1. Since when do social networking sites qualify as learning tools? And they certainly don't define the most important portion of the internet.

Parents of children have the right to restrict their activity on the internet as they see fit. And I think that having something in place that restricts the use of these types sites in schools constitutes reasonable protection given the fact that it's well known that predators use sites like MySpace to trick children into all sorts of bad situations.

Why aren't people up in arms with respect tto rights issues when adults are prevented from accessing the same social websites by their employers?

Posted at 2:07AM on May 12th 2006 by Rob S

2. Thanks for the intelligent response, Rob. I do think that social networking sites have great educational potential - check out http://www.takingitglobal.org/ for example. Likewise, even sites less explicitely defined as social networking sites could fall under the criteria included in this resolution. Wikipedia, for example, enables users to create profiles and contact other users. Some people have mentioned Blogger and Flickr - it would be a real shame to say the least if a student doing research on Iraq could not access, for example, http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com

Likewise, the recent school walkouts concerning HR 4437 on immigration were probably super educational, and mobilized largely on MySpace.

It's interesting to ask about the employee situation. Perhaps it's a matter of competetive advantage in the work world - you don't have a right to access any particular sites at work, but if doing so gives helps you provide real value then your employer would suffer a loss by restricting access and perhaps you should work some place hipper if you can.

One way or the other, there is obviously great educational *potential* in social software - I think these legislators are mostly concerned with control. We're all going to need new skills to deal with a new world - including kids - being shielded from it is not going to work.

Posted at 2:23AM on May 12th 2006 by Marshall Kirkpatrick

3. I agree that social sites hold great educational potential. I think that Wikipedia is one of those sites and I would hate to see it lumped in with MySpace for example when this legislation is debated.

I certainly don't think MySpace is evil either. I have a profile there myself. But I do see a lot of adult communications and images there that children need to be educated about. I think that it's the role of the parent to do that educating. That said, I don't believe that MySpace is a productive learning tool. So just like a corporate employee could be restricted from YouTube or MySpace, I don't think it's an outlandish idea to try to make kids time at school more productive or safer.

I recommend that people who know social media contact their local representatives and let them know the difference between MySpace, which is a vertically integrated leisure website and educational sites like Wikipedia, or independently managed blogs. Because it would be a shame for Congress to have a knee jerk reaction and throw the baby out with the bath water.

Posted at 4:26AM on May 12th 2006 by Rob Safuto

4. We just discussed this as a news item on our last podcast. I think it is rather sad. Granted that social web sites MAY not really be learning tools but I recall a few years back when state supreme courts ruled it was uncostitutional to ban porn sites from schools and libraries.

Personally, I learn far more on the WWW than I ever could at a university. I tend to find the right IRC room and pick brain, use RSS to pre-search my intrest. I mostly learn from those I connect with though. I, personally, have not gotten with the whole social web scene as defined by the MYSpacers but I learn much from the gnomies of the WyldRyde IRC network. In short, the social aspects of the web are of enourmous educational use.

One of the more important lessons a young adult (or child for that matter) must learn it the value of time and the value of choices. Regardless of how great or worthless MySpace and such are, restricting such sites only deprives the individual of choice and lessons learned from it.

Posted at 7:24AM on May 12th 2006 by Lumpy the CyberJunkie

5. Thanks for your contributions to the discussion Lumpy and Rob. There are certainly more nuances here than I let on in my original, heated post.

On the difference between Wikipedia and MySpace, Rob - I'm worried that the line is ultimately going to be too hard to draw. For example, there are a lot of silly entries on Wikipedia and there are a growing number of political organizations with MySpace profiles. What of future online communities we can't even imagine today?

MySpace expert danah boyd posts on this yesterday http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2006/05/11/antisocial_netw.html and says that there is a special clause for noncommercial sites. Important! However, I think that the blurring of the business models between nonprofits and commercial enterprises that we see today is just one more way that the world is too complicated for legislation like this.

Posted at 10:25AM on May 12th 2006 by Marshall Kirkpatrick

6. To Rob S, it's not parents doing the restricting (or allowing for that matter), it's the federal government.

Posted at 8:27AM on May 13th 2006 by Christiaan

7. So just to be clear, what you're really saying is, "the federal government should have the right to restrict activity on the internet as they see fit."

Posted at 8:28AM on May 13th 2006 by Christiaan

8. Does anyone remember the debate over calculators? That students would never learn how to do trigonometry if all they had to do was push buttons? Update that argument tenty-five years and what do you get? People arguing that today's new tools are bad for kids.

While it is partly about controlling who sees what, it is more fundamentally about a failure to understand the social and technological context of tomorrow's workforce.

Posted at 5:26PM on May 13th 2006 by David

9. Since when do social networking sites qualify as learning tools? And they certainly don't define the most important portion of the internet.

Since the 1970s when the first listservs started becoming an important networking method for academic and technical professionals? The creation of formal and informal social networks for sharing knowledge The internet as we know it exists because someone had the bright idea that in addition to machine-machine, and human-machine communication, that it could be very useful as a tool for human-human communication.

The idea that learning is a social process goes all the way back to Socrates, and in modern theory has almost a 100 year tradition of research. A large chunk of any educational technology journal (such as Educational Technology Research & Development or the British Journal of Educational Technology) will be devoted to internet-based collaboration and communication systems. There is two decades of prior art behind MySpace, Flickr and del.icio.us. So in effect, this bill is essentially arguing against a fair chunk of 20th century learning theory.

A part of why I don't like this bill, is because I can't think of many sites that would not be covered. Certainly, all the instructional interventions I've worked on in the last 10 years would qualify. But also, Google Groups, Ars Technica, PC World, and my local newspaper with its bulletin board would be restricted. (Off the top of my head, what about Amazon and IMDB, both have profiles and communications systems that could fall under this bill?)

In terms of CMC media, there is not that much difference between Wikipedia and Myspace. In terms of publishing media, there is not that much difference between Ranger Rick and Penthouse either. Librarians both in schools and in public libraries attempt to make informed judgments about whether the content is appropriate to a given age group. I think that if there were a bill on the table that attacked print media with the same fuzzy broad strokes that there would be no question about this.

Posted at 9:50PM on May 14th 2006 by KirkJobSluder

10. Social networking as educational tools!

YES! I discovered some amazing tools including blogs, wikis, and other tools defined as "Web 2.0" and they have literally Transformed my classroom.

These are the most exciting tools created for education. They allow top level students to be pushed by other to, level students. They are a conduit for learning and sharing best practices. They are salient and meaningful to students.

Unfortunately, most adults are not connected with the true societal change that has happened with children today and the fact that the conduit is not evil, but it is the people using it. Steps must be taken to regulate the people!

With all this talk, I cannot find ONE place online where children can go to report predatory behavior that occurs. With one in five children being approached or solicited online, why have we not given them a voice!

Filter a website and protect a child for a day. Educate a child in a supervised, real world environment and protect a child for a lifetime.

(Most schools block myspace right now, I have yet to find one that doesn't!)

Posted at 7:51PM on Jul 30th 2006 by Vicki Davis