Karl Fisch, Scott McLeod, and others are discussing how to include student voices at NECC. While I admire Karl immensely, I find the scope of the idea inadequately ambitious. NECC means less (next to nothing, I would guess) to students compared to their daily school experience, and their participation in the larger world generally. They should be participating in our edublogger conversations on an equal footing, as equal partners.
But they’re not. I raised the issue months ago and added some student bloggers (and an “Individual Student Bloggers” category) to the Support Classroom Blogging wiki, but nobody has followed suit. Why? Fear of parents? Concern for job security? Valid enough. But this article from Psychology Today about psychologist Robert Epstein‘s thesis, in his book The Case Against Adolescence, points to more: We don’t challenge arbitrary laws that define our youth in counter-productive ways. We confuse man-made (and depressingly American, in this case) laws as “natural truths.” The “truth” in question? That teens – high schoolers, particularly – are “not adults.” And the consequent “infantilization” we inflict upon them as educators and parents.
From the article:
We have completely isolated young people from adults and created a peer culture. We stick them in school and keep them from working in any meaningful way, and if they do something wrong we put them in a pen with other “children.” In most nonindustrialized societies, young people are integrated into adult society as soon as they are capable, and there is no sign of teen turmoil. Many cultures do not even have a term for adolescence. But we not only created this stage of life: We declared it inevitable. In 1904, American psychologist G. Stanley Hall said it was programmed by evolution. He was wrong.
The edublogosphere is as guilty of this as the rest of the education world, generally. “Elevate student bloggers by giving them equal footing in the adult echo-chamber? It’s illegal. Privacy issues. Case closed.”
I don’t think so. Something as simple as a parent permission letter/waiver, maybe coupled with teacher moderation of student posts (if we must retain control and continue the infantilization of our teens), could do the trick. Forward-thinking parents would buy in, I suspect.
Giving them a “voice” at NECC is a token gesture, at best, when the real issue is that we’ve rolled over in the face of laws that silence those voices as valid participants in authentic discourse.
Radical? Yes. But so was every commonplace “truth” we hold now – human flight, moon landings, public education, womens’ suffrage – when it was a new idea.
We need to broaden this discussion about teen voices. Again, traditional “school-y” solutions like a simple parent waiver consenting to student blogging among the adult world might make this “radically sane” idea easy enough to take hold.
Otherwise, we’re stuck reading each other and muffling our young. That’s not my idea of ideal educational practice.
In a conversation on Scott Schwister’s blog, Higher Edison, I ask why it is that churches and church youth group leaders have the right (and take full advantage of it) to lead youth groups with so much more freedom, authenticity, relevance, and effectiveness, than schools and teachers. Why are educators so afraid to be true community leaders beyond the schoolhouse and classroom? It shouldn’t be that way.
I’d love to hear some of your ideas on this. How can we make the edublogosphere itself – not merely NECC – more student-centered? What am I missing?
It can be complicated if parents are squeamish about seeing their child reveal anything about themselves online. A lot of parents are unrealistically scared about online predators. I tried having my students blog about Huck Finn last year, and it was great except for one parent who misinterpreted something I said in a comment, flew off the handle, and prevented her child from further participation. What do you do with a case like that? I see great possibilities for student voices being part of the discussion, but I also see we have some battles to fight. You might be interested in an older post of mine — you may not have seen it since I wrote it before we “met.” A student — not one of my own, but from a school in New England, began a dialogue with me about about some posts I was making regarding grade inflation, and I gave him airtime on my blog: http://www.huffenglish.com/?p=31.
Hi Dana,
Sorry to be so late replying.
I hear you on the parent thing, but again, “forward-thinking parents would buy in, I supsect.” Let those who don’t sit it out, and let those who do watch their children extend into connections and growth far beyond the classroom walls.
We have to start somewhere. Voluntary participation with parent approval seems the place (the legalities of that consent would need to be tight, I suppose).
Fny thing is, here in Korea, the parents of all the students whose work I have featured on my blo have been thankful for “promoting” their children’s work. They’re my natural “parent ambassadors.” Given time, they’re sure to have more and more of a tide-turning effect.
But then again, Im not in the States, thank goodness. DOPA dopes are few and far between here – and blocked sites in the schoolhouse are almost nonexistent.
And there’s no reason NOT to do something just because one or two people are going to try and fight you on it. Take the opportunity to explain the safeguards you have in place, the benefits of this kind of work, and the enthusiasm of the students, and you’ve got a shot at making a convert.
Man, you need higher standards for who you admire!
I wasn’t trying to limit the idea to NECC, the post was simply a reflection on NECC – and I still think there’s some value to be had there. You’ll note that the post concluded with me needing to refocus on getting students involved at my school before worrying about NECC (or your blogging idea, for that matter).
I think you do underestimate the level of opposition to these things, at least in my neck (NECC?) of the woods. Everyone is lawsuit and talk-radio shy, and everyone is scared of “Internet predators”. And churches do have much more freedom to do those things, for all the obvious reasons.
Oh, and do I remember a certain blogger that not so long ago was hesitant to connect his blog with his school? I think some of the concerns that blogger had back then are very valid for quite a few teachers right now.
That said, I will be working in my building next year to develop more of a student voice through “personal learning network” blogs, and have at least a couple of teachers on board. We’ll see how it goes. If I can get them more involved in the discussions/decision-making in my school, then perhaps I can think about tackling the wider world.
Hi Karl,
I realized that I was unfairly characterizing your NECC idea by implying that that was the extent of your thinking on the subject, so fair enough and sorry about that. I still admire you immensely *giggle*
As for American paranoia, that’s where I’m hoping the rest of the world, as I wrote, can just move on and lead, until America follows. It’s ironic that so much of the edublogosphere is Yank-centric, when the American education system itself is responsible for retarding the pace of these changes we all want to effect. The rest of the world doesn’t have to wait, and can maybe exert a corrective paranoia on America by making it fear that its learners aren’t connecting in this flat world as effectively as China, Korea, India, and so forth.
As for the “factors of opposition” you mention, some focused thinking on (simple?) solutions, followed by implementation, can either come now or later. Scott Schwister’s idea of a “LearnerTalk” blog, which could be moderated by adults and could employ whatever anonymity/privacy mechanisms – anagrams or whatever – seems very do-able, especially if targeted at the parents in America (and anywhere else) who are not paranoid. There’s a place to start. Get a good-hearted lawyer to do a bit of pro bono by drawing up a leak-proof Consent Form?
Why is it obvious that churches are more free than schools to lead youth? We read as much or more about predators in the churches than we do in the schools. And so many churches are teaching the young to ignore what they’re taught at school in the sciences and so forth. Why allow churches to be more effective educators than schools? (I know that’s a side issue, but why it’s one is very interesting indeed. And to be clear, I’m not broad-brushing here – many churches, I’m aware, accept modern science, but their numbers seem to be on the wane in the USA.)
You advised me when I was finding my legs back in January to be more transparent. You saw the obstacle and guided me to overcome it. That problem/active solution approach is what I’m saying should continue.
Thanks for your comments, Karl. We’re all in this together, and I hope we can push it further.
Pingback: On the Meaningful, in Quantum Contexts | Beyond School