Group items tagged

Recently, the call for teaching 21st century skills and content in K-12 has gained considerable momentum and acceptance. Problem-solving, communication, and teamwork are examples of 21st century skills; a deep, integrated model of key science processes, for example, is 21st century content. To learn such 21st century content and skills, students must use 21st century information and communication technology.

Seeing No Progress, Some Schools Drop Laptops," schools were spending their budgets on computer maintenance and had little left over to purchase educationally specific software and training to help teachers integrate the laptops into their existing curriculum. Generally speaking, the computers devolved into glorified typewriters and interfaces to Google.

A punch in the eye seems so passé. Bullies these days are traveling in packs and using cyberspace to their humiliating messages online. Like the toughies of old, they are both boys and girls and they demand nothing less than total submission as the price of peace. It’s a jungle out there. For school districts, patrolling the hallways and adjacent grounds is just a start. In the 21st century, a new kind of vigilance is necessary—an expanded jurisdiction that serves to both stave off legal actions and ensure a safe and productive learning environment.

Today’s principals rely on district policy and practice to extend the presumed long arm of the law to off-campus incidents. Potentially, that could mean plunging headlong into the electronic frontier to rescue student victims and thwart cyberbullying classmates who thrive as faceless computer culprits.

A December 2009 study by Harvard University’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society found that students on the receiving end report greater emotional distress, are more likely to abuse substances, and are more frequently depressed.

Twitter

Twitter

Twitter

Lance Armstrong loves it. Oprah’s all over it. Ashton Kutcher found a million people to follow him on it. Heck, Barack Obama used it to get elected president. So why is Twitter in trouble? According to David Martin, Vice President of Primary Research at Internet traffic monitor Nielsen Online, the site suffers from a retention problem. From month to month, Nielsen data says, just 40 percent of Twitter’s users return to it.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) is organising on 5 May 2009 (pm) a public presentation on protecting children from harmful content and conduct online. The issue of child protection in regards to online technologies is of major and continuing concern to policy- and law-makers, the wider ICT industry and its end-users. In spring 2008, the EESC unanimously adopted its most recent of several opinions on this topic

This is a follow up to the post on the Meeting on 5th May here.The Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual Community programme on protecting children using the Internet and other communication technologies represents the latest in a series of initiatives introduced by the European Parliament and Council to promote children’s safety and well-being in the information society.

Chances are they're banned - to stop students texting their friends all the time, or worse still, cyber-bullying. But are schools missing a trick? Most teenagers now carry a mini-computer in their pockets, capable of taking photos, videos, podcasts and even surfing the web. Could their mobiles actually be used to enhance their education? Alex and Charlotte from Westhoughton High School in Bolton wanted to investigate this issue. They interviewed one boy who'd experienced cyber-bullying - getting abusive and threatening text messages on his mobile phone.

“Our study set out to establish whether online security factors vary according to age, gender, geography and occupation. Online criminals operate on a mass scale so are indiscriminate about who they target. Whether they are successful or not depends largely on two factors: firstly, how good we are at securing our computers; and secondly, how much we avoid risky activities and behaviours while we’re using the internet.

Instead of these technologies being used to usher in a new age of youthful activism in Iran, they now serve as a window for the entire world into the repressive tactics of the regime.

It is difficult to tell what the ultimate impact of these technologies will be for Iran. Nor is there any proof publicly available to support the claim that the vote was rigged in Mr Ahmadinejad’s favour. But the regime’s reaction to both the accusations of foul play and to the young people who demonstrated both in the streets and on the internet, is telling. As hard as a government tries to stifle dissenting voices, those voices will only try harder to be heard, and there is little that Iran can do to stop them. Technology always seems to be one step ahead of the censors.

I’m not aware of any federal Internet safety commissions that met during the Bush administration. From what I can tell, that administration paid very little attention to Internet safety other than to add to the exaggerations and fear-mongering about so-called Internet predators. So is there any point in taking yet another look at Internet safety? Yes, if only because things have changed dramatically over the past few months. To begin with, we have a new administration led by a president who actually understands the Internet as well as the constitutional issues that arise whenever government tries to control online speech, access or even safety.

When the new working group convened Thursday, our first speaker was Susan Crawford, who works at the White House as special assistant to the president for science, technology and innovation policy. A law professor and founder of OneWebDay, Crawford brings a refreshing understanding of the government’s need to balance safety and security with civil liberties, privacy and even the First Amendment rights of minors. Her opening remarks helped set the tone for the group by admonishing us to “avoid overheated rhetoric about risks to kids online,” pointing out that “risks kids face online may not be significantly different than the risks they face offline.”