learning, or re-learning, many skills and processes on the computer. On the other hand, I think its fantastic that SalemKeizer School District has classes routinely available for its own district's teachers. The classes really should be called very quick workshops as often they are an intro. to what the teacher wants to know rather than a longer period (class) where there is time to begin to get better at any skill that is demonstrated. I have taken several of these "mini-workshop/classes"; however, I seldom have time to play around with what has been presented to me.

In regards to how technology can transform education, I think it already has (at least to some degree). I believe that the more comfortable teachers get with using the technology on their own, perhaps even in their personal life, the more the teachers will desire to use it with students. Also, some teachers are leading the way in using technology with students. This causes me to see the possiblities in real-life (instead if theoretically in an article on-line)and want to learn more so I can confidently use technology in appropriate ways. (We have only one teacher at our school that is using Power Point with 5th grade students. However, she's excited about what the kids have mastered and her enthusiasm is catching!)

At first, I wasn't impressed with the term "participatory culture" because too often I have not seen the computer used to really be involved with the culture. Instead, I have seen people draw away from other people, sometimes having "relationships" with someone on the internet. That would be o.k. if this was indeed a person who was who they said they were. But I have had friends who started their relationship on the internet and when they got together could not live up to the image they had projected on-line. To me, this was a "nonreality" and it could have happened in person. People do misrepresent themselves in all kinds of ways, however, it seems to me that it's easier to misrepresent yourself on the computer. Why? Body language isn't available, there often is more time for the person to respond on-line than there is in person, tone of voice isn't involved, and people obviously can use fake names and entire identities. As adults, we are very much aware of all these possiblities. As teachers, we can see children have a limited perspective and often
believe what they are told by anyone. (They are still forming who they are and what is reality versus non-reality. They also are still transforming the beliefs about self, others, and the world.) Even teenagers have this limited perspective simply because they are young and have not been around enough to see all that happens in our world. Furthermore, they often don't attune themselves to the news---it may not make sense to them due to the vocabulary and pace of one news story after another.

All of the above is to say, that children and teens can play/practice at "participatory culture" but, for most, it is quite different than an adult would experience the same "participatory culture".

The "participatory culture" as described in the chapter included the following features: low barriers to creative expression; encouragement and support for sharing one's work with others; an informal mentor program that allows more technologically experienced students to help those less experienced; students may often feel that their contributions are important (because they are shared with others) and they experience a "connection" to others. The authors point out that games on the computer, simulations, and communications give student-users a "non-threatening environment." Students see these activites as "fun" and not real work, although they may be learning skills for their future careers.

While the chapter takes a culture-large-view approach, I can only compare what is said to my small-view approach (i.e. my school, my world, what I see/think on a daily basis in Salem, Oregon). I'm sure this accounts for some of the dis crepancies I have with the article.

Also, the article comes across very idealistic to me. Educators can change the world, however, it will be in small daily steps with their students. Yes, we do create a ripple effect, our teaching is passed from one-student to someone(s) they interact with but any culture change will happen over relatively longer amounts of time. (Though in some other ways, advances in technology itself is moving extremely quickly, not to mention our culture/society as a result is changing more rapidly than past U.S. history.) Rome really wasn't built in a day! Beyond this, there is a part of me that rebels at having all the responsibility dumped on educators. So many factors effect an individual and how they in turn act on and effect our culture.

On page 12, the article addresses three core prooblems with not directly teaching technology: 1) the participation gap; 2)the transparency problem; and 3) the ethics
challenge.

The article cites some places (like Philadelphia, Boston, and Cambridge)where high-speed wireless Internet can be accessed for free. It also talks about a non-profit agency in Philadelphia that provides free network access to its shelter residents.
Furthermore, the author states that students often have access through schools or public librarys. While this is often true, I know that at our school the students come from poverty circumstances. They may not even have access to bus fare money to get to the public library. Furthremore, access to computers at school are limited by the number of partipants that can be involved at one time and to the classroom schedule of each child. This doesn't even include the fact that supervision is necessary at public schools. Students may simply be denied because no adult is available to be in the computer lab. So, at best, computer access is "limited" if the student does not come from a "middle class home."

Equal computer access/availability for all students is an idealistic dream. With limited budgets, pressure on teachers' time schedule due to having "testing" take up so much of the school day, and the fact that children who have the most computer experience may not "share" the computer in a group situation, there will always be digital "haves" and "have nots".


Second is the transparency problem. Students have to be able to "think backwards" on their experiences, to reflect on their experiences. They must be able to tell the difference between what is real and reliable and what is not. In games and simulations, children often assume there are no biases. They may actuaaly believe that the computer automatically conveys only reality and truth. As adults know, this often is not the case.

Finally, the issue of ethics must be approached with students. What once was seen only by their classmates, may now be seen by many around the world (if placed on-line). This may cause some real physical dangers, or simply some unwanted attention from others. The author contends that "cyberspace's ethical norms are in flux".
Furthrmore, the author believes that having discussions about ethical concerns may be more valuable than having strict rules or even guidelines. He believes that the process of discovering our own ethics, and the process of finding our ethical concerns about others, will help everyone "to recognize and articulate the differrent assumptions that guide their behavior".

(I am continually reminded, as I am reading this article, that the article was written about adolescents not elementary students. However, most of these issues relate in the same wya with this much younger school population.)