Kim Cofino writes on Twitter:

Join us in our uStream session: http://ustream.tv/channel/isb-edu-stream Conversations about the Future of Learning in a Networked World.

I click the link to uStream and find that 12 others have also joined her meeting, later there were 17 of us.

Vance Stevens is talking and a participant in the meeting links to the slide show he is showing.

Vance keeps us up to speed with respect to when to advance the slides.

I bookmark one of the links in the slides to my del.icio.us, a great link for new bloggers to check out.

I chat with some ‘familiar’ people, Alec Couros and Kelly Christopherson, and ask them to help me out with a Pro-D session I’ll be running with student teachers on the 25th. Chrissy says to ‘Twitter’ her and she will help out. (She actually says, “Twitter us and we will help”). I don’t follow Chrissy on Twitter so I go to my open Twitter window and request to follow her.

I see that I have a new Gmail message in my inbox so I open another window to find out that it is Kris. She is asking if I had seen her new post, which is titled Web2.0 Compatible.

I’m listening to the meeting, I postpone popping open windows to the links Vance is referring to, or checking the live chat on uStream so that I can read Kris’ post. I notice a small typo in Kris’s second paragraph. I also notice a green dot by her name in Google Chat indicating that she is online. I open a chat box and quote her typo back to her.

Kris replies back minutes later that the typo is fixed, (I hit refresh and it is). Kris’ post is about how ‘her generation’ is totally web2.0 compatible.

I continue following the meeting where a participant is talking about how these new applications are now ‘net’ applications and not ‘pay-for’ software. I realize that other than my computer and Internet connection, all this linking and watching and listening and engaging is free.

The most amazing part to all this: It was almost midnight here and I was ‘chatting’ with a student, reading her writing, and offering (minor) feedback… while ‘sitting in’ on a staff meeting at the International School Bangkok, Thailand… ‘talking’ to Kelly in Saskatchewan and Alec in Regina, as well as others in Australia and The UK… and ‘meeting’ Chrissy, a new connection from New Zealand, who has offered to Twitter-in and help demonstrate networking/connectivity at my Pro-D session next week in the suburbs of Vancouver.

All this happened in a shorter time than it took me to write this post!

- – - -

Postscript:

While getting links for this post, I discovered that Chrissy also wrote about this experience. Here is a great image she uploaded. Click on it to get to her post.

…and back again moments later. Apparently this was not a staff meeting, but a session in an un-conference. Kim just linked to the conference wiki page via Twitter.

The first time I saw the term ‘B.G.’ referring to ‘Before Google’ was in Karl Fisch’s ‘Did You Know’ presentation. Tonight that term came to life for me.

Here is an eye-opening statistic I discovered about myself today:

Total Google searches: 3633 (Since April 30th, 2006, and only counting when I have been signed into Google.)

I did some quick number crunching: On average, I use Google about 450 times a month, which also averages to about 15 times a day. I really do have to ask, what did I do B.G. – Before Google?

If you have a Google account you can check out your own history here http://www.google.com/history/

Have a look at my Googling trends: (The secret is out… I am a night owl!)

Above and beyond this chart, there is actually quite a lot here that Google knows about me. Add to this the things I choose to RSS into Google Reader, the things I choose to Star and Share there, the sites I sign up with on Gmail, the people (and information) I e-mail, and basically Google could start to make decisions for me.

- – - – -

A.G. – After Google

How far away are we from having Google prioritizing items in our e-mail and RSS feeds for us? Or providing us with personalized search results? I wonder how far this could go?

Will there be a truly semantic web? Although Stephen Downes says ‘no’, and makes a very knowledgeable and compelling argument, I wonder if he isn’t looking at it from a paradigm that will change?

Stephen states:

But the big problem is they believed everyone would work together:
- would agree on web standards (hah!)
- would adopt a common vocabulary (you don’t say)
- would reliably expose their APIs so anyone could use them (as if)

But I think of the sophistication of Language Translators today and wonder if standards and vocabulary will have to be stringent? Perhaps there will come a time when it will be enough to have a somewhat common vocabulary (congruent semantics within different languages)… and so ‘loose’ standards become beneficial since if you choose to follow along, you reap greater benefits. Or perhaps the same way Mashups scrape information from multiple sites a semantic web could be built by information scraping?

How many billions of dollars were spent on laying down fiber cables in the few years before wireless access mushroomed?

How many experts thought blogs would fail? Without RSS blogs would never have become so prolific. Blogs came first, but they might have drifted to the fringe without the ability to have feeds go to the reader.

Is a semantic web really doomed to fail or is it inevitable? Web4.0 – your webmodality.

- – - – - -

C.E. -Communal Era

I’m not changing my behavior because I have become aware that ‘Google is watching’ and tracking what I do.

And yet I’m not fully trusting either. How accurately can they pinpoint my interests and focus Google ads towards me? (With a last name of Truss this would be refreshing… Yahoo always shows me Roofing and Bra Support ads.) Furthermore, who else can see my information? Who decides this? How secure is my information? All these things concern me, yet I’m still using Google.

There is an option to ‘pause’ the history tracking and also to ‘remove’ an item in Google History, but do these things actually happen or just disappear from my view? (I recall some issues with Gmail not ‘deleting forever’ after such a request was made.) Yet I’m still using Google.

With OpenID and Corporate ID (Youtube is Google, Flickr is Yahoo) I am going to be sharing my information regardless of how much I chose to ‘pause’ or ‘block’ or ‘remove’ information from the web. My information is communal/shared to a very large extent!

What really concerns me is how this information about me will be used to “help” me? Will “smarter” searches force like-minded ideas on me? Will they stifle my creativity? Will I suffer the ‘Dumbness of Crowds‘?

Will a semantic web shield me from an onslaught of unnecessary information or will it insulate me from possibilities and learning opportunities?

It’s the old allegory of the cave.

Last Friday I was leaving the school and I popped into my VP’s office. Among other things, Anthony and I often talk about technology in the classroom. One thing led to another and I showed him the YouTube video that was the subject of my last post: iPhone tutorial from a two-year-old. It was shortly after this, while I was saying something, that Anthony interrupted me:

“You can’t go back now, can you?”
“What?”
“You could never be able to go back to teaching without technology, could you?
“No.”

Driving home after our conversation it occurred to me what a transformation my teaching has gone through in the past couple years. Could I go back to a classroom and teach void of blogs, wikis, & online networks? Well, of course I could, but I just wouldn’t want to!

Not only do I never want to go back, but I have become an evangelist.
However I’ve noticed a bit of a backlash among teachers. Comments like “We can do that without technology” miss the point about what students have the potential to do. “Every time I get them in the computer room all they do is Facebook” recognizes that technology is a tool, not an answer, but comments such as these are used as excuses rather than challenges.

In the past few weeks I’ve heard more than one teacher say, “What is Facebook”, and “What is a wiki?”. This I can handle. But then I hear about how technology is evil; about what a distraction it is. Well here is a little news flash… IT ISN’T GOING ANYWHERE!

There are times I just want to put my head down, improve what I am doing as a teacher, and forget that there is ‘work to be done’. I can’t. Not only can’t I return to life in Plato’s cave, but I am also compelled to ‘share the true light’. I now realize that at times I am destined to be seen as ‘blinded’, such will be the lot in life for many of us.

Can you go back now?

I’ve bounced some digital immigrant/native ideas around a few times. Now I have one more thing to add.

When I was young my sister had dolls that spoke. This was so amazing! You pulled a string in the doll’s neck and as it recoiled the doll said, “Hi Ma-ma” or some other short phrase. Later the dolls would say a series of phrases, changing with each pull-of-the-string. Now my daughters have My e-Pets and Webkinz. Next comes this video:

It seems that the ‘Immigrant/Native’ argument is moot. I called the digital range in competency/capability of students a spectrum, not a dichotomy, (I think the correct word should have been continuum -note the reflection/comments on the post to see why I now think ‘spectrum’ is better than ‘continuum’). The fact is students can’t be lumped into general categories such as this. George Siemens summarizes this point better than I can, so read his post, and I’ll move on to the point of this post.

There is an issue of ‘digital exposure’ that many (but not all) of today’s kids have that simply wasn’t available when we were young. Despite my new distaste for the ‘digital native’ catch phrase, I am back to liking my Batman/Borg quote:

“I come from the Batman era, adding items to my utility belt while students today are the Borg from Star Trek, assimilating technology into their lives.”

My daughters interact with their toys in ways that I never could. In the same vein, two year old Paige from the above video will expect her toys to interact with her, to provide her with choices that I never had. Does it not follow that she will expect the same interaction and engagement in school?

Basically this is about ‘exposure to’ and ‘integration with’ digital technology at a young age as opposed to ‘adaptation to’ digital technology later on in life.

When Paige is 9, she will have peers that instant meesage each other on their PDA‘s… they will be more likely to communicate online at a younger age… they will be more likely to connect to like-minded social groups digitally. They will be continually exposed to ‘new technology’ that they won’t ever remember living without. (Technology and tools that we name, and they participate with.)

Meanwhile, I will continue promoting the value of integrating technology into the classroom to teachers who have “enough on their plate already”. I will offer out some ‘delicious‘ tools for their utility belts… while Paige plays with an iPhone and learns to connect to the world around her in ways many of us are now learning about… learning side-by-side with a two year old.

Have you ever spent hours working on something and then looked at the final product only to wonder where the time and effort went? That’s how I feel about the rubric I have been working on for the Graduation Transitions Program (for which I am the coordinator at our school).

Last year, under the old program, the ‘Final Presentation’ was about showing evidence and meeting criteria. This year the ‘Exit Interview’ is more about the journey…

So how do you create a rubric to give feedback to students about their journey? I decided on a few things first:

1. Reflection is important and needs to be valued.
2. This is a big transition… some forward planning also needs to be valued.
3. This is NOT a grade! (The program is not graded, you just need to meet the requirements.)
4. It needs to be ‘different’ enough that the many different teachers doing the interview won’t fall into ‘grading’ mode.

Here is what I came up with… (Link to a larger view)

At this point I can’t decide if this achieves what I want it to, or if I wasted my time… feedback is really appreciated… I have to present this to students on Monday.