There are positives and negatives when comparing the Surrey and the Calgary district policies as far as what is best for teachers and students. It depends on how you look at it. I can see how the CBE’s policy could give parents some reassurance in that it is very restrictive, thus giving parents a sense or possibly a false sense of protection for their children from sites that may or may not be appropriate. However, with regard to what I feel is best for teachers and students, I would have to choose the Surrey Districts policy.
I feel that the Surrey School district’s policy is best for teachers and students. The Surrey School district’s policy is less restrictive than the CBE’s policy. I believe that for learning to be truly reflective of the world we live in today, we need to embrace the tools of today. To limit the use of some tools is limiting learning in all sense of the word. For a small panel to decide what is acceptable and what is not acceptable for use, to me, sounds almost like a dictatorship. Do I understand the challenges that are faced with the use of some tools? Yes. I think we have to be careful. It is really important to make sure that the tools we are using are well researched and that we have a good rationale for using them. We also need to make sure that we inform parents of the possible risks of the tools we are using so that they can make informed decisions regarding if they want to allow their child to use the tool or not.
When I read that the CBE district did not allow Twitter, for example, to be used, I was actually quite shocked. Why? Because you can be sure that most of the students in their district are already using Twitter. Would it not be better to have some guidance and support through educators with the use of this tool? Instead what the CBE district is doing is giving the impression that Twitter is not acceptable, when in fact, it can be a tremendous learning tool. If educators are not using Twitter to show students that it can be used as a debating tool, or for sharing links, and ideas with others, then those students will have missed out on a very valuable tool which could further their learning. Children will use tools that are “in” so why not be “in” with them? I make the analogy of if a child sees something on T.V. that may be deemed inappropriate, do we freak out and put a lock on the channel and never let that child watch other programs on that channel? Well, maybe there are good things on that channel in which he/she could learn a lot from. Or do we guide the child with discussion around what they saw, and teach them to be self-directing and discriminatory in the shows they watch. Is it not better to teach children the skills to know what is ok and what is not ok and to make the right choices in life? We do this in all other aspects of raising/teaching children, why should using Web 2.0 tools be any different.
In conclusion, I feel that educators are the best people to make qualified decisions on what and how tools are used in their classrooms. Of course there needs to be guidelines with which to follow, however why limit the possibilities because a panel of a few deems something to be unacceptable for the whole.
I feel that the Surrey School district’s policy is best for teachers and students. The Surrey School district’s policy is less restrictive than the CBE’s policy. I believe that for learning to be truly reflective of the world we live in today, we need to embrace the tools of today. To limit the use of some tools is limiting learning in all sense of the word. For a small panel to decide what is acceptable and what is not acceptable for use, to me, sounds almost like a dictatorship. Do I understand the challenges that are faced with the use of some tools? Yes. I think we have to be careful. It is really important to make sure that the tools we are using are well researched and that we have a good rationale for using them. We also need to make sure that we inform parents of the possible risks of the tools we are using so that they can make informed decisions regarding if they want to allow their child to use the tool or not.
When I read that the CBE district did not allow Twitter, for example, to be used, I was actually quite shocked. Why? Because you can be sure that most of the students in their district are already using Twitter. Would it not be better to have some guidance and support through educators with the use of this tool? Instead what the CBE district is doing is giving the impression that Twitter is not acceptable, when in fact, it can be a tremendous learning tool. If educators are not using Twitter to show students that it can be used as a debating tool, or for sharing links, and ideas with others, then those students will have missed out on a very valuable tool which could further their learning. Children will use tools that are “in” so why not be “in” with them? I make the analogy of if a child sees something on T.V. that may be deemed inappropriate, do we freak out and put a lock on the channel and never let that child watch other programs on that channel? Well, maybe there are good things on that channel in which he/she could learn a lot from. Or do we guide the child with discussion around what they saw, and teach them to be self-directing and discriminatory in the shows they watch. Is it not better to teach children the skills to know what is ok and what is not ok and to make the right choices in life? We do this in all other aspects of raising/teaching children, why should using Web 2.0 tools be any different.
In conclusion, I feel that educators are the best people to make qualified decisions on what and how tools are used in their classrooms. Of course there needs to be guidelines with which to follow, however why limit the possibilities because a panel of a few deems something to be unacceptable for the whole.