The Schinker Family

For the last 20 years, I’ve had this love-hate relationship with computer programming. I took a high school programming course at the suggestion of a math teacher, and found that I enjoyed it and was relatively good at it. I liked the idea of controlling the machine — deciding what I want it to do, and giving it the commands to do it. I was the puppeteer. I was pulling the strings.

This led to taking a structured programming class as an elective my first year in college, which led to my adding “computer science education” as a major.

Unfortunately, at that time, nobody really had any idea what a computer science education major should know, so they basically just told me to get a minor in systems analysis. I took data structures. That was kind of fun. I learned about stacks and queues and linked lists and trees and all sorts of things I don’t understand anymore. I learned Cobol (why?) and Fortran (why?) before finding out that I had inadvertently skipped the first class and had to go back and learn BASIC. Then it was on to IBM mainframe assembly language.

None of this had any real relevance in the world of education. No schools had IBM mainframes. I might get to teach a little BASIC and Pascal. If I was really fortunate, I could teach C (which, oddly, was about the only language that wasn’t required). The college of education predicted that we were going to leave the university and get jobs teaching high school computer science, where we’d be using the only computers schools had available — the Apple IIe. So in our methods courses, we learned 6502 Assembler, how to build analog-to-digital converts to interface with the Apple II, and how to program in LOGO. (The programming part of LOGO, not just the turtle graphics stuff).

By the end of all this, I had had enough of programming. I got a job teaching middle school computer applications. I was teaching students to use productivity applications. The closest I got to programming was writing spreadsheet formulas. Two years later I switched jobs, and inherited another middle school course that had previously been a programming class. “Irrelevant,” I declared. “The kids don’t need to know this stuff.” I taught productivity tools, some Internet basics, and the concept of hypermedia. The closest I got to programming was teaching them HTML from scratch. Now that I look back on it, I’m amazed at what those kids could do, simply because they didn’t know it was supposed to be hard.

I eventually did get a job teaching high school programming. I taught Visual Basic for two years. I always felt it was an awkward language, and that it doesn’t serve the students very well. I’ve been disappointed twice that they’ve kept the same language in place when revising the courses of study. While I can’t say I didn’t like teaching programming, I also wasn’t too sad when my duties shifted into other directions.

I’ve always advocated for teaching kids to use technology to be productive in non-technical ways. Use email and the Internet as communication tools. Use word processors to make your writing better, to simplify editing, and to make professional-looking documents. Use spreadsheets to organize data, answer “what-if” questions, and draw conclusions based on the numbers. Use presentation tools to augment the message you’re delivering in the presentation. There have been many variations on this theme, but I’ve never strongly advocated for learning about the machine for its own sake. So I’ve never really pushed programming.

Apparently, I’m not alone. According to Carnegie Mellon University, the number of computer science majors declined by more than 60% between 2000 and 20004. In the same time period, the number of females majoring in computer science declined by 80%. Some point to the lack of emphasis on the more technical side of computing as a major contributor to this decline. People like me are de-emphasizing how computers work in favor of an emphasis on how we work with computers.

Two recent projects are aiming to change this. Scratch is a programming environment designed for 8- to 16-year-old students by the MIT Media Lab. In it, kids combine graphics, pictures, video, and audio in new, innovative ways. At the same time, they can snap programming blocks together to control how the elements are displayed, or how the computer user can interact with them. Windows and Mac versions of the free program are available on the project web site. There are also lots of teacher resources and an envrionment for students to share their creations.

For older students, Carnegie Mellon has developed the Alice environment. It can be used to create 3-D animated worlds, with characters that move around and interact. It’s a great way to tell a story, create an interactive game, or make a video to share online. It’s targeted especially toward the middle school and high school crowd, with an emphasis on attracting girls. Like Scratch, it’s easy to use, allowing you to drag and drop the various elements to determine how they interact on the screen.

The thing that’s striking about both of these tools is that they’re teaching programming while doing other things. They’re teaching kids to be good problem solvers, innovative thinkers, and collaborators. That’s meeting half of the 21st Century Skills. If they happen to learn a little programming while they’re at it, and maybe decide that they like telling machines what to do, so much the better.

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be taking a closer look at both of these tools.

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite

In the first part of this series, we examined the issue of cybersafety. Hopefully, we dispelled some myths and put the issue into perspective. While it’s important to protect our kids online, and it’s important to teach them to protect themselves, it is not at all likely that our children will become the victims of cybercrime, even if they haven’t been schooled on the best practices to avoid online predators. Now, we’ll start getting into the more useful stuff. This is the condensed overview — the sound byte version of how to keep kids safe online. The biggest thing to remember is that we’re balancing a lot of factors here. Consider this analogy, which comes from the Byron Review:

This is no different to how we think about managing risk for children in the offline world, where decreasing supervision and monitoring occurs with age as we judge our children to be increasing in their competence to identify and manage risks. So, when we teach our children to cross the road safely we do it in stages:

• We hold their hand when they cross the road.
• We teach them to think, look both ways and then cross.
• When we see that they are starting to understand this we let them cross walking beside us, without holding on to them.
• Eventually we let them do it alone, maybe watching from a distance at first, but then unsupervised.
• And throughout this, the environment supports them with signs and expected behaviour from others in the community – the green man, zebra crossings, speed limits and other responsible adults.

Depending on the age and experience of the child, then, you have to take measures to both protect and teach. As they become more experienced online, we also have to loosen the reins a little. Then, there are inevitably the elements of trust and privacy that will come into play as children move through adolescence. There aren’t any hard and fast rules for when changes need to take place. It all depends on the children, the parents, and the relationships between them. That being said, here are some boiler-plate suggestions for getting started:

Put the computer in a public place: If the computer is in the kitchen (as ours is) or in the family room, or in some other public part of the house, children are much less likely to do things online they know they’re not supposed to do. You don’t have to constantly look over their shoulders — you can see what they’re doing from across the room or just by walking by. It allows you to monitor what’s going on without giving the impression that you’re spying.

Give them a place to start: Set your computer’s home page to a kid-friendly starting place. Use a tool like Protopage to provide links to sites they use frequently. Embed some kid-friendly search tools. If they’re always starting with a Google search box, they could end up anywhere.

Set time limits: Just as children shouldn’t be spending hours on end in front of the TV, they shouldn’t be spending hours and hours online. Set reasonable limits based on the age of the children, other activities and responsibilities they have, and the needs of others in the family to have access to the technology.

Discuss “private” versus “public”: Children need to understand that there are some things we can share with people online, and there are other things we should keep private. Many children are confused by the online concept of “friend.” Online friends in social networks can’t necessarily be trusted as much as you’d trust a friend from school.

Monitor one-on-one communication: If your child has an email account, configure it to send copies of all of the messages to you. If you can set limits on who they can send and receive email from, do it. My first and third graders both have their own email accounts, but they can only email their parents and grandparents, and Mom and Dad get copies of all of their messages.

Learn about the technology: You can’t keep up with all of the buzzwords and technologies. You probably have some idea about Myspace and Facebook. Do you know what Twitter is? How about ooVoo? Pownce? Parents of younger kids probably have a good idea about what Webkinz is. But do you know about Bella Sara? If you’re looking for a great place to get an overview of a lot of new web tools, check out the Common Craft videos. Google has partnered with Common Sense Media to help parents and educators teach children to be safe online. This video gives a good overview of many of the issues, and provides some common-sense tips for parents and teachers:

In the next part of the series, we’ll look at some online resources to help kids learn to be safe online.

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite

“The object of teaching a child is to enable him to get along without a teacher.”

– Elbert Hubbard

In the first part of this series, we tried to cut through some of the irrational fears about online safety and put the issue into perspective. In part 2, we looked at some tips for parents to help keep their kids safe online. Now, it’s time to turn our attention to teaching children to protect themselves.

As children grow, they become more independent, gain more freedom, and take on more responsibility. When my daughter was a preschooler, she decided she was going to visit her friend. The friend lived six houses away, on the same side of the street. She knew that if she just followed the sidewalk, she’d get there, so off she went. Mom, of course, wasn’t very happy about this when she found her daughter halfway down the street. Now, she’s bigger. She can go to her friend’s house by herself (when she’s not grounded). She can go to the park that’s a few backyards away. She can’t yet go to the high school that’s slightly farther away. As they grow, the kids gain new freedom. The boundaries and limits change. But they also have to take the responsibility for their behavior along with it.

In my house, we recently instituted a change in how the TV is managed. Previously, we had several different profiles on the satellite receiver. The default one, which the kids used, only had access to about half a dozen channels, and there were pretty serious rating limits. Now there are more channels available, and the kids have access to DVR’d programs. But they’re much better about self-regulating, choosing appropriate programs, and limiting the amount of time they spend in front of the TV. It also helps that Mom and Dad set expectations for TV use, with rewards and consequences based on the choices they make.

The Internet isn’t much different. There are some things on the Internet that aren’t for kids. There are also some things kids shouldn’t share online. They shouldn’t tell people where they live. They shouldn’t give their passwords out to their friends. As they get older, they have to be concerned with pictures and video they upload. They also have to protect their online reputations, since most of this stuff is public. And, they have to know when to allow things to be public and when to protect it.

How do we teach this? Here are some pretty good resources:

NetSmartzKids has a number of games, videos, activities, and other resources for elementary kids. They address everything from password privacy and stranger danger to computer viruses in a compelling, kid-friendly way. For older students, NetSmartz Teens takes the privacy lessons a step further, and also addresses cyberbullying and online enticement.

Think U Know has resources for students aged 5-7, 8-10, and 11-16. The resources for younger kids include the Hector’s World cartoon series on online safety. In addition to teaching kids how to be careful online, they also address the etiquette issues of being nice to one another. For older children, the Cyber Cafe is a place to have fun while learning about online safety. The resources for teens also address mobile phone use, chatting, social networking, and blogging.

Social Safety offers a free packet on online safety for teens. It’s definitely written from the fear perspective, with the assumptions that Law & Order episodes mirror real life, and that people who contact you online are probably just trying to kidnap, rape or kill you. But in the right context, it might be a useful resource.

Safekids and Safeteens are web sites that have good resources for children and teens for staying safe online. While it’s mostly textual information, does give useful information from an authoritative source.

X-Block is another resource for older students. It’s a much more interactive resource, giving students a way to participate in social networking on a limited basis while learning the basics of online safety.

Regardless of the method used, we have to teach our children to protect themselves online. We can’t always be looking over their shoulders to protect them. We have to set expectations of responsible behavior, teach them what those behaviors are, trust them to make good decisions, and then follow up with positive and negative consequences based on their choices.

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite

Hopefully by this point, you’ve put the cybersafety issue into perspective, implemented some basic measures to protect your kids online, and used resources to help teach kids how to protect themselves. Now it’s time to talk about filtering Internet access.

Conceptually, web filters are very simple. When using a filtered computer, requests for web pages, pictures, and other resources are first sent to the filter. Based on keywords, databases of allowed or blocked sites, and other factors, the filter determines if access to the resource should be allowed. If it is, the filter allows the computer to access it. If it isn’t, the filter blocks access to it.

It’s important to know that all filters have limitations, and some of them are pretty significant. With thousands of web pages being added, removed, and modified on a daily basis, it is impossible for any database to keep up with the ever-changing list of sites that should be blocked based on a certain set of criteria. It is also much more difficult to filter multimedia (pictures, audio, video) than it is to filter text. Text can easily be compared with certain blocked words to determine the nature of the content. It’s a lot more difficult for a computer to tell if the people in that picture have clothes on.

This problem is complicated by the increasing interactivity of the web. As more and more sites allow viewers to contribute their own content, they lose some of the control of those sites. It’s possible, for example, for someone to post inappropriate content in a comment on a CNN.com news story. That doesn’t necessarily mean Internet filters should block CNN.

It is also worth noting that a determined person can nearly always circumvent the filter entirely. Because students read this blog, I’m not going to go into too much detail here, but if you can get a web request to go directly to the Internet, rather than through the filter, you can access anything you want.

The final caveat, before we start talking about filtering solutions, is to note that many web filters are just that — WEB filters. They may not filter content in email, instant messages, or other types of Internet activity.

With all of that said, there are two basic types of filters available. The more complex of these is installed on a server. Computers on the network are configured (or forced) to access the web through this server. This has the major advantage that the computers being filtered are not running the filtering software. This makes it much more difficult (though not impossible) to disable or circumnavigate the filter. Because this requires a local network, server, and (maybe) packet routing and filtering, we’re going to assume that this is beyond the scope of most home users.

The other type of web filter uses software or a software configuration on the computer itself. While this has the disadvantage of being defeated by those being filtered if they can change the settings or uninstall the software, it is a much more manageable solution for most parents.

Filters
All right. Enough with the caveats and provisos. Where are the filters, already? Here are some free ones that come pretty highly recommended. The descriptions are paraphrased from the web sites for the software:

K-9 Web Protection: This software prevents the computer user from viewing Web sites that contain unwanted content. It can block more than 55 different categories of content, including pornography, hate speech and sites that promote violence or permit gambling. It’s free for home use.

Naomi: Naomi is a free internet filtering program intended for families. It is able to constantly monitor all internet connections, protecting children from inappropriate online material. Naomi examines in real-time all the data being transmitted and received through any internet application - such as web browers, chat programs, and news readers.

OpenDNS Adult Site Blocking: Adult site blocking is a free service that lets you block adult websites on your network. The software uses site categories compiled by St. Bernard Software, who have human-reviewed tens of millions of domains, to make sure you get the most comprehensive, easy-to-use adult site blocking service ever.

X3Watch: Rather than blocking access to inappropriate sites, this software simply logs the access, and emails those logs to a person you specify. It’s used more to monitor access than control it. The free version contains the basic features, and there’s also an advanced version available for a fee.

I haven’t actually used any of these products, but from what I’ve read, they seem to be the best of the free products. If I were setting up filtering in my home, I would start with one of these.

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite

On Tuesday, June 4, the EdTech Posse will be joining the Women of Web 2.0 in their weekly webcast at 9:00 PM EDT. The show will include a game show component, where the two teams will compete against each other to will fabulous prizes, which mostly consist of just bragging rights.

You can help by submitting game show questions. All of the items in the form below are optional, but we won’t be using any questions that don’t have answers

Loading…

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite

It’s been an RSS day. It started last night, actually, when I was trying to figure out how to get an RSS feed of an entire Google Reader account into a Protopage (still haven’t figured that one out). Then, there was the challenge of helping my wife get an RSS feed of her Twitter messages on her blog. This morning, two colleagues and I were playing with RSS feeds for delicious tags and feeds for Technorati searches. I returned to the office and took a call from the developer of our content management system. He wanted to change the XML chicklet icon we were using to the standard RSS icon. We also talked about adding some explanation of what RSS is to the web site.

I’ve explained RSS at least twice before (here and here). Basically, it allows you to automate the checking of web sites, blogs, and other web resources for updates. When something new gets posted, you see the content in your feed reader.

I always use CNN as an example. You can get an RSS feed for any of their news categories. If I just want world news, or education news, I can subscribe to those feeds. Then, when something new is posted, it shows up in my feed reader.

Here’s the interesting thing, though. Take a look at this image of CNN’s home page from August 29, 2007:

Now, look at this image from CNN’s home page, May 2, 2008:

See what isn’t there? The RSS Feed link. You used to be able to click on that link in the upper-right corner of any CNN page. It then took you to a page listing all of the available RSS feeds. It explained what RSS feeds are, and how you can use them. That link isn’t there any more.

You can still get to the feeds though. All you have to do is scroll to the bottom of the page. Click on “Tools & Widgets.” That will take you to a page that will try to get you to install the Google toolbar widget, and the desktop alerter, and other things you don’t need. Scroll to the bottom of that page, and you’ll see an “RSS Page” link under “Other Products.” Click on that link and you’ll find the old list of RSS feeds available on the CNN site. Easy, right?

So if RSS makes it so easy to share information and aggregate content from multiple sources, why did CNN make it so hard to find?

Of course, I can only speculate about CNN’s motives, but I would guess that it has to do with advertising revenue. See, if I grab an RSS feed from CNN’s site, and I put it on my Protopage, that means I’m reading CNN’s content on my own page. That’s what RSS is for. Maybe I have CNN on one part of the screen, and the New York Times somewhere else, and some other news sources and blogs in other places. But by not going to CNN’s web site, I’m not seeing their advertisements. So they’re getting less traffic on their web site, and generating less advertising revenue. That hurts them financially, so they’re no longer actively encouraging people to do that. At least, that’s my theory.

And I hope it works. The alternative would be to put advertising in the feed, so I would get today’s headlines along with a few advertisements on my page. That would set a very unpleasant precident for news feeds, and I don’t think any of us really want to move in that direction.

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite

Once upon a time, there was a voice in the darkness. The voice spoke, and her words were truth.

The truth enlightened the huddled masses, who were huddled because they were cold. The heat was lower and the lights dimmer than normal because there was an energy crisis. As they sat on carpet squares in the overcrowded room, they absorbed her truth.

Never end a sentence with a preposition.

Paul Revere rode through the Massachusetts countryside calling “The British are coming!”

Around 150 million years ago, the plant-eating brontosaurus roamed the earth.

The best way to learn arithmetic is to understand set theory and alternate bases first.

In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue and discovered America.

Of the nine planets in the solar system, the furthest from the Earth is Neptune.

If you work hard and behave yourself, you’ll get into a good college, graduate in four years, get a good job, and be better off than your parents were.

They took notes, completed worksheets, and learned the truth. They repeated it on tests. They were rewarded when they accepted the truth, and they were penalized when they challenged it. In time, they learned that the voice is always right, the truth is absolute.

Over time, the voice changed. But the concept of the authority holding the keys of truth remained. The voice says there are weapons of mass destruction. The voice says we’re not in a recession. The voice says we don’t have to worry about global warming. The voice is right. The voice is truth.

And so the sins of the huddled masses — the sins of faith in the keepers of the truth — shall bring punishment unto their children.

But the children have other ideas. They listen to the voice, but they they don’t blindly accept the truth. They ask questions. They challenge assumptions. They check sources. They verify facts. The voice helps this process by asking more and speaking less. And when the children find discrepancies, they point them out.

Information is not at a premium. We don’t have to blindly accept what we’re told. I’m not worried about the quality of information our students are using because we’re also teaching them how to be intelligent information consumers. They’re learning that information is only as good as its source. That’s more valuable than the elusive truth.

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite

I’ve received a couple questions lately about keeping kids safe online. We see news reports all the time about the danger of social networking sites, and the problems with posting personal information online, and the number of children who have been exposed to inappropriate material online. Today, I’m starting a series of blog posts about cybersafety to take a fairly comprehensive view of the issue and what we can do about it.

Today, we’re starting with a look at the problem itself. Maybe you’ve heard about the softball player who was stalked by someone she met online. She thought he was a 14-year-old boy halfway across the country instead of a 40-year-old man in her town (the story is fiction, by the way). We’ve seen plenty of news items about how dangerous the Internet is for kids. Most of them cite statistics that claim that one out of every seven teens with Internet access has been sexually solicited online. We hear stories about children and teens getting tricked into meeting online predators. Theoretically, all of those things can happen. But the problem may not be as serious as many would have you believe.

Take, for example, the one-in-seven statistic. That comes from Online Victimization of Youth: Five Years Later, a report from from the Crimes Against Children Research Center. Here’s what the report actually says:

…approximately 1 in 7 youth Internet users (13%) received unwanted sexual solicitations or approaches in the past year. Close to half of the solicitations were relatively mild events that did not appear to be dangerous or frightening. Four (4) percent of all youth Internet users, however, received aggressive sexual solicitations, which threatened to spill over into “real life” because the solicitor asked to meet the youth in person; called them on the telephone; or sent them offline mail, money, or gifts. Also 4% of youth Internet users had distressing sexual solicitations that left them feeling very or extremely upset or afraid. Two (2) percent of youth had solicitations that were both aggressive and distressing.

So while the implication is that 13% of our teens are being stalked by predators, the reality is that only 4% of teens are upset or afraid, and only half of them were in situations where the person tried to initiate offline contact. While one in fifty is still a serious problem, it’s not on the same scale as one in seven. A panel discussion of these findings took place recently among experts meeting in Washington, D.C. Video and transcripts of this discussion are online.

The Pew Internet and American Life Project studied teens and online stranger contact in 2007. They found that nearly a third of online teens have been contacted online by someone with no connection to them or their friends. That’s not too surprising. I meet new people online all the time. It’s not necessarily any more dangerous than striking up a conversation with someone in line at the store, or the people in adjacent seats at a concert or sporting event. Considering the facts that they count social networking friend requests and spam email messages in this count, I’m surprised that the number isn’t higher. A more important number is the percent of teens who have been contacted by a stranger online who made them feel frightened or uncomfortable. The Pew study reports a figure of 7%. Again, it’s not an insignificant number, but it’s not a third of online teens.

Interestingly, the biggest predictors of stranger contact are social network profiles and posting photos online. Teens who have publicly-viewable profiles on social networking sites, or who have posted photographs of themselves online are twice as likely to be contacted by people they don’t know.

Writing in the New York Times, David Pogue points to some of the findings reported in a recent PBS Frontline documentary, Growing Up Online. Pogue points to several quotes from producer Rachel Dretzin, including these:

The data shows that giving out personal information over the Internet makes absolutely no difference when it comes to a child’s vulnerability to predation.

The vast majority of kids who do end up having contact with a stranger they meet over the Internet are seeking out that contact.

All the kids we met, without exception, told us the same thing: They would never dream of meeting someone in person they’d met online.

These statements directly contradict most of the cyber-safety information that’s intended to help protect kids. The first item, certainly, contradicts the Pew report I just mentioned.

The Byron Review released its report on cybersafety in March, 2007 (an executive summary and a guide for students are also available). The report focuses on video games, media content, and Internet use among children and teens. I like the analogy to swimming. The odds that you are going to die by drowning are approximately 1 in 1100. Yet we still have swimming pools and water parks. We still go to the beach. Some people even have dangerous bathing tubs in their own homes. We put up fences around the pools. We post signs warning about the dangers of drowning. We post lifeguards in busy swimming areas. We have shallow ends. We do everything we can to protect people from the danger. But at the same time, we also teach people how to swim, so they can protect themselves.

Conclusions? Children need to be protected online. Certainly. Especially at younger ages. As they get older, they need to learn how to protect themselves. This is really important, and cyber-safety is something we should be addressing with every student. But it’s not more important than teaching kids how to cross the street or ride a bike. The Internet is not more dangerous than firearms or alcohol or cars, all of which kill a significant number of teens each year. The problem calls for a balanced, reasoned approach. And we’ll start there with part 2.

Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite