Archive for March, 2009

Step-parents

Recently, I had the opportunity to interact with a parent user of our web service over a series of emails.  The contact was initiatied by the parent using the Feedback link in our product.  Her (at least I think it was a her) point in the feedback message was about adding the ability in Connected.info for a step-parent to be treated as a parent in Connected, but not with exactly the same privelages that a parent had.  This peaked my curiousity and I sent an email asking a few questions about her concern and a proposal for what we might do about the situation.

This sparked a series of emails which really illuminated the issue for me.  Before I describe the issue, I would like to compliment the parent on having a very good attitude about the validity of the involvement of a step-parent in a child’s life.  I thought her attitude was refreshing.

That said, here is the situation.  The custodial parent (the one who wrote the note) has remarried and the step-parent in the household with the child would like to have access to the features of Connected that allow the viewing of grades and homework assignments for the child.  The non-custodial parent also has remarried, and the new spouse of that parent would also like the same visibility.

In Connected.info, we drive a lot of our relationships and group memberships from the data stored in the student management system.  We do this to make Connected.info more immediately useful for a user.  The idea being that if there is less configuration to do on the part of the user, there is more perceived value in the software.  Some student management systems do a better job at identifying parental and legal guardian status than others.  In the case of Powerschool, many schools use the “custom field” capability of that student management system to note “special” relationships where they exist.  So, it is possible for Connected.info to identify step-parents when the school district notes them.

But, what if the school district does not note them?  How would such a relationship be identified and an appropriate user status be given to a step-parent in Connected.info?  The request that the parent I interacted with had was to allow her to grant “parental” status to another user.  There are some advantages to that, but shouldn’t the non-custodial parent have a say in whether this was ok?  What if there are court orders preventing the non-custodial parent’s spouse from having access?  This turned into a thorny issue.

The second issue we discussed was the issue of how much access to grant, and specifically, what was seen on the “family calendar” by the step-parents.  I explained that the “family calendar” was essentially a view of events present on individual family members calendars and any groups those users belonged to.  So, then, the question of what constituted the family came up.  Is the family the superset of the custodial parent’s household AND the non-custodial parent’s household?  Clearly, there are issues with that.  Is the “family” then the set of events that only the child is involved in?  That is probably not complete enough a set of events.

What seemed to be the best solution was for the “family calendar” of the custodial parent’s household include events from the individual members of the household and the groups they belong to, but not events that only appear on the non-custodial parent’s household members calendars.

One last issue that came up was that of the child’s calendar view.  Since the child is both a member of the custodial parent’s household as well as the non-custodial parent’s household, shouldn’t their “family calendar” view show all the events from both households?  That is, when they sign in as themself, what evens show on their calendar?  The parent I was interacting with via email agreed that a combined view was appropriate for the child.  In fact, she felt that there was value in both parents being able to see events scheduled by the other parent that affected the child.  However, privacy issues would normally prevent that from being practical.

I found this a fascinating conversation about an area that really does not get enough attention in school oriented software.

No Comments

Connected.info included in the New Media Consortium’s 2009 Horizon Report

The growth of a new company is marked with milestones and we have just had another one with our first piece of PR.  We were mentioned in the 2009 Horizon Report, K-12 edition, from the New Media Consortium.  The report can be downloaded here.

The Horizon report is a nice resource for technology professionals in school districts.  It discusses the trends in technology that are making their ways through the education market.  Their reports have been pretty much spot on over the years they have been published.

This year’s version covers the following trends:

  • Collaborative environments
  • On-line Communication Tools
  • Mobiles
  • Cloud Computing
  • Smart Objects
  • The Personal Web

The report talks about the Time to Adoption for each; gives a nice overview of the trend; discusses the relevance for teaching, learning, or creative expression; gives examples of the trend being used in practice; and, gives links to places to continue learning more.

Connected.info is included in the Collaborative environments section, but we could just as easily have been included in several of the others as well.  I am very pleased we were included, and I am excited that we achieved this milestone.

No Comments

March 4th release of Connected.info

We are really pleased to announce our latest release of Connected.info.  The new features went live on the site this evening.  The maturity of the service is starting to be reflected in the nature and type of the changes we made this evening.  Sub-groups is not an earth shattering new feature, but it is one that will simplify a lot of things and make the use of the product more efficient for some situations.  As a team, we are gratified to have an involved set of early adopters who are helping us continue to build a world class product.

Below is a list of the main changes:
Sub-Groups

  • Any group, including class section groups can now have sub-groups.
  • Sub-group membership can be administered using a new sub-group membership editor.  Users can be added and removed from sub-groups via a quick and easy checkbox
  • Sub-groups have all of the same features as groups

Posting

  • A group owner has the ability to disable (and re-enable) the following features – blog posting, forum posting, and wiki posting by other group members.  Teachers may find this useful for certain course sections.
  • School administrators may disable posting for the entire school district if they wish.  Teachers can over-ride this for a specific course section.
  • Muli-post editing now will only show active course section groups and will display period title and time, as well as room information to help differentiate sections.

Flagged Content

  • Teacher postings in class section groups can no longer be flagged as objectionable.
  • Flagged content will now display who has flagged the content

Group Content display

  • Improved display of group content (blogs, etc.) by limiting the number of items displayed on the main page to the most recent.  A link to show all the content has been added which will navigate to a new page.

Wikis:

  • Connected.info will now display the names of the individuals who made an edit to a wiki and the date the change was made in the wiki history rather than just the dates of the changes.

Assignment Workflow

  • Assignments created in the SIS gradebook will now “auto-post” into Connected without having to be specifically linked to a Connected assignment.
  • Connected.info will honor the “post on” date specified in the gradebook (PowerTeacher) and not post the assignment to the students / parents until the date specified.
  • If there is a date collected supplied in the gradebook, Connected will use that date to show that an assignment has been submitted by a student.

Period order now honored

  • Class sections will now be sorted in period order in all displays

1 Comment

Teaching Digital Literacy in a Web 2.0 age

Recently, I re-read a study sponsored by the MacArthur foundation on Digital Learning.  The study can be found at http://digitallearning.macfound.org.  I may have mentioned this study before in another blog post.  But, as a part of some training materials we developed for our product, I have put some thoughts together on the need to update teaching digital literacy in K-12 in light of all the new Web 2.0 tools.  Time in a computer lab learning Microsoft Word, Powerpoint, and Excel is simply not enough anymore.

The study makes a point (among others) that young people are learning basic social and technical skills that they need to fully participate in contemporary society while interacting with one another on-line.  My observation is that this is true to a point, but that there is a gap in learning when it comes to some areas of digital literacy.  I’ve read that to be a digital citizen means knowing about:

  • Internet access methods
  • Communication methods
  • Literacy
  • Security and Safety
  • Etiquette
  • Rights and Responsibilities
  • Law
  • Health and Wellness
  • and, Commerce

I can believe that some of these can be “picked up on the streets” in ways which formal learning in a classroom or via computer can not.  For example, digital etiquette might be better learned by adapting to the norms of the on-line community one is interacting with vs. trying to use rules learned elsewhere.

But, there are some rules of digital etiquette which make basic communication more productive and less prone to misinterpretation.  An example area is how to deal with commentary on a blog post.  Or, how to comment in a productive manner vs. an unproductive manner.  Being exposed to some simple rules can help avoid problems which may prevent the blog author from having a positive experience.

Digital safety gets a lot of play in the media, and it is a topic that worries many parents.  The idea of a stalker obtaining information from one’s child and worse yet, making contact in the real world as a result of a virtual connection is chilling.  Just like teaching the important message of “Don’t talk to strangers”, we need to be teaching the basics of dealing with the prospect of Internet crime, cyber-bullying, and identity theft.  K-12 educators reinforce the “Don’t talk to strangers” message in early grades, but rare is the lesson plan that includes a discussion of how to deal with cyber-bullying.

Some educators are pushing for mainstream education to include the idea of a digital update on the Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.  (See: http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom’s+Digital+Taxonomy)  It is fascinating to see things like twittering, instant messaging, and text messaging being included in a list of educational objectives.

However, this is very progressive thinking.  Most schools still view many of these tools as distractions and do what they can to block access to the basic tools that students will use the moment they leave school.  Some people worry that this is making school seem increasingly less relevant to our youth.  But, to adopt the widespread use of web 2.0 tools during the school day will require a new model of teaching, and many schools are just not in a position to make the commitment to change.  Why is that?  I believe that society has laid too much of a burden on schools and teachers.  It used to be that the goal of public education was to insure that our youth became ready to take their place as an informed electorate.  Essentially, the very future of our country depended on it – a lofty goal to say the least.

But, as Christensen states in his book “Distrupting Class”, schools are now saddled with so much more from an expectation point of view that it is difficult to conceive how they can be successful, let alone adapt to continuous change. For example, Federal law requires that students be protected from inappropriate content while at school.  This is part of the digital safety concept and I agree that students need to be protected.  It would be great to have some of this burden be borne by ISPs and internet content providers as well so that kids can be protected outside of school too.  I do not agree that cutting students off from the tools they need to be successful is a good plan, but I can empathize with educators who choose to do so.  I would put forth the proposal that schools consider teaching a course or a series of courses on Digital Literacy where the point of the class is to make the students proficient in the tools.  While driver’s education has been cut from many high schools due to budget issues, it is pretty clear that federal programs like e-Rate are there to insure schools can teach digital literacy.

What are your thoughts?

1 Comment