Category: digital citizenship

Posted on

New Pew Internet Reports: Teens, Social Networks, Privacy and Parents

New Pew Report: Teens, kindness and cruelty on social network sites

Social media use has become so pervasive in the lives of American teens that having a presence on a social network site is almost synonymous with being online. Fully 95% of all teens ages 12-17 are now online and 80% of those online teens are users of social media sites. Many log on daily to their social network pages and these have become spaces where much of the social activity of teen life is echoed and amplified—in both good and bad ways.

Part 1 » Teens and social networks

Part 2 » Social media and digital citizenship: What teens experience and how they behave on social network sites

Part 3 » Privacy and safety issues

Part 4 » The role of parents in digital safekeeping and advice-giving

Part 5 » Parents and online social spaces: Tech tool ownership and attitudes towards social media

The good news – “The majority of social media-using teens say their peers are mostly kind to one another on social network sites. Overall, 69% of social media-using teens think that peers are mostly kind to each other on social network sites.”

This a great statistic to use for “positive norming” when talking to students about online behavior. Positive norming is showing that what most people do is positive and healthy, rather than focusing on the alarming behavior of the small minority. See this blog post (Cybersafety – do fear and exaggeration increase risk?) for a great slideshow from Larry Magid on how to present to parents and students about positive online  behavior rather than rely on fear tactics (which don’t work, by the way!)

Don’t let the statistics get skewed – you may also see that 88% of social media-using teens have witnessed other people be mean or cruel on social network sites. But before getting alarmed, realize that lots of people have seen something bad happen, it doesn’t mean it’s happening all the time. If someone asked you, “have you ever seen someone being mean to someone else in public?” – probably 100% of us would say yes. It does not mean that it is the norm. And in fact, only 12% of the 88% who saw meanness, saw it “frequently.”

I think this is another study showing that parents and kids are both doing pretty well navigating the brave new world of social networks and online life. Schools need to build on this positive trend!

Sylvia

Posted on

Leaders today and tomorrow

Great leadership is inclusive leadership, yet the largest stakeholder group in schools is often forgotten — students.

Those of us who believe the modern technology is the way to change schools must also realize that this digital generation has more direct experience with technology than any other group–if we were listening. When students aren’t included in the effort to improve education with technology, we lose more than their technical know-how, we lose the opportunity to shape the ongoing conversation and cultivate the leaders of tomorrow.

While we wonder where the future leaders of the educational reform movement will come from, there they sit in front of us everyday, being ignored. Thinking that “school” doesn’t understand what their lives are like outside of the classroom. Wondering what their role will be in changing the world. Wishing that someone would give them the opportunity to make a difference.

Enabling youth voice in K-12 schools isn’t simple. They might not say what you expect; it takes time to teach them how to speak their minds effectively and work collaboratively. And they keep growing up and leaving, so it never ends. I’m not talking about the kind of token youth panel you often see at educational technology conferences, where students who can be counted on to say acceptable things are trotted out for an hour, everyone nods and feels good about listening to youth voice and then lunch is served while the kids are conveniently bussed back from whence they came.

This is a lose-lose situation. We lose their input, convince them we don’t care, and miss the teachable moment. We enable dependence in youth by not allowing them to participate in the process of school decision-making. And technology is only a small part of this. The curtailing of student press freedom and the blocking of online discussion creates fewer opportunities for student voices to be heard in every avenue and less opportunity to practice these skills.

It’s not just about leadership in educational technology, we should be worried about where the leaders of tomorrow will learn how to be informed, involved citizens of the world.

Related Download: From Vision to Action: Including Student Leadership in Your Technology Plan (PDF) This 8-page guide contains research, sample language, practical suggestions, 6 models of student involvement, and a planning worksheet. Print it out and give it to your favorite tech planning committee members!

Sylvia

Posted on

Drama! Why adult concepts of cyberbullying don’t mesh with teens

It’s an unimaginable tragedy for any person to commit suicide. It’s a family’s worst nightmare and a problem that society must address. In recent months, more and more news stories are surfacing about very young people committing suicide and tying the cause to bullying, especially in online environments – cyberbullying.

Campaigns have started to find ways to reach youth with media and school anti-bullying programs. Of course people want to do the right thing. Of course adults want to help young people. But what really does help?

Alice Marwick and danah boyd, both highly respected social media and youth researchers wrote an op-ed for the New York Times today – Why Cyberbullying Rhetoric Misses the Mark

It’s based on a new paper – The Drama! Teen Conflict, Gossip, and Bullying in Networked Publics

You should read these, both of them. Why? Because the authors talked to teens, and listened. For six years. Across all kinds of kids, all kinds of socio-economic groups and geography. What they heard was that teens do not use the same language as adults. What an adult might label “bullying”, teens call “drama.” And in the paper, the authors distill what that means and how it plays out in real life (both online and off.)

It’s not just a different word for the same thing. The authors listened to youth about the motivation – why would teens engage in drama? What do they get out of it? It’s a fascinating read.

One of the big takeaways for me was the relationship of adult bullying solutions to the issues of youth agency. When we ask young people to accept adult definitions and solutions to the problems of their lives, adults often ignore the fact that this is asking them to put a label on themselves. If you are being bullied and adults tell you “tell an adult”, it’s meant as a friendly, supportive gesture. However, for a young person, that means first accepting that they are a victim. This is a big ask for a young person building their own identity.

I hope you take the time to read both the article and the full paper. They are worth it!

Sylvia

Paper Abstract: While teenage conflict is nothing new, today’s gossip, jokes, and arguments often play out through social media like Formspring, Twitter, and Facebook. Although adults often refer to these practices with the language of “bullying,” teens are more likely to refer to the resultant skirmishes and their digital traces as “drama.” Drama is a performative set of actions distinct from bullying, gossip, and relational aggression, incorporating elements of them but also operating quite distinctly. While drama is not particularly new, networked dynamics reconfigure how drama plays out and what it means to teens in new ways. In this paper, we examine how American teens conceptualize drama, its key components, participant motivations for engaging in it, and its relationship to networked technologies. Drawing on six years of ethnographic fieldwork, we examine what drama means to teenagers and its relationship to visibility and privacy. We argue that the emic use of “drama” allows teens to distance themselves from practices which adults may conceptualize as bullying. As such, they can retain agency – and save face – rather than positioning themselves in a victim narrative. Drama is a gendered process that perpetrates conventional gender norms. It also reflects discourses of celebrity, particularly the mundane interpersonal conflict found on soap operas and reality television. For teens, sites like Facebook allow for similar performances in front of engaged audiences. Understanding how “drama” operates is necessary to recognize teens’ own defenses against the realities of aggression, gossip, and bullying in networked publics.

Posted on

What’s the “do”? Student iPad implementation choices

This summer we’ve done a bunch of iPad training with students who will be tech leaders in their schools. We had students from 6th-10th grade in about 20 different schools (all with different setups!) It’s been interesting to with so many different schools – because we’ve learned so much from them how many technical and philosophical choices there are when implementing iPads.

Two things that are going to matter greatly are: 1) decisions about setting up the iPads and 2) what you expect the students to do with them.

Management
Very broadly speaking, the iPads can either be set up with group management software or they can be set up more loosely managed (more like the way a normal iPad is set up). Either way you can set the profile to not be able to access anything rated “adult” in the App Store, and not allow any paid App downloads from the iTunes account.

The managed way you have more “control” – some adult will see any download on any machine, can more easily mass purchase Apps, they will be easier to revert to an initial condition, etc. It also matters whether they will be handed out randomly to students or assigned a single user and whether they can take them home.

The managed way makes it easier for adults to monitor and control, the individual way makes it a more useful personal device, but with more ability to “get in trouble” – a typical tradeoff.

What is the “DO”?
Is there an expectation that the students will use the iPads for any “work” or creative application – or are they strictly information appliances? Gary Stager says, “if your primary metaphor for a computer is looking stuff up, it should be no surprise when kids look up inappropriate stuff.”

Hopefully there is some expectation that the iPad will be more than a research tool. If that’s true, there should be a few paid apps for the students – free apps and browsing are not going to cut it for “real work”.

It matters greatly what you expect the students are going to do with the “stuff” they create/find on the iPad. The only ways in and out of an iPad are through the Mail App and the “Cloud”, meaning apps that use online storage. Will the students be allowed to set up the Mail app with school-supplied email accounts? What about non-school supplied email? Can they use apps like Evernote or Dropbox for file management?

If you use web apps and students will be under 13, you need to find out right away what these apps require – many teachers tell kids not to lie about their age on the Internet, and in the next breath tell them to lie about their birthdays so they can use web apps. We strongly urge our schools never do that (and we talk about why directly with the kids.)

Even if you don’t tell them, some will figure out how to set up the Mail app to access their personal email, unless all that is disabled too. (Which makes the iPad a thin, shiny brick.)

Browsing and cybersafety
Internet safety and digital citizenship are not things you can just deal with separately. They are completely dependent on what YOU CAN DO – which is completely dependent on how the iPads have been configured and what the expectations are for doing work. Even if the kids have used computers, the iPads are just different enough from a computer that you can’t depend on previous training and rules.

The browser is where the iPad is most like a regular computer. Safety/rules/filtering/blocking when using the iPad browser are exactly like any other computer on campus. The kids should be let in on what these policies are, not just the “don’t do x” stuff, but the why. The older the student, the more you have to let them in on the policy decisions so they can buy into them and support them. The older the student, the more the actions of peers will influence behavior, not the words of adults.

You can of course talk about intellectual property and citing sources, and practice saving images, URLs, etc. as they do research.

Where to start
Are the students allowed to download free apps from the App Store? If so, teach them how to use the ratings, categories and reviews to find good ones. If these are personal machines, teach them how to use and manage bookmarks in Safari. Practice setting the wallpaper and moving apps into organized folders. (Setting the wallpaper seems trivial but actually hits a lot of basic functionality and allows you to talk about using pictures that are too personal.)

Let them teach each other useful things they’ve found and figured out. They will find amazing stuff. You will need the cable that goes from the iPad to a projector. Get them used to sharing to a group – the wallpaper of them kissing the boyfriend will quickly be replaced.

Many schools start their iPad lessons with the school’s AUP (Acceptable Use Policy.) However, you better read it first. We find that most AUPs are pretty miserably written for kids (and parents) and it’s a waste of time to go over them in any detail. It’s a crime that these are often the only message that parents get about technology – incomprehensible and punitive. Then we ask them to sign that they understand and will obey – there’s some vision of 21st century learning, eh?… (another rant for back-school time…). Seriously – Have the kids write their own rules – usually they will come up with a list that is just fine to start with.

But treat the rules as a living document. Expect to tweak them from time to time – in many AUPs for example, there are rules about not changing settings of the computers. For an iPad, you just have to get into the settings. Don’t just let your rules get stale and breaking them become the only way to get work done. If “bad things” happen, let the kids discuss and amend the rules to cover it.

More complex questions to deal with
Are students allowed to connect to a home computer and add a second iTunes account attached to mom’s credit card? Don’t assume the students won’t figure this out or that this will only happen in affluent communities. What about push notifications or allowing an app to use your location – useful in Google Earth, creepy in Foursquare. What about apps like Skype or chat apps like KakaoTalk. Do the school phone rules apply to iPads that are being used like a phone? If current school rules simply ban phones, you will likely have a gap in your policies since in many ways iPads are more like smartphones than computers.

If the policies are too restrictive, you are going to have to try to get buy-in from the students on why things are locked down – because they will immediately start running into brick walls where the usefulness is diminished – and you will end up playing whack-a-mole with kids who will quickly find ways around the restrictions (many for entirely justified reasons).

The big thing I haven’t mentioned is this… you can’t talk about this with just the students… the teachers have to be on the same page and understand these issues too. Students and teachers should be learning and making decisions about implementation as a team.

In the best case scenario, this not only creates a better educated community, but you will be walking the talk of a collaborative learning community, where everyone is a stakeholder and participant.

In the worst case scenario, if you do some cursory PD and hope it trickles down to the students, or the iPads are so locked down that they are useless — kids and teachers will end up getting blamed for the “failure” of the iPad program. That would just be sad, not to mention a huge waste of scarce dollars.

Sylvia

Subscribe
>> in your favorite blog reader
 >> by email
>> via Facebook
>> follow me on Twitter
Posted on

Student ipad deployment – the first big decision is not technical, it’s about agency

This past year we’ve been gearing up for several Student Technology Leader projects across the country with a new twist. This fall, for the first time, many of our Student Technology Leaders will be equipped with iPads as they assist teachers in technology integration, tech support, and technology literacy efforts. Two projects in particular, College YES (a federal Investing in Innovation (i3) grant) and a project funded by the Rural Schools and Community Trust for improving STEM education are kicking off this fall.

We are in the middle of a busy summer teaching some amazing students leadership and technology skills, plus how to use the iPad as a technology integration tool. Student Tech Leaders will use the iPads to assist teachers with STEM project resources, help teachers track and assess technology literacy projects, manage help desk and trouble ticket requests, and more.

We’ve learned quite a bit about iPads and school deployment in the past few months which I hope to share soon. But in short, there is one major decision that schools must make when deploying iPads – whether to set them up individually or as a managed group. Now, there are lots of great websites that help with this, but this one basic decision has ramifications beyond the technical – it’s a decision about student agency and ownership.

I don’t mean who really “owns” the device – but who has responsibility for it day to day. Who is making choices about its setup, use, and apps. I’m also not talking about the kinds of loaner situations where you hand an iPad out for an hour or two with no expectation of long-term use. I’m talking about an expectation that the iPad is a tool that a student will use for real work on a long term basis.

If you configure the iPads with a management system, the agency will lie primarily in the system administrator. If you configure them individually, the agency lies primarily with the student user. The point is, it’s not a totally technical decision, nor should the only consideration be making it easier for technical staff. Yes, you must be sure that students can’t access “bad stuff”, can download great apps, and that problems can be fixed quickly. But that’s possible with both kinds of configurations.

So, in our iPad deployments, we’ve set up them up individually. We believe the students will take their responsibilities seriously and not abuse them. Time will tell if this trust will be rewarded – but it usually is!

Sylvia

Posted on

Helpful bullying and cyberbullying model policies and resources from Washington State

The State of Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) has a very helpful website on resources for schools around the issues of youth online safety and bullying.

  • Resources on bullying and harassment
  • Slideshows useful for staff training
  • Model policies and procedures
  • Helpful links and reports

Of course these resources conform to Washington State laws, but might be a helpful starting point for any district looking for guidance in these matters. OSPI has recently updated these resources to reflect the latest legal advice for schools and a balanced view of bullying, cyber and otherwise, without scare tactics. Their approach is a cycle of “prevention, preparedness, response, recovery” rather than waiting for a crisis to strike. Good advice!

This link is courtesy of Mike Donlin, a program supervisor with the OSPI School Safety Center focusing on bullying & cyberbullying prevention and intervention. Previously, Mike was a consultant to the Seattle Public Schools’ prevention-intervention services, and spearheaded creation of a new cyberbullying curriculum for Seattle teachers.

It’s great that Washington’s OSPI is acknowledging that student’s digital lives are important and schools need policies that teach and inform, not ban and vilify.

Sylvia

Posted on

Survey reveals disconnect in online safety education

Survey reveals disconnect in online safety education (eSchool News)

  • 81% of school administrators, including principals and superintendents, said they believe their districts are adequately preparing students in online safety, security, and ethics
  • 51% of teachers agree
  • 33% of teachers said they believe their school or district requires a cyber safety curriculum be taught in the classroom setting
  • 68% administrators said they believe the same thing

Ooops…

I think what this shows is that the devil is in the details. Blanket policies about teaching online safety, security, and ethics get lost by the time these policies get to the classroom level. Now stir in the fact that 36% of teachers in this survey say they have received zero hours of district-provided training in cyber security, cyber safety, and cyber ethics with an additional 40% receiving between one and three hours of training in their school districts. Add a dollop of confusion about laws, policies, and the ethics of situations that didn’t even exist a year or two ago. Sift in parents who believe all sorts of different things about what school should allow kids to do online, and bake in an oven of stress about standardized testing in core subjects with no time for “extras” like citizenship, digital or others.

In fact, last year, Julie Evans of Project Speak Up said that students reported to her that teachers who get training in Internet safety restrict Internet access even more out of fear and confusion.

This is a recipe for confusion and confusion leads to paralysis.

I think the answer is evolving towards shared decision-making at all levels (including students), accepting that this is a rapidly changing situation and can’t be “finished”, and moving towards including these lessons into larger programs that address ethics, safety, civics, and community norms of behavior. The more we ghettoize “cyber” safety and ethics, the more likely it is to be misunderstood and dropped for lack of time.

Sylvia

Posted on

The Internet, Youth Deviance and the Problem of Juvenoia

This video is a talk given by Dr. David Finkelhor, is the Director of the Crimes against Children Research Center, Co-Director of the Family Research Laboratory and Professor of Sociology at the University of New Hampshire, entitled “The Internet, Youth Deviance and the Problem of Juvenoia”

Is the internet really an amplifier for youth deviance, bad behavior, and risk? Or is it just the opposite? Are we simply applying age-old paranoia about youth (juvenoia) to the newest technology and coming to all the wrong conclusions? Could the Internet be in fact promoting better, healthier culture, identity exploration with less risk, and increased accountability for personal actions? Dr. David Finkelhor takes on these questions with research, facts, historical perspectives — and connections with the fields of child development, human behavior, and psychology.

This talk is well worth watching – especially if you are dealing with parents or colleagues who take it on face value that the Internet is making children stupid, cheapening culture, and is the onramp to deviant behavior and predators.

The Internet, Youth Deviance and the Problem of Juvenoia on Vimeo on Vimeo

This video provides a lot of food for thought:

  • Why do we label and blame kids for normal behavior?
  • Is a fear OF children masquerading as a fear FOR children?
  • Is the Internet similar to other technologies that caused social changes (like cars, TV, phones, etc.)? Or is it vastly different?
  • Is “stranger danger”, sexting crackdowns, and technophobia really about protecting kids or is it political grandstanding and a way to sell fear-based products?
  • Why do we ignore the many indications of better, healthier, connected, smarter youth and believe all too easily that children today are narcissistic, alienated, and addicted to techno-drivel?

Love your thoughts!

Sylvia

Posted on

Youth Risk Online – Why Engage Youth in Bullying Prevention?

A prevalent view of education is that young people are empty vessels and schools simply open up their heads and pour in knowledge. Unfortunately this is a vision of education that is not serving us well in the 21st century. For a few students, this clearly works, but for many, this is a futile effort — made worse by an increasing focus on testing a few subjects at the expense of high-interest subjects like art and music.

By looking at students as objects to be changed, we lose many opportunities for students to be agents of change. Our society needs change agents — people who care about others, citizens, voters, creative imaginers and leaders. Where will they come from if we don’t allow young people to explore these roles?

Bullying prevention is an opportunity to engage youth in becoming change agents for an important cause, one that impacts them directly. However, lecturing them about rules or organizing pep rallies for kindness misses the mark.

To truly engage youth in bullying prevention, we must take the risk of turning some of the power over to them and allow them to be part of the solution. For example, some students can create their own presentations about bullying or participate in peer mediation. Students listen to other students much more about these subjects than adults, and identify information from peers as more truthful. Involving youth in solutions where they DO something important allows adults to steer youth towards the right answers and good behavior, instead of just lecturing. As adults and youth work together, learning and teaching merge, and youth find new empathy for others.

This kind of engagement requires long-term commitments and caring adults with talent in youth development. However, it pays off when youth develop real skills, compassion, and responsibility.

——————–

Next week I’ll be in Seattle presenting as part of a day-long pre-conference panel on Youth Risk Online: Issues and Solutions at the International Bullying Prevention Association (IBPA) November 15-17 in Seattle, Washington. I was asked to contribute 300 words to a handout for the participants and thought I’d share them here too!

Sylvia