Ethics & Privacy criteria Webtools catalogue

In one of the courses I teach at my university called “Resources and ICT in education” -for students in the 1st year of the Primary Education Degree-, one of the most remarkable challenges is going beyond the instrumental training on ICT and effectively integrating the competencies for helping them to become a real Teacher Competent in the Digital era. And from this challenge, one of the most difficult parts, beyond the use of technology and even beyond the pedagogical implementation of technology, is helping them to address and manage an ethical and critical perspective of the use of technology, and of the technology itself.

Well, with the aim of working on this part of the course’s competencies, this year I propose to my students a specific assignment  (just before the Easter break) in which they explored the relationship between privacy, ethics and the tools they used, or those they intended their future students to use. Let me tell you the story:

After a mandatory introduction to the topic made in f2f class (more regarding the topic awareness than any kind of profound theoretical content), the first thing they had to do individually -and at home- was:

Watching 2 videos :

Then, they had to choose ONE tool (the one they wanted, a game, an app, a web tool) and pass the next two tools to it:

Then in class, in groups (6-7 each), they shared their findings and agreed (they did it, I was just there) on how to convert the results of these tool rubrics into a 1 to 5 stars tools rating (I have to point out the MANY interesting discussions that took place in that session).

As a final task, together they collectively create a GDocs including the analysed tools, with a short description and the tool’s rating from this star rating privacy perspective, and a link to the completed rubric.

Photo of the document in Google Drive with link to Google Drive

Furthermore, from that moment onwards and for the rest of the course, in ALL the assignments (including the exam), they were forced to include every tool they use in the tasks in the catalogue, and reflecting about the ethical perspective, so that it would not only be useful for this course now, but could also be useful for them, and why not for other teachers, in the future.

Until the 25th of May (the day of their final exam), they have included the classification of more than 75 tools and I hope that, having incorporated it into the way they work with technology, it will be useful as a revival of their approach to technology

Do I agree with their classification of the tools? is it correct? I think it doesn’t matter (sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn’t) but students have made decisions, they have analysed the tools, they have understood how classification works, what a rubric is, what some privacy criteria are… maybe when they finish their degree there will be other criteria or other perspectives… but the most important is that maybe some of those students will consider that these issues are important… and they will continue searching… maybe for some of them, some of this will start to be part of their PLE…

It is important to note that the important thing about this post is NOT the catalogue itself, which may be useful to someone or not. What is actually important is THE ACTIVITY, the TASK and what my students got out of it….

Next year maybe we’ll do another one… but it will be with other people… another river.

Very proud of my students… as always…

Challenges in the Knowledge Creation 2021

As a result of my participation in one of the lines of the next FIET 2021 (Fòrum Internacional d’Educació i Tecnologia), I have the privilege to debate in a working group in which we are reflecting on the main challenges that the current times propose for the models of knowledge production.  Some years ago, I have the good fortune of being part of an identical group at FIET 2014, which produced a document that I think is worth reviewing The educational landscape of the digital age: Communication practices pushing (us) forward, and now the challenge is to take another look at the issue and try to evaluate and, if necessary, refresh that reflection.

In the first part of our individual work, we have been thinking individually about what we consider the main challenges facing knowledge creation in our times, and I would like to share with you my contribution, which is also linked to the last post of this blog.

Following the trend of almost unpredictable acceleration that we have seen over the last 20 years, the last 5 years have seen a huge change in the way knowledge is produced. While the changes appear to be mere consequences of traditional processes, the fact is that there are issues where the quantitative change (in terms of the number of people using it, in terms of the processing technology behind it) has brought about huge qualitative challenges. I would like to point out some of them:

  • The exposure of a huge percentage of the population to the effective and daily use of technologies has changed the way people approach the creation of diverse content, from changes in the way users approach the creation of digital content (the type of tools they use and the amount of media they handle),  to noticeable changes in the communication code (greater preponderance of videos, less “fear” of the camera, enrichment of conversations towards transmedia uses) or, in the case of more advanced users, the creation of more hybrid materials that combine mixed realities and are immensely loaded with meaning.
  • New narrative models enabled by mass-use tools, e.g. the case of content production in Twitter threads, Instagram reels or the case of TikTok with its remixes, and how this generates different possibilities for the simple organisation of these new narratives – see this example: https://twitter.com/KalhanR/status/1391083690051129353?s=20 ). This challenge also refers to the creation of very high quality “live” collaborative content on video streaming platforms such as Twitch (a good example of this are Twich’s broadcasts of political events, especially those related to the 2020 US elections) or audio platforms such as Discord (used by my some of the students on its podcast job), Clubhouse and Stereo.
  • From the point of view of literary uses, some changes in the production models of art: literature, cinema were already mentioned in the 2015 work in an almost anecdotal way (stories told in twitts, e.g.) but have been further explored in recent years (e.g. https://carlesbellver.net/contes/unicorns/ ). There is also a challenge that for the moment is only in the minority, but which directly refers to the production of digital figurative art (with certificates of authenticity linked to bitcoin-like blockchains) and which moves in its own market.
  • The advance of automation mechanisms and the processing speed of AI has also generated an immense amount of “fake” content (fake videos, automated texts) pose at least two complementary challenges:
    • The educational importance of critical thinking skills for the digital world with an emphasis not only on education and re-education programmes for children and schoolchildren but to somehow address the education and re-education of adults and older adults who find themselves completely lacking in thinking tools to face the new information scenario.
    • The profound rethinking of the type of content on which academic knowledge is based and the purpose of certain practices in the educational world. To focus the conversation, I am concerned, as I have already told you, about the relevance of the current format of literature review sections in school or academic papers, understood as part of training, in the face of the boom and the extraordinary success of tools such as https://smodin.me/, or the online companies that create academic papers, which are already having an impact on debates in large universities about the meaning of certain practices.
  • From a much more positive perspective, this increase in the speed of automation mechanisms has allowed tools that generate alternative content to the formats already created to improve enormously (the case of tools that generate automatic subtitles or simultaneous sound translation, or combined tools such as Blackboard’s Ally), broadening and deepening the possibilities of accessibility, which puts the focus back on human intervention and on raising awareness of the importance of accessibility not as an “extra possibility” but as an obligation in the production of knowledge.
  • I think one of the biggest challenges in terms of knowledge creation has to do with influence. The mechanisms by which certain power groups exert their influence on the content that is created and on people’s knowledge are becoming more and more subtle but more important. Understanding how these mechanisms work can be one of the great challenges in educating the influenced and in promoting certain sources of influence.
  • In these times of content creation, the challenge of making content creation teams visible is becoming increasingly important. Classical citation standards (surname only, first author “et al”) do not meet these standards.
  • The broadening of distribution channels to wider geographical spectrums and the decolonisation of discourses is a growing challenge.

I think there is a challenge that is perennial in this society of overabundance, the challenge of curating the content that is consumed and generating its own knowledge. One of the challenges is how to equip people with tools (technological and personal) that allow them to curate the content they want to consume in an efficient and ethically desirable way.

These are not simple issues and certainly far beyond the capacity of our personal efforts to respond to such important and complex challenges, but like everything else in the world, I think the first part is to recognise them and understand that they are not the only ones, not the most important ones, but they are there and they are part of our immediate future of human development with technology.

Learning in TikTok: about plagiarism, IA and being on the shoulders of giants

A video with an on-the-fly reflection on the need to seriously rethink models of knowledge production and the importance and format of theoretical reviews in social sciences. Thanks to TikTok and the Instagram reels from which I am learning so much 🙂

REFERENCES

Daanen, H., & Facer, K. L. (2007). 2020 and beyond: Future scenarios for education in the age of new technologies. Futurelab.

Students’Task: A Podcast about The Hour of Coding

Computational thinking and developments in educational robotics are part of the content of the subject I work on with students in the first year of the degree in primary education. However, this year, due to the working conditions with the students (blended learning and express prohibition of any kind of physical interaction or exchange of materials in the face-to-face sessions), it was difficult for me to think about how to get them to explore the subject, to see its possibilities and not just a “theoretical” approach to the issue.

So I decided to propose as a weekly task an exploration of the activities of The Hour of Code, a project that is helping teachers all over the world to get introduced to coding as an introduction to Computational Thinking. My proposal (which is framed in the group working conditions, by performance roles that some of you already know) included that they should:

  • try at least three activities from https://hourofcode.com/us/gb/learn. Choose the three of them from those classified on Grades 2 to 5. Choose at least one to be used on Poor or not internet conditions, and another with NO computers or devices; the third one do not have more requirements.
  • Collecting evidences of the process and document the experience in your performance blog.
  • Answer some questions such as: What level would be appropriate for this? What is(are) the objective(s) of this task follow the Bloom Taxonomy? What content/standard from the curriculum would be suitable to be developed with this activity? What is the added value of using digital tools in this case? What ethical problems could you (or your students or the parents) find doing this activity in the classroom? What changes do you need to make to allow your students to do it from home?

All the weekly assignments we do in class are presented to the rest of the class members in big group sessions so that we can receive feedback and also learn from each other’s work, but we try to do each of these presentations in a format that is also set up as subject content. So, this time we tried something different, I asked the groups to create, during the class period (and without any prior training), a podcast about their experience.

When I gave them the instructions for the assignment I told them that they should make a podcast in class but I did not tell them the conditions of the content. The same day of the class, I gave them the conditions which were that they should create a radio programme (in the audio tool -podcast or audio, social network- of their choice) and that this programme should tell the story of the assignment and must include:

  • Welcome and goodbye clips
  • An advertisement for the Webpage “The Hour of Code.”
  • Two main clips:
    • Interview regarding the experience
    • A story about your experience
  • A reflection about the importance of using this kind of activities in the classroom.

The complete duration of the radio program can not exceed 15 minutes and must be of mínimum 8 minutes.

You already know that I am a big fan of my students, so I want to share with you the artifacts they have presented, not only because I have been surprised by their self-confidence and good work, but also because the content of the reflections of my students has pleasantly surprised me (I insist that they are works made in less than 2 hours of work and WITHOUT previous experience in podcasting).

Here you have got some of them to listen to ;-):


Click on the pictures to listen to the podcasts 😉

Congrats to my students!! I’m very proud of you!!

At the end of the course, I’ll publish all the task guides that I have used this year.

An online visiting, or the virtual mmobility

Since last February I have had the immense pleasure of accompanying Ximena Forero, professor at the Faculty of Communication and researcher at the University of Antioquia (Colombia) on her research stay at the University of Murcia. Yes, as you read, she did her pre-doctoral research stay at UM in the middle of the CoVid-19 pandemic, or at least that was the initial plan. However, as her stay became urgent and the pandemic has been increasingly unpredictable (and tragic), our institutions decided to give the green light to “online visitings”… and what does that mean? Well, this week the stay is over and we decided to do a “final” session and record a video in which we talk a bit about how, why and what an online stay is (just in Spanish unfortunately), we hope you find it interesting, even if it’s just a little bit.

Oh, and dear Ximena, you are always welcome! come back many more times… thanks a lot for “coming”