Yesterday I was chatting with a science teacher at well-regarded public high school whose classes are geared for the most motivated and high-achieving students. She lamented the extent to which even these students now use their cell phones to text each other while classes are in session, with some students taking frequent "restroom breaks" specifically for this purpose.
The problem is widespread and, at least in her school, appears to have no solution. School officials won't ban or confiscate the phones, students won't relinquish them (even temporarily), and the connection between paying attention in class and comprehending often very complex material appears to be lost on everyone.
Here is a situation that, for students and teachers alike, somehow needs to be addressed and remedied. When student behavior interferes with the educational process, administrators should not shy away from considering all relevant aspects of the problem and implementing policies to resolve it. Nor should school officials be afraid to punish those students who ignore the regulations and disrupt—even silently—the educational process for others.
Even strict rules about the use of cell phones during class won't prevent some students from covertly texting each other. But firm, enforceable policies at least convey the message that, when it comes to the classroom, not everything goes.
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Keeping Your Child Safe on the Internet
Recently I attended a presentation on child Internet safety given by a local police officer. Because I'd been to two similar talks over the past few years, I wasn't sure I'd learn anything new. But, reasoning that things might have changed since then, I decided to go—and ended up very glad I did.
As with the previous presentations, this one featured a fictionalized but reality-based demonstration of how much information anyone could learn about a child with a MySpace (or other social networking) account. Starting with searches of the child's user name and progressing to searches of user names of "friends," the child's school, sports information, chat rooms, and so on, obtaining the child's real name, address, and phone number—as well as details on exactly where and when the child might be in a particular place—was relatively easy, taking only 20 minutes.
What I hadn't heard about before, however, was the lengths to which online perpetrators sometimes go to obtain the information they seek. For example, if a "friend" request is turned down, a perpetrator may create one or more pages on social networking or other sites specifically geared to the interests of the child in question. The perpetrator may also try to become a "friend" of the child's other "friends," indirectly gaining access to the child and eventually becoming accepted as a "friend." Sometimes, to build up trust, a perpetrator will cultivate an online relationship for months, or even years, before suggesting an in-person meeting.
In addition, although a child may feel "special" and that he or she has a unique, exclusive relationship with the perpetrator, the reality is that most perpetrators pursue many children simultaneously in hopes that one (or more) of them will "pay off." As adults, perpetrators are far more sophisticated than even the most streetwise teens and take advantage of their relative inexperience and gullibility.
Perhaps the most important take-home message of the presentation was that no information is private or safe on the Internet—and that there is often much more personal information available there than kids or their parents realize. If your child receives questionable communications from potential predators, contact the CyberTipline at the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children—and don't wait.
As with the previous presentations, this one featured a fictionalized but reality-based demonstration of how much information anyone could learn about a child with a MySpace (or other social networking) account. Starting with searches of the child's user name and progressing to searches of user names of "friends," the child's school, sports information, chat rooms, and so on, obtaining the child's real name, address, and phone number—as well as details on exactly where and when the child might be in a particular place—was relatively easy, taking only 20 minutes.
What I hadn't heard about before, however, was the lengths to which online perpetrators sometimes go to obtain the information they seek. For example, if a "friend" request is turned down, a perpetrator may create one or more pages on social networking or other sites specifically geared to the interests of the child in question. The perpetrator may also try to become a "friend" of the child's other "friends," indirectly gaining access to the child and eventually becoming accepted as a "friend." Sometimes, to build up trust, a perpetrator will cultivate an online relationship for months, or even years, before suggesting an in-person meeting.
In addition, although a child may feel "special" and that he or she has a unique, exclusive relationship with the perpetrator, the reality is that most perpetrators pursue many children simultaneously in hopes that one (or more) of them will "pay off." As adults, perpetrators are far more sophisticated than even the most streetwise teens and take advantage of their relative inexperience and gullibility.
Perhaps the most important take-home message of the presentation was that no information is private or safe on the Internet—and that there is often much more personal information available there than kids or their parents realize. If your child receives questionable communications from potential predators, contact the CyberTipline at the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children—and don't wait.
A (Potentially) Better Use for Spector and Other Internet-Monitoring Software
Following up on my previous post about Spector and other Internet-monitoring software, this one will discuss a potentially better use for this new technology. Some parents have come up with the idea of installing the software on their children's computers as a time-management teaching tool. The reasoning goes that the detailed feedback the software provides will allow kids to see just how much time they're spending (read: wasting) on various Internet-related activities (surfing, chatting, and so on).
At first glance, this use of the spyware appears to have some merit. Today's students are busy and often complain about not having enough time to do all the things their schedules necessitate—including, for many, massive amounts of homework. At the same time, kids may truly be unaware of how many hours per day their on-line activities eat up. Viewing the software's records can be a revelation and may indeed inspire some students to cut back.
The problem is, parents' motivation behind installing the software ostensibly for this purpose may not be as pure as it initially seems, even to themselves. Particularly with uncommunicative teenagers, the software offers parents a window into their children's "secret lives," and the temptation will be very strong to peer through the glass—to monitor, or spy on, what exactly their kids have been doing on line.
Moreover, the sort of time-management feedback the software can provide is likely to have limited use. Although some teens might, just out of curiosity, be open to monitoring their on-line time for a day or two, few will choose to continue doing so over an extended period to see whether their time-management skills are improving. On the contrary, most will likely see through this attempt (however well-intentioned) to "help" them and refuse to participate in the endeavor.
So if you've been considering using Internet-monitoring software as a time-management teaching tool, should you abandon the idea? Not necessarily. If you can promise yourself and your child that you won't look at the software's detailed records—in other words, that what your child does on line will remain private—and if you have the money to invest in what is almost certain to be a very short-lived time-management lesson for your child, then going ahead and installing the software may not be problematic. Just be sure to think long and hard beforehand about whether you'll really be able to resist opening up that Pandora's box once it's there.
At first glance, this use of the spyware appears to have some merit. Today's students are busy and often complain about not having enough time to do all the things their schedules necessitate—including, for many, massive amounts of homework. At the same time, kids may truly be unaware of how many hours per day their on-line activities eat up. Viewing the software's records can be a revelation and may indeed inspire some students to cut back.
The problem is, parents' motivation behind installing the software ostensibly for this purpose may not be as pure as it initially seems, even to themselves. Particularly with uncommunicative teenagers, the software offers parents a window into their children's "secret lives," and the temptation will be very strong to peer through the glass—to monitor, or spy on, what exactly their kids have been doing on line.
Moreover, the sort of time-management feedback the software can provide is likely to have limited use. Although some teens might, just out of curiosity, be open to monitoring their on-line time for a day or two, few will choose to continue doing so over an extended period to see whether their time-management skills are improving. On the contrary, most will likely see through this attempt (however well-intentioned) to "help" them and refuse to participate in the endeavor.
So if you've been considering using Internet-monitoring software as a time-management teaching tool, should you abandon the idea? Not necessarily. If you can promise yourself and your child that you won't look at the software's detailed records—in other words, that what your child does on line will remain private—and if you have the money to invest in what is almost certain to be a very short-lived time-management lesson for your child, then going ahead and installing the software may not be problematic. Just be sure to think long and hard beforehand about whether you'll really be able to resist opening up that Pandora's box once it's there.
Should You Install Spector or Other Internet-Monitoring Software on Your Child's Computer?
Many parents these days are concerned—with good reason—about their children's use of the Internet. Setting and enforcing limits is a pervasive problem, one that various companies have rushed to provide solutions for in the form of Internet-monitoring and surveillance ("spy") software.
One company, SpectorSoft, has created a product for PCs called Spector. According to an ad on SpectorSoft's website, with Spector "you'll be able to SEE EXACTLY what your kids have been doing on the PC and Internet." Spector takes hundreds of snapshots of a computer screen every hour, providing a record of all screens, chat conversations, e-mail viewed and sent, keystrokes typed, and so on.
If you're worried about your child's Internet use, installing Spector or other similar software can sound like the perfect plan. But doing so, either openly or covertly, brings up a host of other issues. Perhaps most obvious is the question of privacy: Unless your child figures out a hack (which can and does happen with any Internet-monitoring software), you'll be able to see everything he or she does on line—at least on this one computer.
That may sound great in theory; in practice, though, you'll not only have invaded your child's privacy but also sent a clear message, if only to yourself, that you don't trust your child. You may well have good reasons not to, but monitoring his or her computer won't solve that problem and may in fact exacerbate it.
And although in the first day or two of the software's installation you could learn whether or not your fears have been justified, ultimately you won't be able to monitor your child's use of computers at libraries, friends' houses, or elsewhere. So recording every move on a home computer has limited utility.
A better solution might be to have a serious conversation with your child about Internet use in which you outline strict consequences for inappropriate activities. These consequences should include restricting the child's access to the computer—and, if necessary, removing it from the home altogether.
(NOTE: Original comments on this post could not be transferred but may be viewed by clicking here.)
One company, SpectorSoft, has created a product for PCs called Spector. According to an ad on SpectorSoft's website, with Spector "you'll be able to SEE EXACTLY what your kids have been doing on the PC and Internet." Spector takes hundreds of snapshots of a computer screen every hour, providing a record of all screens, chat conversations, e-mail viewed and sent, keystrokes typed, and so on.
If you're worried about your child's Internet use, installing Spector or other similar software can sound like the perfect plan. But doing so, either openly or covertly, brings up a host of other issues. Perhaps most obvious is the question of privacy: Unless your child figures out a hack (which can and does happen with any Internet-monitoring software), you'll be able to see everything he or she does on line—at least on this one computer.
That may sound great in theory; in practice, though, you'll not only have invaded your child's privacy but also sent a clear message, if only to yourself, that you don't trust your child. You may well have good reasons not to, but monitoring his or her computer won't solve that problem and may in fact exacerbate it.
And although in the first day or two of the software's installation you could learn whether or not your fears have been justified, ultimately you won't be able to monitor your child's use of computers at libraries, friends' houses, or elsewhere. So recording every move on a home computer has limited utility.
A better solution might be to have a serious conversation with your child about Internet use in which you outline strict consequences for inappropriate activities. These consequences should include restricting the child's access to the computer—and, if necessary, removing it from the home altogether.
(NOTE: Original comments on this post could not be transferred but may be viewed by clicking here.)
Should You Buy a Wii (or XBox 360, or PS3)?
Video games are a touchy subject for many parents—a source of conflicted emotions, ongoing arguments, even financial hardship. Despite these negatives, most parents at least consider buying their children a gaming system, and many go to great lengths (and make considerable sacrifices) to do so.
Why? Video games can have many positive benefits. Some are genuinely educational or skill-building and successfully impart knowledge and skills in entertaining ways. Video games are also a major social currency among today's kids—a child who doesn't know about, play, or have video games is, to a very real extent, "out of it" and, to other kids, even a less desirable playmate. Finally, video games—particularly those designed for the Wii—can be active and family-friendly, providing new ways older and younger generations can bond by having fun together. Even grandparents can get in on the action.
So what's the problem? With all these benefits, why would any parent hesitate before buying a gaming system? Because, as with many choices in life, there are significant downsides. Most parents would rather see their kids reading a book, practicing the piano, or playing ball outside with friends than trying to come in first in Mario Kart. But, given a choice, most kids would rather play video games—they're "more fun."
So activities that, objectively speaking, provide greater educational, social, and physical benefits lose much of their appeal when compared to the prospect of playing video games. Moreover, even if one doesn't consider video games addictive in the strict sense of the word (though this is debatable), they are definitely habit-forming; to the extent that children use what little free time they have to play video games, they get out of the habit of pursuing other activities that, in the long run, are better for them.
As parents, we are charged with looking out for our children's best interests. Yes, we want our kids to be happy, and yes, we want them to have friends. But even if a Wii (or XBox 360, or Playstation 3) accomplishes that (at least temporarily), it does so at a cost. Playing video games becomes much easier—and much more frequent—once kids have their own gaming systems, and using their spare time to play video games is not in children's best interests.
So, difficult as it may be, simply choosing to keep gaming systems out of the home is a better long-term decision for many parents. Their kids will have more time available to pursue other interests (and be more inclined to do so), frequency of arguments about time spent on video games will decrease or even cease, "real world" interactions will increase, and parents will not have to worry that they contributed to any negative effects of a video game habit.
Why? Video games can have many positive benefits. Some are genuinely educational or skill-building and successfully impart knowledge and skills in entertaining ways. Video games are also a major social currency among today's kids—a child who doesn't know about, play, or have video games is, to a very real extent, "out of it" and, to other kids, even a less desirable playmate. Finally, video games—particularly those designed for the Wii—can be active and family-friendly, providing new ways older and younger generations can bond by having fun together. Even grandparents can get in on the action.
So what's the problem? With all these benefits, why would any parent hesitate before buying a gaming system? Because, as with many choices in life, there are significant downsides. Most parents would rather see their kids reading a book, practicing the piano, or playing ball outside with friends than trying to come in first in Mario Kart. But, given a choice, most kids would rather play video games—they're "more fun."
So activities that, objectively speaking, provide greater educational, social, and physical benefits lose much of their appeal when compared to the prospect of playing video games. Moreover, even if one doesn't consider video games addictive in the strict sense of the word (though this is debatable), they are definitely habit-forming; to the extent that children use what little free time they have to play video games, they get out of the habit of pursuing other activities that, in the long run, are better for them.
As parents, we are charged with looking out for our children's best interests. Yes, we want our kids to be happy, and yes, we want them to have friends. But even if a Wii (or XBox 360, or Playstation 3) accomplishes that (at least temporarily), it does so at a cost. Playing video games becomes much easier—and much more frequent—once kids have their own gaming systems, and using their spare time to play video games is not in children's best interests.
So, difficult as it may be, simply choosing to keep gaming systems out of the home is a better long-term decision for many parents. Their kids will have more time available to pursue other interests (and be more inclined to do so), frequency of arguments about time spent on video games will decrease or even cease, "real world" interactions will increase, and parents will not have to worry that they contributed to any negative effects of a video game habit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
