Another must-read blog post from David Pogue of the New York Times today that makes some good points about the value of sharing the process with readers.

He sets up the story by talking about a recent speech he gave at an industry conference.  Just before Pogue begins to speak, an announcer tells the attendees that there are WiFi laptops on the tables, and anything typed into them can be seen on the big screen.  How cool is that!  The announcer asks several questions of the audience.  One was, “Why isn’t your company (or client) taking advantage of Web 2.0?”

Pogue writes:

The audience loved that one; within seconds, there were 132 responses on the screen in a huge, scrolling list. “Not enough money.” “Don’t understand it.” “No technical resources.” “Not enough manpower.” “No visible return on investment.” “Fear of ridicule.” “Fear of slander.” “Fear of permanence.” “Fear of the public running amok.”

Pogue goes on to say that when common-sense practices (like moderating comments in a blog) are employed, the public can participate interactively with something like a blgo without those fears being realized.  In his post, he gives this message to corporate America:

When a company embraces the possibilities of Web 2.0, though, it makes contact with its public in a more casual, less sanitized way that, as a result, is accepted with much less cynicism. Web 2.0 offers a direct, more trusted line of communications than anything that came before it.

I know of a school district that, during tough budget times, publicized a blog authored by the superintendent showing the ongoing discussions and processes of deciding what programs to keep intact, which to restructure, and which to let go of.

In Michigan, where the state funding model, reliant on our faltering economy, cannot keep up with inflation or rising costs of doing business, it’s budget cut season. 

Would your district consider using a blog to make its budgeting process more transparent?

Most people know that I love Web 2.0 tools, but I apply a healthy dose of skepticism when Web 2.0 and student privacy start to collide. 

I’ve heard a lot of stories about how K-12 educators should respond to social networking tools like MySpace and Facebook.  Some folks say we should all have a presence on these sites: be where the kids are, in their digital zone.  I’ve been feeling like a fuddy-duddy about my ambivalence to this idea, though I know my public library friend credits MySpace with sending teens to her teen programs.

Here are some of the questions swirling around:

• Should a school library, librarian, teacher, or administrator “reach out” to kids in their digital world?
• If we would consider it inappropriate to call a student our “friend” in the face-to-face world, is it appropriate to be  “friended” by a student on Facebook?
• How do we respond when inappropriate content on Myspace affects the school environment and, more importantly, the students? Who is responsible? The school? The parents? The child?

So I was thrilled to read the transcript of a recent Education Week chat, in which school principal Conn McCartan and Bowling Green popular culture professor Montana Miller discuss social networking and what educators’ role can or should be in monitoring, interacting, and creating content. 

Their to viewer questions show a great depth of thoughtfulness about how we educators interact with Facebook or MySpace and how that relationship is different at the K-12 level than it would be at the college level.  (When is the last time you heard someone put the words empathy and technology in the same sentence?)

Now brace yourself, because Miller returns to one theme over and over: kids don’t want us in their social spaces.  So there. And they’re not there to learn.  They’re there to be social. 

This is a must-read transcript.  The nuances and issues in the article will be so helpful in helping you navigate your next conversation with administrators, parents, or students.

(One nagging detail, though: I believe that although Ning is discussed in the transcript a a private networking site, its results do show up in Google.  Please correct me if I’m wrong!)

After a close friend kept referring to Eduational Leadership, I realized that I was missing out by not subscribing.  Each issue focuses on a particular thematic focus, and the last two months (Feb - student thinking; March - engaging the reclutant learner) have been paticularly outstanding. 

The issues always have something worthwhile to share with my classroom colleagues and sometimes inspire new directions for our inquiry lessons together. 

If your budget won’t absorb costs to belong to ASCD and receive the magazine (go here and click on “membership”), or attend an ASCD conference, you can read the ASCD blog, “In Service,” for free. 

The blog gives you a snapshot of the kinds of articles your administrators are reading, including free online editions of articles from the print EL or Web exclusives.  One of this month’s free online articles is Marc Prensky’s “Turning on the Lights,” urging schools to stop telling kids to “power down” and leave their technology and communications devices at the door.

Prensky is probably best known for inventing the “digital native/digital immigrant” phrases to show the difference between today’s students and those who remember a time without computers or the Web, so he’s definitely worth reading.

The blog asks us, “Do you agree with Prensky’s notion that requiring students to “power down” in school actually impedes their learning?”   

I’ll leave it to you to answer that.  It’s a tougher question than it seems.

In the meantime, get connected with ASCD.  It will be a constant source of ideas and ways to speak about, connect to, and engage teachers in conversations about student learning.

Image: ASCD Home Page