Transcript CNagraSeminar Leadership – Sharissa Carrie and Cherie

TECHNOLOGY IS A TOOL?
Presented by: Sharissa, Carrie
and Cherie
TOOLS-R-US-JONATHAN B.KING
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF BUSINESS
ETHICS APR 1994
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
“Jonathan King is Associate Professor of Management at the College of Business at
Oregon State University. His primary research interests are in moral philosophy and
systems theory. His most important publications are “Common Knowledge of the Second
Kind” (1989) and “Learning to Solve the Right Problems” (1993),Journal of Business
Ethics.”-http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00871671
ABSTRACT
Our modes of understanding do not correspond to the complex issues confronting us in our modern
technological society.
BIG ISSUES
1.Risks of people using powerful technology with the intended objective of exploiting others.
2.Risks of unintended disasters, where systems-- not individuals or groups--- run
amuck.
3. Risk of allowing our tools and technologies to shape our intentions.
“Soft” systems methodology: used when dealing with matters of high complexity, ill defined
problems.
offers direction to exert moral control over our tools and technologies.
Goal is to address subjectivity in our decision making process
CHOICES
Rational Choice Theory(RCT): framework for understanding social & economic behaviour
---ex: how the individual calculates what is in his best interest and acts accordingly
“best interest”/ “self interest” is a variable, rather than a given
“self-interest” as a variable opens a pandora’s box-ethical relativism.
RCT takes seriously the subjectivity which is the crucial characteristic of human affairs” by trying to
contain it through objective methodology.
Objectivism vs Relativism
There is no escaping the subjective determination of our subjective preference
PARADIGM SHIFT
We need to un-learn and re-learn how to do things knowing that we are using our subjective
brain.
Learning how to learn & unlearn: playing with paradigms
Signs
Lists
Tools as scripts
In and out of boxes
Coping with self-justifying processes
Abductive logic provides distance from self-justifying circles
BACKGROUND
Some of top box office movies of the
late 80’s and early 90’s include:
 Terminator (1984) & Terminator 2 (1991)
 Jurrasic Park (1993)
 The Matrix (1999).
Back to the future II (1989)
TECHNOLOGY IS (NOT) A TOOL?
Arntzen, Krug, and Wen
INTRO
You caught a tool to get to a tool. The educator used a tool
to introduce you to the idea of educational tools. In the tool
you looked around and saw your classmates tooling furiously
on their tools. Arntzen, Krug, Wen (2008)
KEYWORDS/PHRASES
overuse of the term tool
social and cultural context
curricular conundrum (confusing
and difficult problem)-complex
deskill
boxes and wires
technology is a means not an end
digital natives, net-generation
digital immigrants
morals and ethics
social responsibility
professional development
KEY IDEAS
• ICT is acknowledged internationally as emerging and increasingly
important in Education (21st c. learning)
• We want teachers to engage in and use ICT therefore we need to use
specific terminology to describe it so they can do this effectively
• ICT has two parts media and technology and the social, cultural contexts
• Digital technologies are more than simple machines or tools (complex)
• For digital natives (net-generation) and digital immigrants, devices hold
very different social and cultural meanings and values
QUESTIONS
• Is overly simplified terminology helping or hindering educators’
acceptance, critical engagement and accommodation of ICT into
educational settings?
• Does the over-generalized term provide educators the information
they need to critically assess and discuss the educational merits of
ICT?
• Does it prepare educators to discuss the social and cultural
meanings and implications in their students’ lives?
SUGGESTIONS
• Substantial professional development needs to be provided in order for
educators to feel comfortable implementing ICT in their practice
•It is the all or nothing view that needs to be challenged and changed
•Engaging and critical inquiry needs to take place to reduce anxiety and
encourage comfort and curiosity
•Need to know how and why moral and ethical (responsibility and accountability)
issues affect societies (eg. cyberbullying)
•Need to teach social responsibility in the context of ICT
•It is not simply about the term tool it extends far beyond
•It is an ongoing curricular conundrum
Dan Meyer is a high school math teacher.
“I teach high school math. I sell a
product to a market that doesn't want it
but is forced by law to buy it.” — Dan Meyer
VIDEO
USING WEB 2.0 FOR EDUCATION
PROGRAMS ON GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP:
ADDRESSING MORAL AND ETHICAL
ISSUES
Moll and Krug (2008)
CRITICAL POINTS OF THE ARTICLE
Description of changes made to POT course at UBC, where social software platform
was developed to support the teaching and learning of global citizenship in the
teacher education programs.
 Carrie was a student in “POT 1.0”
 Sharissa and I were students in “POT 2.0”
 Perhaps others had a different experience with POT course at SFU or McGill
Argument that educators and students need to engage with and be informed about
ICT literacies, particularly the moral and ethical issues associated with using Web 2.0
applications for learning.
PROJECT GOAL
For teachers and students to learn collectively about what it might mean to be a
global citizen in an era of expanding worldwide knowledge-based societies and
increased access to and engagement with ICT
KEY TERM: GLOBAL DIGITAL CITIZENSHIP
http://freerice.com/about
KEY TERM: GLOBAL DIGITAL CITIZENSHIP
KEY TERMS: ICT LITERACY VS. DIGITAL LITERACY
ICT Literacies vs. Digital Literacies
KEY TERMS: WEB 2.0, (WEB 1.0) AND WEB 2.0
VIRTUAL SPACES
Web 2.0 – begs the question, how does it differ from Web 1.0?
 Focus of my key term project is Web 3.0
WEB 2.0 AND LEARNING
Method:
An Internet-based platform was developed using several open-source software applications to
support large group lectures and biweekly small group meetings as part of the Principles of
Teaching course in the UBC Bachelor of Education program.
Example:
 Exam Questions
 E-portfolio (wordpress as living documentation of our learning artifacts)
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP AND ICT LITERACIES
Specific changes to POT course in terms of ICT:
 developing a social software platform that facilitated opportunities for learning such as collaborative
weblog and wiki spaces and networking capabilities
 using a thematic approach to teaching learning theories and practices – large group lectures plus case
studies during small group inquiry sessions.
Example:
 inquiry session students used RSS feeds and social bookmarking to gather information and tagging and
a wiki to share ideas for lesson plans on climate change issues.
EDUCATIONAL POLICIES, PRACTICE AND WEB 2.0
To avoid heightening any perceived disjunction between educational theory and
practice, the strategy was to engage teachers and students in methods to develop ICT
literacies and to provide opportunities to conduct their own critical inquiry about
established and emerging moral and ethical ICT issues
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR
STAKEHOLDERS
ICT moral and ethical issues are extremely complex, dynamic
 need to be viewed in educational, community, and societal contexts.
Web 2.0 can be used for good or for evil…
Integration of ICT literacies across curriculum, and to recognize these literacies as a
vital component of what it means to be a global digital citizen.
ACTIVITY
Now you get to work
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION USING POPPLET
APP
1. What “tools” are necessary to be a successful teacher in the 21st century?
Please refer to both articles.
2.
Of those, what “tools” are required to create POT 3.0?
DEMONSTRATION OF POPPLET
ACTIVITY!
1.
Groups will be divided into three groups.
2.
Within each group you will be divided into two smaller sub-groups.
3. One group will work around an iPad with one question. One will group will work around
the other iPad with the other question.
4. Using Popplet, you will brainstorm your ideas for the question (please choose a colour for
your group’s brainstorm).
5. After 5 minutes groups will move to the other iPad and brainstorm their ideas in a
different colour.
6. Groups will move back to their original iPad and discuss similarities between what they
wrote and what the other group wrote.
7.
Each sub-group will report out the similarities to the whole group.
CONCLUSION
Activity wrap-up
How does this relate to previous readings?
 Cyberbullying
 21st century learning
 Others?
Technology is a “Tool”? Vs Technology is (Not) a “Tool”?