This is the title of a YouTube posting which has attracted over 10 million hits. I was directed to it after reading Ewan’s latest post “Who Needs Educational TV?” The 8-minute clip was shot by a tourist when on safari, and features a dramatic struggle for life between a lion pride, a buffalo herd , and, at one stage, a crocodile. Watching the clip got me thinking about how we should embrace the opportunities of YouTube. All human life is there, and there is a vast bank of clips just waiting to be used in schools. In my own subject, Geography, to give 3 examples a 5-minute clip taken by a teacher becomes a mini programme ,which would be a very useful way of introducing a topic, there is whole section on Glaciation and a vast library of posts on “Climate Change”. Some clips are made by pupils themselves and use imaginative images and music There are so many aspects of learning that YouTube, could enhance:
The technology of making a film to post on YouTube-equipment, sound, editing
Use of music to create a particular mood, eg matching music to a post on artwork or scenry
Viewing clips-in class, via a white board at the start of a lesson, or during a lesson, via a lap top, or a home exercise
Responding-”essay”, “poem”, “storyboard”, “what happened next”?
Building a personal bookmark of clips for revision-creating Del icio us tags and sharing these with peers.
The question for schools, as I suggsted in my comment to Ewan’s post is come up with a way of harnessing this resource without compromsing on internet safety. I remain concerned about the ease with which viewers can accidentally or deliberately come upon harmful, unpleasant, or inappropriate images and comments.
A quote I found, from SETT 2001:
“What comes out very strongly from a reading of the literature on ICT and classroom activity -is a stress on the need for human interaction and structured teaching and learning to accompany the use of new technologies in educational settings. Learning involving ICT applications must be carefully planned, clearly set out and well sequenced (and in this respect the requirements for a successful lesson using ICT are no different from those of a good lesson generally”
Peter Rudd, National Foundation for Educational Research;
Scottish Education and Teaching Technology Show, SECC,
Glasgow, 20 September 2001
I like this emphasis on using ICT to support and enhance teaching and learning, but it has thrown up many questions. it is interesting to reflect on how much ICT has changed in the 6 years since that keynote address, yet I wonder how many of us have really kept up with the pace of change, and grasped the opportunities of web 2.0 and social networking in our teaching. How many teachers can define web 2.0 or give examples of how it can be used in class or as homework? What current textbook or sheet based tasks might social networking or wikis or blogs replace? When is it more effective not to use ICT? Are we teaching the right, appropriate ICT skills at the right time? Are we moving from “death by worksheet” to “death by powerpoint”?How can we use web 2.0 to develop the social and co-curricular dimensions of our schools? What about cross curricular themes? What input do parents and carers have now and what should they have next session? What is the impact on CPD going to be? whose job is it to lead colleagues in exploring the potentials and, yes,addressing the concerns, of the next generation of ICT? In all this how do we retain the integrity and rigour of our teaching?
Radio 4 broadcast a programme introduced by Clive Anderson on Wikipedia on 27th July-the podcast of this programme can be accessed by clicking here.
The programme interviews at Jimmy Wales looks at the genesis of wikipedia and discusses how its unique selling points, that it is open source, collaboartive , free and doesn’t sell anything. He believes that it represents the democratisation of knowledge as the 18th century encyclopediasts Anderson examines its influence and outlines at how people can contribute or edit articles. He asks how articles can be amended and mistakes rectified, and looks at how references are used. He notes that some of the big articles may be written and refined by over 1000 people, but the typical article has one or two authors.
The progarmme goes on to critique the dangers of too much collaboration where there is a lack of editorial control and coherence, and where content may read badly, or lack critical evaluation. Andrew Keen, author “The Cult of the Amateur” argues that wikipedia encourages Intellectual anarchism and relativism. Others criticise the incessant ping pong that can occur as articles can be edited and re-edited without a final definitive decision. It is also argued that entries are dominated by people who are most skilled at using the technology. Malicious entries are also a problem, and correcting mistakes can be difficult.
Anderson discusses the issue of reliability with Encyclopedia Britannica-one editor questions how we can ascertain the reliability of a Wikiepedia article. He arguies that the truth is not determined democratically, by multiple authorship (”wisdom of the crowd”) but by expert knowledge of individuals.
Well worth listening to!
I have been following the work of David Allan and his philospophy of “Getting Things Done” and subscribe to the website 43 folders, hosted by Marlin Mann. This is a site about personal productivity, which I feel i always need to stay on top of, and in a recent post Marlin includes a clip of a presentation he made on managing your e-mail, which you can access by clicking here:
This has been a good summer to catch up on some reading and getting to grips with some of the latest writings on web 2.0 technology. From two good friends, two very different books on loan. First. “Debts of Honour,” a series of essays written in the ’80s by Michael Foot, the former Labour leader and political thinker. I have started reading his essay on Disraeli, the “good Tory”; regardless of his many faults, clearly Disraeli was a perceptive statesman, who well recognized the consequences of failing to address the growing inequality of industrial Britain and the looming “Irish Question” Foot is an articulate writer, well read, as few politicains today are today, with a experience of political life , and I look forward to reading the remainder of these essays on individuals who he felt shaped his approach to life, and so, to whom he has a “debt of honour”.
Secondly, a truly stimulating book by Edward Tufte entitled Beautiful Evidence. Tufte, a Professor Emeritus at Yale University, writes, designs, and self-publishes books on analytical design. I have just started reading this and already find this book is a stimulating survey at how design can be used to enhance or mislead our quest for knowledge and understanding. Citing examples as diverse as Renaissance dance instructions, classifiaction schemes, typefaces, 19th Century coloured plate drawings of animals, recent DNA maps and the ubiquitous PowerPoints, Tufte develops a critique of how we use (misuse) visual information.
All the while I have been trying to keep my knowledge of recent web 2.0 developments up to speed by reading some key blogs, which I have added to my blogroll. Perhaps the one I visit the most is Don’s Learning Log, and from his posts and links my reading has gone out in many directions. What is emerging is the growing number of teachers involved in developing learning communities, who see collaboration and constructivist models of education as the “new paradigm”. I have three questions in my mind that I feel I need to explore
How we can evalaute the impact of web 2.0 on teaching and learning? Does HGIOS 3 give us the tools to do this?
How will teachers respond to web 2.0-is it a threat or an opportunity? is perceived as a passing fad? Is it “mainstream” or for geeks and nerds?
Can we reconcile web 2.0 with concepts of teacher authority, academic discipline and intellectual rigour?
