Intellectual Property - Free or Not?

This week's topic has been a brutal slap in the face for me, as I became aware of the fact that I, quite unintentionally, have not been appropriately respectful of intellectual property. First of all, according to Wherry as quoted in Butler's article "Social Responsibility: Intellectual Property Defined," intellectual property is "the fruit of one's intellect." This definition wasn't quite enough for me, so I looked a little further. The World Intellectual Property Organization provided me with a much more detailed definition: "Intellectual property refers to creations of the mind: inventions, literary and artistic works, and symbols, names, images, and designs used in commerce."

Once I knew this, and started to read a couple of the articles, it became obvious to me that I have been a copyright offender, and as a result so have my students. Let me explain. . . The Internet has been a great tool for teachers in allowing them to enhance projects and lessons in many ways. It has helped to enhance my lessons by giving me access to literally millions of articles, poems, song lyrics, and so on, which can be easily printed and copied. I have used these to develop synthesis response questions for my senior English students; lessons on analysis of song lyrics, using these same lyrics as links to periods in history, and as springboards for class discussions, and this is only a short list of how I have used the Internet's "treasures" in my lessons. I have freely used the works of others without asking their permission; however, I have always credited the sources, but according to copyright laws, this is not enough.

As for my students, I can't count the times when I have allowed them to include graphics from the Internet for their projects such as powerpoints and posters. In fact, I have encouraged them to use graphics to make their projects aesthetically pleasing. At the same time, I have insisted that they copy and paste the URL where they have taken these from, but after this week's discussion, I realize that this does not quite cover it when it comes down to copyright laws.

I am still a little confused when it comes to copyright on the Internet, and I clearly need to do some more research/reading when it comes to this topic. For example, when I have my students do their poetry analysis project are they not allowed to use music lyrics from the Internet, or use other poems posted there? I am also not quite sure about the pre-Creative Commons materials. How difficult or easy is it to make contact with people who posted materials on the Internet 7 years ago? Unfortunately, there are numerous pictures on the Internet (Flickr is a prime example) that might be great to include in student or teacher works, but cannot be used because permission is not granted in time for the project's completion. The difficulty arises when the original owners of the work no longer visit or check the site where they originally posted their materials.

This past week I made a concerted effort to only use materials covered under Creative Commons - this was not easy! Partly because this is a relatively new form of dealing with intellectual property, so there still isn't that much out there. However, I did find an article that had a Creative Commons licence, for my discussion on moral dilemma's, and this tied in nicely with the short story "Just Lather, That's All" that I teach in grade 12. So, I realize it is not impossible to find materials that support my teaching, but it is certainly more time consuming. What this means for me, and for my colleagues who adhere to Creative Commons, is that we need to allow ourselves enough time to sift through the information located on the Web. We also need to make ourselves aware of websites that promote Creative Commons.

As for students, I believe many students understand what plagiarism is, but I agree with Tammy Morris' perspective in "Do Students Respect Intellectual Property?" that they do not necessarily understand the issues surrounding copyright, and this can be attributed to the fact that their teachers do not understand it either. Furthermore, I don't know how many of them have heard of Creative Commons. So, I went in search of something that would assist me in trying to explain to my students about Creative Commons, and arrived at this website, which I found quite useful. In particular the Sharing Creative Works slideshow, which has a simple, clear explanation of how Creative Commons works (I think this is accessible to students starting in grade 4, but I am just guessing here).

I believe that most teachers understand what copyright is when it comes to paper materials, but I really believe that there is a misconception that the information found on the Internet is "free for all." After all, if someone is posting something on the Web for the world to see, shouldn't they be prepared to have others use it??? Well the reality is no, the person should have the right to stipulate how he wants the materials used or not used. I believe that it is just a matter of bringing teachers and students up to speed with regards to Creative Commons and copyright on the Internet.

One of the discussion questions this week asked who should be responsible for copyright in the schoolhouse. There was mention made that it is everyone's responsibility, but I tend to think that perhaps one person (and I do believe it should be the teacher-librarian) should be the one to help keep teacher's up-to-date. It would be helpful to have someone who could periodically put on a brief after-school presentation on copyright, Creative Commons, etc. This would hopefully encourage teachers to become aware of what they are doing, and adhere to these laws. I also see this as being beneficial to the new teachers coming into the school. No where in my pre-service training do I remember any discussion of copyright, and I would hazard to guess that this is the case for many teachers currently entering the profession.

I believe in this case it is not easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. We need to be respectful of people's intellectual property.

Photo courtesy of Bettina Tizzy

Bridging the Digital Divide

"The number one benefit of information technology is that it empowers people to do what they want to do. It lets people be creative. It lets people be productive. It lets people learn things they didn't think they could learn before, and so in a sense it is all about potential." Steve Ballmer

Before getting too far into this post, I have to admit that I really didn't know what the digital divide referred to until I read the wikipedia definition. I was under the false impression that it was more to do with the divide between digitally aware students and digitally unaware educators. Was I ever wrong! Although, I do believe it is possible that digitally unaware educators can contribute to the digital divide.

I really liked the simple, yet straightforward model that shows the "four levels of influence that take the form of 'digital divides' in schools" found at the AASLBlog Web 2.0 in Schools: Our Digital Divides Are Showing!














So, for this post, I am going to focus on this model and ways in which we can bridge the digital divide by addressing each level.

* Access - This seems to be one of the largest areas of the digital divide, and there was much information to mull over on this topic, as I began to think outside of my relatively urban community, and contemplate what ICT access or lack of access could mean for students who live in more rural and remote areas of Canada (I am going to narrow my focus to Canadian children, as the global digital divide is such a huge issue). The realization that came to me as I read the 2003 study The digital divide in Canadian schools: factors affecting student access to the use of information technology is that there is a difference between access to computers and access to the Internet. It hadn't really crossed my mind that there are still some schools that use computers as "glorified typewriters" because they are still unable to access the Internet. This clearly puts these students and teachers at a disadvantage in many aspects, in particular when it comes to all of the collaborative web tools available. However, upon further investigation, I had some hope that perhaps access was becoming less of an issue, as I came across Canadian Internet Use Survey completed in 2007. According to this study, the access to the Internet numbers are slightly higher than shown in the 2005 study, with "65% of residents living in small towns or rural areas access[ing] the Internet, well below the national average, while just over three-quarters (76%) of urban residents d[o] so." This study only looked at home access, so I would assume that students would have access at school.

Further to the access to technology issue is that of bandwidth which seems to be a constant battle that I am dealing with at my school. It seems that students' bandwidth is being constantly decreased, whereas teachers' bandwidth is at an "acceptable" size. The problems that arise are significant in that when a teacher investigates whether or not students can access a Web 2.0 site such as Animoto ,for example, she has no difficulty, but once students try to access it and upload pictures, the entire library lab moves at a snail's pace. The frustration level that results for both the students and teachers is imense, and discourages everyone from using web tools to enhance learning.

The key to bridging this aspect of the digital divide is for Federal and Provincial ministries to designate funding for ensuring that rural/remote schools have access to the Internet. We need to make it a priority that equal access at school is provided for all Canadian students. Not only is access essential, but adequate bandwidth is also a necessity for students and teachers in order to experience success with the many available web tools. (However, from what I understand of bandwidth, this may be closely linked to the issue of filtering.) If we deny teachers access to these essential elements of digital education, then we are not helping to prepare today's students for the jobs of the 21st Century. Educators need to lobby for easier access, and maybe this means inviting some of the members of school boards to spend a day in the computer lab so that they can witness first hand the frustration experienced by the users. The best thing that I can do in my own school is continue to be the "squeaky wheel.' I will continue to attempt to use Web 2.0 tools, and I will continue to be vocal when we can't upload pictures, videos and music.

* Skill - Another contributing factor to the digital divide is the skill or lack thereof of using Web 2.0 tools in education. There are many teachers who are not familiar with what is available to them through digital technology, and it is essential that time be alloted to educate the educators. In this week's discussion Joanie and Carol had some excellent suggestions about how this could be done by offering monthly sessions for teachers to learn a new Web 2.0 tool, as well as initiating a grassroots approach where Educational Assistants would be shown some of these tools which they could share with students. I believe that both of these would be excellent methods of bridging the digital divide. Further to this, it would be beneficial to have more professional development opportunities to increase awareness of Web 2.0. I have offered to give a little session in April on Voicethread and Blogging for the English Department at my school, and I have also spent some time with the Social Studies Department talking about Voicethread and how it can be used.

* Policy - This seems to be an issue that is becoming more prevalent as technology and its uses are increasing. It revolves around the issues of "technology policies that enforce slow hardware replacement cycles or restrictive use and filtering policies that block Web 2.0 applications" (AASLBlog). It is essential for school districts to allocate sufficient funding for replacement and updating of technology, but perhaps this could be done in a way that would be beneficial to teachers who do not want access to the Internet all of the time, but would like access to computers. Christine expressed frustration with teachers who book computer lab time in order to allow students to do simple word processing activities. However, I think that there are times when teachers need to do this, and unfortunately there are no other options available to them other than to use the school computer lab. I think it would be beneficial for schools to take some of their older computers and set them up to be used for word-processing. Also, I think that it is important that library labs be routinely outfitted with new computers, rather than receive the computers being taken out of the IT labs.

I keep reflecting on last week's discussion on filtering and I still believe that teacher-librarians need to advocate for filter-free environments in order to teach students how to be responsible web surfers. Esther Rosenfeld in blocking Web 2.0 tools in schools: creating a new digital divide argues that " [w]e now have a new digital divide-between, on one side, students and teachers who have access to the tools of 21st-century learning and, on the other, those who have that access blocked.

*Motivation - Finally, the idea of motivation contributing to the digital divide seems to be closely linked to Policy. The idea that students and educators have different "motivations to either adopt, ignore, or actively thwart learning innovation with Web 2.0 tools" is a new concept for me because I am so motivated to share all that I have learned about Web 2.0 with students and teachers. I think in order to bridge this aspect of the digital divide, it is important to have more professional development opportunities to allow educators to "play" with these tools, but also there needs to be some sharing of information that shows how motivated students are to learn using Web 2.0. I can think of a number of Women of Web 2.0 podcasts that could be easily used to inspire others to integrate digital technology into the classroom.

After looking at the 4 quadrants of the model, it is easy to see that each needs to be addressed in order to bridge the digital divide. It is essential that we find ways to overcome the digital divide so that our 21st century youth can be successful in their future careers. The way that I plan to help bridge this divide is by continually advocating for access to digital technology and more importantly Web 2.0, and to work on a grassroots approach by getting other educators interested and excited about these tools.

Filtering or Censoring - Is There a Difference?

This week's topic has been an eye opener for me, as I truly was unaware of the filtering that happens in schools, and its impact on student learning. My naivete arises from the fact that I am fortunate enough to teach at a school where the level of filtering seems to be quite low. Students and teachers are easily able to access YouTube, blogs, wikis, voicethread and other web 2.0 tools. It was interesting and surprising for me to read as others in the course spoke about their inability to access web 2.0 tools in their schools. Upon further reading, I was surprised by Mary Ann Bell's survey results listed in "I'm Mad and I'm Not Gonna Take It Anymore!" She states that in her survey, 65.2% of the people polled were dissatisfied with the internet access at their schools. I began to wonder why school districts would spend so much money on filters, rather than spend this money on educating students how to use the Internet in a school appropriate way? What does this mean for the students (and educators) at these schools? Should teacher-librarians be advocating for a filter-free environment?

In the discussion, it came up that not having filters could be a liability issue for a school district. Dale McDonald points out in his article "Educating Students to Protect Themselves in Cyberspace" that "[a] 2006 Harris poll conducted on behalf of Cable in the Classroom found that 71 percent of parents believe the responsibility of ensuring children's safety online belongs to the school" (2007). I was a little surprised by this statistic because as a parent, I feel that it is MY responsibility to ensure that my child understands how she should be surfing the Internet, and how to access appropriate sites. I want to be the one who discusses with her how she should deal with certain difficult situations such as coming across inappropriate websites and not providing too much personal information. However, stepping back from this a little bit, I have come to realize that over time I have become more Internet savvy (Thanks for helping with that, Joanne!), and even though I feel comfortable maneuvering my way around, it is very likely that many parents do not feel this way. So what does this mean for our students?

I think it's important for educators to act as "prudent parents" as someone (I think Danielle) put it; however, perhaps we are going too far in this role. I initially argued that I think that it's important to have different levels of filtering at the different school levels, but after this week's discussion I am tending to move away from this view. I think that we need to focus on teaching our students how to be smart searchers, and we need to develop a protocol of what to do in the case that someone happens upon an inappropriate site. After all, "[h]ow does one learn to use something effectively and safely without being able to see and experience actual examples and Web sites" (Abram 2007)? This brings me around to Acceptable Use Policies, which I had never heard of before this week. I think that we need to be moving towards developing and implementing well thought-out AUPs. I tend to believe that these would be much less expensive and intrusive than filtering, and they allow our students to be responsible users of the Internet. All that we do by installing filters is create an environment of distrust; students believe that we don't trust them, and as a result, some go on to try to circumvent the filters, which results in further distrust - this time educators of students.
Another problem surrounding filters is that it is possible "blocking and rating decisions are made by unknown third parties with unknown qualifications and unknown ideological agendas" (Schrader, 1999). The reality is that much of the content that is filtered was chosen by people who do not teach; therefore, it is possible that there is a lot of valuable information and web 2.0 tools for students and teachers that is being filtered. I tend to agree with Schrader (1999) and Ryan (2005) in that it seems filtering can be seen as a form of censorship. Ryan presents both the positive and negative aspects of filtering, but concludes that "[f]ilters cannot be separated from censorship." After reading these articles, and having some time to reflect on the discussion, I am beginning to realize that schools need to adopt a different approach to dealing with the "undesirable" aspects of the internet. We cannot continue to hide behind filters because they provide us with a false sense of security.

As educators, and (future) teacher-librarians, we need to take a stance and demand a filter-free environment. It is our responsibility to teach students how to be smart and safe when using the internet. When I read the Canadian Library Association's Statement on Intellectual Freedom it became even more evident that we should not be inhibiting the intellectual freedom of our students. We need to remember that even though filters might be in place at school, they will not be in place elsewhere in society. We would be better off redirecting the money that is spent on filters and put it towards creating effective Acceptable Use Policies, and educating our students. As "prudent parents" we need to be prepared to trust our children and give them some freedom to make mistakes.
Here's one student's perspective of "censorship" of the internet: