Copyrighted Creativity

Why do copyrights exist? The Technology Source explains, "To provide an incentive for undertaking the risks inherent in creative activity, the owner is granted a limited monopoly on his or her creations (http://technologysource.org/article/copyright_law_and_fair_use/)"

Okay, that sounds cool and fair. Yay to America for encouraging creativity, which often has low money remuneration, etc, but greatly benefits society. But because creativity often DOES benefit society, how do we share that with the world without stepping on the toes of the creator?

As an educator, this will come up frequently in my work. And the best way to create a mood of respect for others' inherent ownership of creativity, that takes setting the example. How so? Citing work and being knowledgeable in how to present work. Showing respect on my part with allow for my students to pattern respectfulness.

I can also encourage proper acknowledgement of copyright issues by simple education! Letting students know what is a copyright, how to cite, and the importance of citing. Even this simple lesson and question on copyrighting in this Integrating Technology into the Classroom has given me a whole other perspective on copyright.

So yay to creativity, America, and yes, copyrights! Because this means that the very words that I'm typing right now (which are so very fabulous) are inherently protected from showing up on someone else's site.

Well, hopefully.   

Virtual Schools?

Technology is evolving at breakneck speed and revolutionizing how we experience the world.

School is no exception.

Maybe you have heard of virtual schools, or have taken online classes. Whatever the situation, technology offers education profound and unparalleled opportunities to learn.

Or does it?

I personally examined the website for Florida Virtual Schools to see if this option offers anything new or of significant value to education. I considered if I would want my child to take these online classes. From my rather neophyte perspective, I have gathered some conclusions on virtual schools:

a) Virtual schools involve a LOT of sitting in front of the computer - according to the projected time required to take courses, a student must sit in front of the computer for about 20 - 25 hours a week. Add on to this the fact that that's all supposed to be "school" time, and kids want to also do more recreation activities online, my kid would probably be on the computer 40 hours a week!

b) Webcams are cool. Phonecalls are cool. Chats and e-mails and Skype conferences are cool. But in my humble opinion, nothing replaces looking another human being in the eye. How would my child go through life, contacting all of the important people in her/her life through some form of technological medium?

c) Virtual schools require a huge amount of commitment to time management and a sense of self-accountability - these skills are often lacking in adolescents (I myself attest to that).

In conclusion, I would let my kid take classes from Florida Virtual Schools if it was one or two classes, but not full time. If I let my kid take classes full time, it would be because:

a) We're traveling in a foreign country and he or she needs to keep up with school, or
b) my child expressed a deep, very focused desire to take all classes online, with also some balance of real-world interactions with people and friends.

Technology enhances life and communication, but please, let's not let it get in the way of connection with other human beings and the world.

Social Networking Evolution

The article that I will be commenting on this week is a case study involving the dangers of social networking. You can read the short article here: http://www.bamaed.ua.edu/edtechcases/Case%20Numbers/social%20networking%20ups%20and%20downs_Case%2012.pdf

At the end of the article, these questions are posed:
1.) What should the University of Education do to the girl who keyed Natalie's car and stole her
clothes?

I believe the University should do whatever the University does to students who would break into someone's personal property and steal his or her belongings. So the question is What is the University's policy?


2.) Should Juicy Campus be held responsible for what happened to Natalie’s belongings?

No. I think there should be more copyrighting protection for photos and content and the like, but in the end Juicy Campus only encouraged attitudes like this and did not cause these destructive attitudes. If it's not Juicy Campus, another website will spring up, and another one, and another one. There is no end to it, so you might as well just face the realities of social networking.

3.) When does social networking become cyber-bullying?

Good question. Social networking becomes cyber-bullying in the hands of immature people. I believe that when people rely too much on internet connections with people, they lose touch of what it actually means to physically and emotionally connect with other human beings. Cyber-bullying can seem so cheap, but really it can be so harmful.

4.) Could Natalie’s situations have been prevented?

Yes. I believe it is a very individual circumstance, and kind of exceptional. If Natalie is an awkward girl who doesn't know how to make friends in person, then she's probably going to be an awkward girl online who doesn't know how to socially interact and make friends with new people.

Ultimately, online social networking is a TOOL, and it is a tool and experience that shall continue for a very, very long time into the future. It's a process of evolution, and we must be ready to evolve with it. Along with computers came computer viruses. So deal with it - now we have anti-virus programs and an entirely new career opportunity in fixing diseased computers! Along with copyright issues on YouTube came the technology to identify music and content from major sources, and then easy avenues to report and remove copyrighted content.

Social networking is a fact of life. So deal with it, Natalie. 

The Do's and Don'ts of PowerPoint

Dear Professor Aburrido,

I heard someone snoring in last Tuesday's class. I'll be frank, I wanted to join in. 

I say this with a lot of love: I have attributed your snore-worthy teaching style to the way you use PowerPoint. PowerPoint is a tool, yes, but it must be used with caution. Not only can a presentation become boring, but vital information can be chopped up into unrecognizable, useless pieces. So, being the concerned and inspired student that I am, I have decided to break down the Do's and Don'ts of PowerPoint. 

1. 

DON'T: Read out long paragraphs verbatim from a PowerPoint slide

DO: Give a dynamic speech with only some key references noted on the slide

2. 

DON'T: use Frilly fonts or colors

DO: Use standard fonts, such as Verdana or Trebuchet and keep the text a standard color

3.

DON'T: Use Phluffy clip art

DO: Use strong, relevant images to tie in with your dynamic speech (see #1)

4. 

DON'T: Oversimplify and distill charts and information down to mind-numbing simplicity

DO: Post important charts or information in some entirety, and give students some silent wait time to read and process the chart - then point out the parts you want to emphasize

5. 

DON'T: Print out your PowerPoint as a way of disseminating information at your presentation

DO: Print out a longer pamphlet to give some anchor and accountability to your audience, but allow the foundation of your presentation to be your speech

6. 

DON'T: Use more than two tiers of bullet points

DO: Stick to one main tier of a topic and then one sub-tier of that topic

7.

DON'T: Display a slide that will not be personally expounded upon for relevance

DO: Make sure every single slide and every single bit of information is relevant and ties in with your speech

Thank you for reading, Professor Aburrido. Although, if you carefully apply these Do's and Don'ts, your name shall be Professor Dinámico! 

Another Look at PowerPoint

This week we take another look at the famous (infamous?) PowerPoint format, as continued in the Tufte article from last week called "The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint."

I shall bring up two other logistical issues that Tufte raises on PowerPoint. The first is how the format of PowerPoint lends a terrible logic and sense to presenting statistics. Tufte argues that tables of valuable data in their raw form is converted into meaningless and convoluted graphs. He gives the example of the famous table about life expectancy and casualties by Graunt - it is a large table with lots of data, but Tufte argues that that is the table's beauty. Trying to dress up the data into graphs or individual slides would butcher the data.

The second issue that Tufte raises is how information is chopped up into strange pieces and then scattered into a plethora of "phluffy" slides. The PowerPoint rendition of the Gettysburg Address definitely had me chuckling. Since it would be difficult to post that rendition on this blog, get an idea of it like this: try putting into a bar graph "four score and seven years ago" in relation to new nations founded; breaking down Lincoln's poetic metaphors about the future of this country into an "Agenda" slide with bullets, and my favorite was the slide entitled: "Shared Vision" and underneath was the bullet "Gov't of/by/for the people."

I had fun reading Tufte's opinions on PowerPoint, I just couldn't help but wonder: "Well, if you hate PowerPoint so much, what do you suggest??" My conclusion last week is ultimately the conclusion I draw this week: PowerPoint is a tool, a very powerful tool. And like any tool (especially powerful ones) it can be abused and wreak havoc.

So beware.

And PLEASE do not reduce JFK's inaugural address into a PowerPoint! Can you imagine?

AGENDA
- Ask not (country)
- Ask (you - country!!)  

An UnemPowered Presentation

In "The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint," Edward Tufte seriously hates on the famous software program. You could say he's analyzing the various pros and cons of using PowerPoint, but let's face it, he's hating on it. And not just from the viewpoint of a disgruntled administrator - he brings in a case study of the Columbia spacecraft crash... and attributes a major reason for its crash to PowerPoint.

Ouch.

Tufte's first argument that stuck out to me was how the format of PowerPoint breeds the usage of hierarchical categories that are simply not needed. "Bullet Points Dilute Thought," he states, which intrigues me. I would think that by summarizing an idea into bullet points and categories, subject matter would be distilled down to its essence, not diluted into meaningless "phluff."

Take note of the screen shot below, which is taken from Tufte's article. He is describing the hierarchical usage in the PowerPoint presentation that was used to describe warning signs that all was not well before the Columbia crash.

Put in this very clear format, the hierarchy used actually seems preposterous! You know, dashes and diamonds and little bullets... It makes sense that the human brain would get a bite of information and then "dilute" it with lots of personal assumptions. He states that this is one of the main reasons that dissemination of information of the damage to the Columbia spacecraft was so scatterbrained and ineffective. Thus, nobody did anything about the damage and bam, the craft crashed.

Another pointer that Tufte makes is that PowerPoint has a low resolution. My first thought was, "Are you serious? PowerPoint presentations can be extremely fancy and high-res!" Then I checked the date that this article was written - 2003. Aha, that explains it. Technology advances at exponential speeds, and the popular PowerPoint is no exception.

What caught my eye the most, though, about this issue that Tufte brings up (and not just discarding it as outdated) is that each slide in PowerPoint condenses information down to such concentrated extents that much is lost in the process. This harkens back to the previous point about how bullets "dilute thought." He notes that presenters put only very little on each slide because of the resolution, thus "with so little information per slide, many many slides are needed. Audiences consequently endure a relentless sequentiality, one damn slide after another."

True, true. I have definitely sat through many a mind-numbing presentations that flashed before my eyes.

The thing is, Tufte hates on PowerPoint, but what does he suggest to replace it? Personally, I believe that PowerPoint is a tool - and like any tool, it can be used improperly and even cause a lot of damage (as in the case of the Columbia crash). But when used properly, PowerPoint can transform teaching and also learning into a dynamic presentation that engages and inspires.

Does This Game Make the Cut?

If you're going to incorporate computer games into your classroom setting, you've got to have a standard.

Not all computer games are created equal.