deerwood’s posterous

What is Home Access?

'Home Access' is a UK Government initiative, in England, to provide computers and online access to disadvantaged learners to enable them to have access to online resources and services when outside school. It follows on from the earlier Computers for Pupils (CfP) initiative in which schools, backed by Government funds, provided computers and access to their most disadvantaged learners. On one level, Home Access is the continuing Government attempt to close, in England, what has become known as the 'digital divide'.  Home Access, like CfP, seeks to provide disadvantaged learners with a 'taster' of online access as a means of demonstrating to the learner, their parents or carers, the advantages of online access as an aide to learning. The term, 'taster', is used here because, while the computer is expected to have a life of around 3 years, the government initiatives would generally only provide online access for 1 year; the intention, or hope, being that having experienced the benefits for one year, the parents themselves would fund further access. The digital divide, however, is more than just having or not having internet access from home; it is also about the way in which that access is used. Home Access provides the kit and the connectivity, which is just the first step in closing the divide, it also recognises the further issues surrounding use. It is the provision of hardware, though, which is likely to grab the headlines. How likely is Home Access to succeed, though? Well, it already has the experience of the Computers for Pupils initiative to build upon, it has run pilot programmes in Oldham and Suffolk, and it has just completed the Home Access for Targeted Groups project (which provided kit and connectivity for looked-after children and  learners educated out of school). So it does have a fair amount of experience to build upon and help it succeed. All the projects, past and present do rely, though, upon learners and parents becoming convinced of the value and benefits of online access for their learning. Why do it though? Why go to all these leangths and expense to provide learners and their families with online access? Well, the programme is supported by the Government's own findings which appear to indicate that having and using online access has a beneficial effect upon learning; it can improve examination grades, lead to better financial reward and faciltate better learning opportunities for all learners. The underlying purpose of Home Access is therefore to improve the learning and future financial situation of current learners and their families.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Britain's broadband 'not fit for the future' (telegraph.co.uk)
• Digital Literacy Debate (fraser.typepad.com)
• What happens when you give a class of 8 year old children an iPod touch each? (l4l.co.uk)
• Confused message on UK broadband (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Lane Fox: fixing holes in Britain's net (guardian.co.uk)

Original Article

What is Home Access?

'Home Access' is a UK Government initiative, in England, to provide computers and online access to disadvantaged learners to enable them to have access to online resources and services when outside school. It follows on from the earlier Computers for Pupils (CfP) initiative in which schools, backed by Government funds, provided computers and access to their most disadvantaged learners. On one level, Home Access is the continuing Government attempt to close, in England, what has become known as the 'digital divide'.  Home Access, like CfP, seeks to provide disadvantaged learners with a 'taster' of online access as a means of demonstrating to the learner, their parents or carers, the advantages of online access as an aide to learning. The term, 'taster', is used here because, while the computer is expected to have a life of around 3 years, the government initiatives would generally only provide online access for 1 year; the intention, or hope, being that having experienced the benefits for one year, the parents themselves would fund further access. The digital divide, however, is more than just having or not having internet access from home; it is also about the way in which that access is used. Home Access provides the kit and the connectivity, which is just the first step in closing the divide, it also recognises the further issues surrounding use. It is the provision of hardware, though, which is likely to grab the headlines. How likely is Home Access to succeed, though? Well, it already has the experience of the Computers for Pupils initiative to build upon, it has run pilot programmes in Oldham and Suffolk, and it has just completed the Home Access for Targeted Groups project (which provided kit and connectivity for looked-after children and  learners educated out of school). So it does have a fair amount of experience to build upon and help it succeed. All the projects, past and present do rely, though, upon learners and parents becoming convinced of the value and benefits of online access for their learning. Why do it though? Why go to all these leangths and expense to provide learners and their families with online access? Well, the programme is supported by the Government's own findings which appear to indicate that having and using online access has a beneficial effect upon learning; it can improve examination grades, lead to better financial reward and faciltate better learning opportunities for all learners. The underlying purpose of Home Access is therefore to improve the learning and future financial situation of current learners and their families.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Britain's broadband 'not fit for the future' (telegraph.co.uk)
• Digital Literacy Debate (fraser.typepad.com)
• What happens when you give a class of 8 year old children an iPod touch each? (l4l.co.uk)
• Confused message on UK broadband (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Lane Fox: fixing holes in Britain's net (guardian.co.uk)

Original Article

If You Can Google it

One of the people I follow on Twitter sent the following tweet;   "If you can google it, it shouldn't be on a test."   To which I simply replied;   “Nonsense”   What made me say that, apart from being in a bit of a grumpy mood that day?   Education is not about the learner cramming their head with facts, figures and information which they then regurgitate in a test or exam. That is a feature which marred the schooling of many during the latter years of the last century. There is far too much knowledge out there for it to fit meaningfully into a young adult’s brain.   As a middle-aged adult, I know that much of the ‘stuff’ we were taught in school has never been used, or hardly ever used, since. So what was the purpose of the teacher spending time teaching it? Surely that time could have been better spent teaching something else? It seems the only purpose for teaching some things was so that we could reiterate it in a test or examination.   21^st Century learning, if I may use such a grandiose and overused phrase, is not about cramming a learner with facts and figures; 21^st century learning is about using tools to find the answers or information you need. I will say now that those tools are not just technological tools; face-to-face meetings, conversations, dialogue, debates etc., are all included but the technological tools provide a modern and versatile way of accessing and using the information. One of the key technological tools is, of course, the internet search engine, such as Google.   It often appears that while learning in the 21^st century is changing, our methods of assessment are changing only very slowly. Our assessments still seem to be dominated by tests and exams that are still wedged in old 20^th century methods. Indeed, it might even be argued that education as a whole has been held back in its development by the need to produce good SAT and examination results.   So why did I object to the tweet? I did so because it seems to me that the message is basically saying that learners should not use an internet search engine to help them find their answer to a problem. I also object because it seems to represent an old view of testing.   Obviously, the tweet was presented without any context and this is often a problem with Twitter. The same tweet could be interpreted differently by other people. I do apologise to the person who made the original statement if there has been any misunderstanding on my part. (image by dullhunk)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google Squared: A Complete Guide (tbarrett.edublogs.org)
• Who are you and where do you come from? (dougbelshaw.com)
• 3 ways Google Wave could be used in the classroom. (dougbelshaw.com)
• Search Engines becoming part of our Learning Process

Original Article

If You Can Google it

One of the people I follow on Twitter sent the following tweet;   "If you can google it, it shouldn't be on a test."   To which I simply replied;   “Nonsense”   What made me say that, apart from being in a bit of a grumpy mood that day?   Education is not about the learner cramming their head with facts, figures and information which they then regurgitate in a test or exam. That is a feature which marred the schooling of many during the latter years of the last century. There is far too much knowledge out there for it to fit meaningfully into a young adult’s brain.   As a middle-aged adult, I know that much of the ‘stuff’ we were taught in school has never been used, or hardly ever used, since. So what was the purpose of the teacher spending time teaching it? Surely that time could have been better spent teaching something else? It seems the only purpose for teaching some things was so that we could reiterate it in a test or examination.   21^st Century learning, if I may use such a grandiose and overused phrase, is not about cramming a learner with facts and figures; 21^st century learning is about using tools to find the answers or information you need. I will say now that those tools are not just technological tools; face-to-face meetings, conversations, dialogue, debates etc., are all included but the technological tools provide a modern and versatile way of accessing and using the information. One of the key technological tools is, of course, the internet search engine, such as Google.   It often appears that while learning in the 21^st century is changing, our methods of assessment are changing only very slowly. Our assessments still seem to be dominated by tests and exams that are still wedged in old 20^th century methods. Indeed, it might even be argued that education as a whole has been held back in its development by the need to produce good SAT and examination results.   So why did I object to the tweet? I did so because it seems to me that the message is basically saying that learners should not use an internet search engine to help them find their answer to a problem. I also object because it seems to represent an old view of testing.   Obviously, the tweet was presented without any context and this is often a problem with Twitter. The same tweet could be interpreted differently by other people. I do apologise to the person who made the original statement if there has been any misunderstanding on my part. (image by dullhunk)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google Squared: A Complete Guide (tbarrett.edublogs.org)
• Who are you and where do you come from? (dougbelshaw.com)
• 3 ways Google Wave could be used in the classroom. (dougbelshaw.com)
• Search Engines becoming part of our Learning Process

Original Article

Published a new post: If You Can Google it http://ping.fm/mVn0b

If You Can Google it

One of the people I follow on Twitter sent the following tweet;   "If you can google it, it shouldn't be on a test."   To which I simply replied;   “Nonsense”   What made me say that, apart from being in a bit of a grumpy mood that day?   Education is not about the learner cramming their head with facts, figures and information which they then regurgitate in a test or exam. That is a feature which marred the schooling of many during the latter years of the last century. There is far too much knowledge out there for it to fit meaningfully into a young adult’s brain.   As a middle-aged adult, I know that much of the ‘stuff’ we were taught in school has never been used, or hardly ever used, since. So what was the purpose of the teacher spending time teaching it? Surely that time could have been better spent teaching something else? It seems the only purpose for teaching some things was so that we could reiterate it in a test or examination.   21^st Century learning, if I may use such a grandiose and overused phrase, is not about cramming a learner with facts and figures; 21^st century learning is about using tools to find the answers or information you need. I will say now that those tools are not just technological tools; face-to-face meetings, conversations, dialogue, debates etc., are all included but the technological tools provide a modern and versatile way of accessing and using the information. One of the key technological tools is, of course, the internet search engine, such as Google.   It often appears that while learning in the 21^st century is changing, our methods of assessment are changing only very slowly. Our assessments still seem to be dominated by tests and exams that are still wedged in old 20^th century methods. Indeed, it might even be argued that education as a whole has been held back in its development by the need to produce good SAT and examination results.   So why did I object to the tweet? I did so because it seems to me that the message is basically saying that learners should not use an internet search engine to help them find their answer to a problem. I also object because it seems to represent an old view of testing.   Obviously, the tweet was presented without any context and this is often a problem with Twitter. The same tweet could be interpreted differently by other people. I do apologise to the person who made the original statement if there has been any misunderstanding on my part. (image by dullhunk)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google Squared: A Complete Guide (tbarrett.edublogs.org)
• Who are you and where do you come from? (dougbelshaw.com)
• 3 ways Google Wave could be used in the classroom. (dougbelshaw.com)

Original Article

If You Can Google it

One of the people I follow on Twitter sent the following tweet;   "If you can google it, it shouldn't be on a test."   To which I simply replied;   “Nonsense”   What made me say that, apart from being in a bit of a grumpy mood that day?   Education is not about the learner cramming their head with facts, figures and information which they then regurgitate in a test or exam. That is a feature which marred the schooling of many during the latter years of the last century. There is far too much knowledge out there for it to fit meaningfully into a young adult’s brain.   As a middle-aged adult, I know that much of the ‘stuff’ we were taught in school has never been used, or hardly ever used, since. So what was the purpose of the teacher spending time teaching it? Surely that time could have been better spent teaching something else? It seems the only purpose for teaching some things was so that we could reiterate it in a test or examination.   21^st Century learning, if I may use such a grandiose and overused phrase, is not about cramming a learner with facts and figures; 21^st century learning is about using tools to find the answers or information you need. I will say now that those tools are not just technological tools; face-to-face meetings, conversations, dialogue, debates etc., are all included but the technological tools provide a modern and versatile way of accessing and using the information. One of the key technological tools is, of course, the internet search engine, such as Google.   It often appears that while learning in the 21^st century is changing, our methods of assessment are changing only very slowly. Our assessments still seem to be dominated by tests and exams that are still wedged in old 20^th century methods. Indeed, it might even be argued that education as a whole has been held back in its development by the need to produce good SAT and examination results.   So why did I object to the tweet? I did so because it seems to me that the message is basically saying that learners should not use an internet search engine to help them find their answer to a problem. I also object because it seems to represent an old view of testing.   Obviously, the tweet was presented without any context and this is often a problem with Twitter. The same tweet could be interpreted differently by other people. I do apologise to the person who made the original statement if there has been any misunderstanding on my part. (image by dullhunk)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google Squared: A Complete Guide (tbarrett.edublogs.org)
• Who are you and where do you come from? (dougbelshaw.com)
• 3 ways Google Wave could be used in the classroom. (dougbelshaw.com)

Original Article

Primary Schools better than Secondary at teaching ICT?

  This article, although describing the situation in Wales, was of great interest to me. It says that the quality of ICT teaching in Wales was improving, though it was still variable. What interested me most was the finding by the inspectors that Primary Schools did better in teaching ICT skills to their pupils than did Secondary Schools. This backs up a feeling I had a few years ago that we may be heading for a bit of a crisis in Secondary Schools. At this level ICT teaching and practices have been in place for some time, almost certainly longer than in primary schools. However, input in terms of money and training had been most noticeable in recent years at the primary level and certainly an improvement in ICT teaching at primary level could be witnessed. This was brining newer practices and teaching techniques into ICT at the primary level whereas the secondary level was still using its established approaches. So it comes as no surprise to me that the report should find that ICT teaching in primary schools has improved. Let us hope that we can now start to see some improvement at the secondary level.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Advice for New Primary ICT Subject Leaders (redbridgeprimaryit.blogspot.com)
• Learning Platforms, Insets and lessons (digital-teacher.co.uk)

Original Article

Primary Schools better than Secondary at teaching ICT?

  This article, although describing the situation in Wales, was of great interest to me. It says that the quality of ICT teaching in Wales was improving, though it was still variable. What interested me most was the finding by the inspectors that Primary Schools did better in teaching ICT skills to their pupils than did Secondary Schools. This backs up a feeling I had a few years ago that we may be heading for a bit of a crisis in Secondary Schools. At this level ICT teaching and practices have been in place for some time, almost certainly longer than in primary schools. However, input in terms of money and training had been most noticeable in recent years at the primary level and certainly an improvement in ICT teaching at primary level could be witnessed. This was brining newer practices and teaching techniques into ICT at the primary level whereas the secondary level was still using its established approaches. So it comes as no surprise to me that the report should find that ICT teaching in primary schools has improved. Let us hope that we can now start to see some improvement at the secondary level.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Advice for New Primary ICT Subject Leaders (redbridgeprimaryit.blogspot.com)
• Learning Platforms, Insets and lessons (digital-teacher.co.uk)

Original Article

Is this ... the Worst iPhone App Ever?

The above is a video of the Balloons iphone app. I have had to put a video up because I cannot show it to you as it will not work on my ipod touch. Why do I ask, though, whether this is the worst iPhone app ever? This app runs only on the iphone, not only that but it runs just on the iphone with the latest software update. It does not run on older iphones without the update and it does not run on the ipod touch (even if it does have the latest update). Needless to say, it does not run on any other OS such as Android or Windows Mobile. So much for interoperability, then!  In a way, this app is elitist, only people prepared to spend money on the top of the range kit will have a chance to play with it. The fun, the experience and the educational potential of this app will be lost to the majority of people, who do not have access to such top of the range kit. At this point, I shall reveal that my tongue is quite firmly in my cheek as I write this post. The app is really great; it is innovative, imaginative, fun and has great educational potential, if you have an iphone capable of running it, then I'd suggest getting it. To me, though, this app illustrates where interoperability breaks down and that's my point in this article. Interoperability will only work as far as common standards are in place. Yet, to differentiate their product from others, manufacturers are likely to add extras which make their product more 'desireable' in the marketplace. programmers and marketers are then likely to 'exploit' these desireable extras in order to sell the product and then it's 'goodbye interoperability'. Do not get me wrong, I am not saying that interoperability is a bad thing, actually I think it is a good thing but the level of commonality and interoperability must be so high as to make additional extras either unnecessary or appear extravagant. Oh, if you want to install the balloons app, you can find the home page here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Adobe Flash 10.1 to support just about every mobile OS (except the iPhone's) (mobilecrunch.com)
• Learners Y Factor (redbridgeprimaryit.blogspot.com)
• iPhone gets it about a bit (elearningstuff.wordpress.com)
• Learning Innovation, Embracing Technology (elearningstuff.wordpress.com)

Original Article