Week 9: What is fair use and how does it apply to education?

Copyright protection, fair use, public domain: it’s quite a tangled web. Having worked for many years as a commercial photographer I’ve been involved with copyright questions my whole adult life, and yet I found that I had little of the knowledge needed by a teacher. When I took the Fair Use and Copyright Quiz I scored a humbling 50%. This means that, in spite of trying to apply what I know, my answers were no better than random. Sometimes I erred in the direction of being too conservative in my interpretation and sometimes my error was in the opposite direction.

Still, it is important to have an idea of how to identify whether potentially copyrighted materials can legally be used by both teachers and students. An image that is out of copyright is said to be in the public domain. It used to be fairly easy to know if something was in the public domain: it was either old, created with government funding (for example all NASA images) or was identified as being in the public domain. However, copyright law is subject to both changes by congress and re-interpretation by the courts. This leaves copyright laws subject to ongoing interpretation, and uses deemed legitimate are not always clear. Not always, but sometimes. For example most software is copyrighted and has a usage license— that annoying checkbox where you always answer yes or you don’t get to use it. Software is routinely shared or otherwise obtained illegally by students (and teachers and many others) who justify using it illegally by the fact that they are poor and/or not using it to make money. Music downloads also fall into this frequently ignored but clearly illegal category. I do believe that the creators have a right to make money from their efforts, and that we as teachers need to model for, and educate students about, this issue. 

Unfortunately, many other kinds of usage fall into “gray areas” where it is not so obvious. For example, showing students the video of a movie as a reward for good behavior is a violation of copyright because it is not licensed for public showing. However, under other circumstances showing all or part of the film could be legal under fair use. The rules for use can be complicated, imprecise and subject to change at any time.

Here’s a chart showing some major changes to the length of copyright protection over the years:

I believe I’m allowed to show this chart. I copied it from: Langran, E., Langran, R., & Bull, G. (2005). It seems no more than factual, and I could recreate it in a few minutes. I don’t believe it’s copyrightable.

But what about this chart?:

It’s from an article called Copyright Length And The Life Of Mickey Mouse. The copyright act of 1999, while technically called the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (which is funny enough) is frequently referred to as the “Mickey Mouse Act” because the Walt Disney company is well known for spending millions of dollars in political donations and lobbying for extensions that just happen to keep all their characters under copyright.

According to what I’ve read, to qualify for fair use, four factors must be weighed in considering whether I can safely use this chart in this blog: 1. Purpose of use 2. Nature of the work 3. Amount used 4. Effect on the market.

My “purpose of use” for this chart is education, which would qualify for fair use, although I do want to be entertaining too. If my primary intent is entertainment, how much educational intent is enough? The “nature” of the chart is certainly more creative than the first example, so I believe it would be copyrightable. In fact, legally any creative work is considered copyrighted at the moment of creation. Applying for and receiving proof of copyright gives additional rights for economic redress, but technically it’s copyrighted whether or not it is registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, and regardless of whether it appears with a © symbol. As far as “amount used”— this is not a very precise term. I’m using 100% of the chart, but the chart constitutes only a small percentage of the article that I copied it from. Still, I’m not sure I can depend on this to protect my fair use rights. Finally, I’d say my “effect on the market”, i.e. how much my using this chart will diminish the creator’s ability to earn money from it is nil. After balancing all four of these factors I believe I’m virtually 100% safe in using this chart. I say virtually, because if the creator of the chart disagrees they could conceivably sue me and it would be a matter for the courts to decide. For practical matters the creator would probably ask me to take it down under the threat of action, and if I didn’t take it down they would still have to balance the likely court awarded damages against the cost and likelihood of successfully pressing a court case.

Still, each case is different. The article What is fair use? gives an example of a Jeff Koons artwork that used an advertising photo as part of a larger artwork. Koons was sued for copyright infringement but the court ruled it was fair use. I am surprised that the article didn’t also mention a case where Jeff Koons lost. Koons used a black and white photo of a man and a

woman with their arms full of puppies by photographer Art Rogers as the basis for a sculpture.

The Wikipedia article on this case describes the situation, “After removing the copyright label from the postcard, he gave it to his assistants with instructions on how to model the sculpture. He asked that as much detail be copied as possible, though the puppies were to be made blue, their noses exaggerated, and flowers to be added to the hair of the man and woman. The sculpture, entitled, String of Puppies, became a success. Koons sold three of them for a total of $367,000. Upon discovering that his picture had been copied, Rogers sued Koons and the Sonnabend Gallery for copyright infringement. Koons admitted to having copied the image intentionally, but attempted to claim fair use by parody.” A judge disagreed and Koons was forced to share all proceeds from the work with the photographer.

So Jeff Koons’ use of the photograph to create a sculpture was not ruled fair use and he owed the copyright owner compensation, but I believe, using the four criteria, my use of the two copyrighted works in this blog is. 

Another fair use case decided against the appropriator involves the iconic Barack Obama poster created Shepard Fairey in 2006. 

He admitted to downloading the photo of Obama from Google Images in order to create the poster, but claimed he had no idea who had actually taken the photo. According to an article on TechDirt.com this information was easily obtained: “a photo journalist from Philadelphia named Tom Gralish had tracked down the original photograph -- complete with a copyright credit to freelance photographer Mannie Garcia, who was apparently on assignment from the Associated Press.” Fairey licensed the poster image to a company for use on clothing and other merchandise and the Associated Press sued for copyright infringement. It took until March 16, 2011 for the case to be settled (with no admission of guilt) in a profit sharing agreement. Clearly, copyright lawsuits are expensive for everyone involved and the outcomes are far from certain.

School districts understandably want to avoid any chance of an expensive lawsuit, and hold teachers accountable in making sure they and their students do not violate copyright laws. Copyright infringement is also technically theft and there are also moral issues for both teachers and students. We, as teachers, should both model for students and explicitly teach students to respect copyright. Unfortunately, I believe the blurry border between fair use and copyright infringement can lead to student’s rejecting the whole concept. In thinking back to courses I’ve taken at MSU, I believe there were many infringements by the professors. The same is true in many classrooms I’ve been in as a substitute teacher. When the scrutiny of permitted uses are taken to an extreme it is virtually impossible to avoid the possibility of breaking the law. Unfortunately, this tends to create an atmosphere where the law is viewed as stupid or inequitable. This also creates an situation where these minor violations are never enforced which reinforces the perception that the law is both unfair and ignorable. The playing of videos in class is an example. Just like with software, having purchased the video doesn’t mean you own the content and the content owner can restrict what the video is used for, in this case not for showing to an audience. In the article Are you the copy cop? the authors state “showing entertainment videos to keep students occupied during rainy days recess, for perfect attendance rewards, or for assorted babysitting activities” are a violation of copyright. However, this is so specific that I’m not sure that other uses of the same video wouldn’t be covered by fair use. For example, if I’m teaching music and show Fantasia, and then have the students discuss the use of music with images is this fair use? How much discussion or writing would make it legal? Do I have to only show a part of it? If so, how much is legal? This same article suggests that photocopying by teachers should be monitored and “If a teacher requests copies of an item that may be copyrighted, it should be returned to the building principle for his or her signature before the print job is completed.” Isn't this fun!?

I wish that we, as teachers, could concentrate on the obvious copyright issues and ignore the gray areas and minor indiscretions. Unfortunately, from these articles and my knowledge of bureaucracies (such as schools), it appears the weight of this will fall increasingly on the teachers, so we might as well be ready to take it on.

Week 8: Integration of Technology Into the Classroom

This week we explored examples of incorporating technology into the classroom from the Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) produced by the Florida Center for Instructional Technology. The assignment called for analyzing one of the ‘1-1 access’ or ‘Shared access’ activities from the matrix on this page. 

However, there is a “newly revised and expanded Technology Integration Matrix” that is under development. After looking at videos on both sites, I decided to use an example from this new matrix. 

This updated Matrix includes examples from four different content areas (math, science, social studies and Language Arts) and, as a future science teacher, I found it helpful to see examples that translate more directly to what I want students to learn. The examples are a work in progress, and I would have liked more examples from Middle and High Schools, and I suspect that others would agree with me that some of the examples are not all that good. One example that I liked is at “Authentic Learning|Infusion Level| Science.” Students work in groups of four, and each student takes on a different role (scientist, mathematician, sociologist or technologist), to explore a scientific problem.

I believe having each student have something specific for which they are responsible accomplishes several worthwhile learning goals. First, no student can shirk their own responsibility, so it encourages equal contribution by all the team members. Second, each student becomes the expert in their own area, but needs to communicate what they know (acting as instructor) to the other three “researchers”. Third, they experience how complex problems are usually solved by groups rather than individuals. Fourth, the use of technology and the internet flow naturally from the assignment, as does presenting what is learned by combining everyone’s contribution into a presentation that includes the use of technology. I think these are all useful for students, and all of these, with the possible excepting of my first point, encompass 21^st century learning goals.

As a good example of using technology in the classroom, the assignment naturally addresses a number of specific National Technology Standards (NETS) for teachers. These include 1.b “engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources”; 2.a “design or adapt relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools and resources to promote student learning and creativity”; 3.d “model and facilitate effective use of current and emerging digital tools to locate, analyze, evaluate, and use information resources to support research and learning”.

This course has made me more aware of ways to both use technology in my teaching and encourage students to learn or improve their own use of technology to aid their own learning. However, I am still reflecting on how, and how much, to emphasize technology integration in my teaching. In looking at the descriptions on the Technology Integration Matrix, I find it hard to place my own current level of proficiency. I see areas which can be incorporated into nearly every lesson, and areas which I would hope to incorporate into some lessons. However, some of the goals seem more appropriate for either elementary school teachers or for whole schools to embrace as they seem outside the power of most teachers, at least in the higher grades. For example,  “Infusion: The teacher creates a learning environment that infuses the power of technology tools throughout the day across subject areas”. Other goals seem as if they could only be achieved with the kinds of radical changes to how we teach, such as “flipping” as described in this TED lecture by Khan Academy founder Salman Kahn. For example, “Transformation: The teacher creates a rich learning environment in which students regularly engage in activities that would have been impossible to achieve without technology” to me implies less time listening to lectures and more time doing. As a believer in the need for students to acquire the basic content knowledge to learn effectively, I believe this could only be accomplished if this knowledge is learned outside of class so that class time can be spent exploring what students have learned. Until I saw the above talk I didn’t have a vision of how this could be accomplished, so I’d recommend it if you are not familiar with this idea.

With the above in mind, I would hope to achieve— on at least one or two assignments during a semester— the highest level of Transformation,  However, on an every day level I’d place myself more at the lower level of Adoption, “The teacher directs students in the conventional use of tool-based software”, or Adaptation, “The teacher directs students in the conventional use of tool-based software.” 

After what I’ve been learning in this course, I can at least now say that I’m looking forward to seeing how I can increase student learning by incorporating the use of technology by both myself and by my students.

Week 7: Using a blog to supplement information from class.

Podcast Powered By Podbean

For my biology classes, I plan on having the students maintain their own blogs in which they will post their thoughts related to what they are learning in class, as well as discuss science articles that they find on their own. For my podcast I chose to explain in more detail both where to look for articles and what they should think about when choosing and writing about them. I think this is something that some students may already be comfortable with, and that others may need more explicit instruction in both the methods and the thinking needed. Podcasts seem like they could be an excellent way to make this information available to those who need extra help without boring those that don’t with long explanations in class.


I am using Garage Band and my .mac account which also allows me to add still images to the podcast, however, the format is M4A which is called “enhanced”. When I save it as an MP3 I lose the images. I don’t know if it’s possible to get the enhanced files to show on our blogs, but I’d like to, as I always learn better myself when I have something to look at.


Here is a link to the Podcast on .Mac which has the images. If you are interested, you can compare the difference. If I could embed the M4A file on this blog you would just have the small player window in the middle of the page. You will see that the player offers more control than the PodBean player. You can easily move forward and backward to skip or replay sections. I didn't do it for this podcast, but you can also mark "chapters" to allow moving directly to the section you want to review.


I did try to make the podcast understandable (and interesting) for someone who wasn’t looking at the images. In any case, I believe a series of podcasts like these would be a valuable resource for students that need more help with the technology, and/or the thinking needed. I know that sometimes after I have started an assignment I realize there are parts of it I don’t understand; I like that student’s can listen to the directions again if they realize there is some part they don’t understand. Reading (and writing) step-by-step directions can be tedious, and I think learning this kind of information from a podcast instead might be easier.


I don’t know why Blogger doesn’t support the “enhanced” M4A files which allow images. BeanPod can use these files, so it’s not a proprietary format issue, but when I tried to embed that BeanPod code I got an error message on my Blog. Perhaps there is another blog host that does support these files?

Week 6: Philosophical-21st Century Learning

Part I: Is the 21^st Century Movement the same thing as 21^st century learning?

I don’t think there is any question that changes in technology require changes in teaching. In the 20^th century some teachers might have ignored the influence of new technologies that led to such new mass media forms as movies, radio and TV, but they would have been as wrong as we would be to ignore the influence of the internet and other changes today. Many of these changes are also as much about mass media as technology.  

As educators, it makes sense to ask ourselves whether we believe changes are needed in how we educate our students, and if the answer is yes, how to adjust the way we teach our students. In my own mind I don’t think there is any question about the former, but I have many doubts about how to accomplish the latter. The Partnership for 21^st Century Skills (P21) believe they have the answer and many agree with what they say on their website. 

This week we were asked to read some articles by both critics and supporters of this organization’s prescriptions for change. I have delved into this before, and I have generally ended up with a feeling of “everything in moderation”. I am always wary of cure-all prescriptions, but I am also uncomfortable with the wholesale rejection of ideas. I am also leery of anecdotal evidence— either for or against. I don’t think it is difficult to find bad examples of implementation for any educational philosophy, and both sides have brought up their share. 

I agree with Professor Bigsby that, “Regardless of which movement you side with, the purpose of schooling has remained - preparing students with skills and knowledge.” I believe the debate is about both what best prepares students and what constitutes prepared. Until you decide on the what you can’t decide on the how.

I have already done some reading on this subject, and although there is plenty to ponder in the articles we were given, there are other’s I’d add, such as The Most Daring Education Reform of All by Diana Senechal, and New Jersey’s plan for implementation outlined in Creating 21st Century New Jersey Schools. 

I’m a fan of one of the “critics”, Daniel Willingham, having found his book Why Don’t Student’s Like School? (2009), to offer many insights into what makes for good learning. I was interested in what he sees as the flawed assumptions in the article Flawed Assumptions Undergird the Program at the Partnership for 21st-Century Skills. He is mostly critical not of the goals, but of their prescriptions for implementation. 

It’s not that the ideas are bad, but they clearly are not workable in the way that seems obvious: we want students to be able to do X in the world, so stick more X in the classroom. If it were that easy, it would have worked by now, because it has been tried many times before. That is the great danger of the P21 movement. To those unfamiliar with the history of education, the ideas sound compelling, and in fact, obvious. In the classroom, they are anything but.

Frankly, I don’t see any fundamental or idealogical differences that would prevent changes being made as new information and a better understanding of how people learn are incorporated. However, I don’t think this means we should accept the goals without agreeing on the methodology. Willingham criticizes what he sees as a lack of understanding of “how knowledge and skill work together.” In previous posts I have mentioned being bothered by what I see as a lack of appreciation for the importance of background knowledge to inform thinking, and I would be interested in whether there has been any modification in the thinking expressed by the advocates. I don’t see any reason why not, but I am often surprised when what I see as reasonable compromises are instead seen as basic idealogical differences. 

Willingham sees 3 mistaken assumptions: 

1. Knowledge and Skills are separate. “the 21st-century skills movement in general is too focused on skills (analysis, synthesis, critical thinking) and ignores the fact that knowledge is critical to thought”. 
2. Teachers don’t have cognitive limits. “The P21 group shows no recognition of the enormity of this problem, nor of the likelihood that teachers will end up not using these methods or having difficulty managing them.” 
3. Experience is equivalent to practice. “This means that 21st-century skills like ‘working well in groups,’ or ‘developing leadership’, will not be developed simply by putting people in groups or asking them to be leaders”. 

His conclusion is clear:

I believe [these 3 faulty assumptions] mean that states that adopt the recommendations of the P21 group will find they don’t work.

But are these really the P21 assumptions? I’m pretty sure that P21 would disagree.

I see as a weakness some aspects of the P21 coalition that other’s, I know, see as a strength. Much of the power is corporate or political. I don’t believe either of these groups have shown themselves to be good prognosticators of the future. I see education as being about preparing students for their lives as adults and citizens and not the preparation of workers to enter the workforce. It’s not that I think school should be so abstract that it doesn’t prepare students for their work future, but I do not believe this should be the primary (or even secondary) goal. I don’t think anyone really knows what the future will be. People should learn how to learn, and the duty of schools to corporations is to provide workers who are prepared to learn. As long as the P21 goals coincide with mine I’m all for it.

As you’d expect, I disagree with some of the conclusions of "The Workforce Readiness Report Card" from the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, The Conference Board, Corporate Voices for Working Families, and the Society for Human Resource Management. What is the schools role in preparing students to be future workers? Is “workforce readiness” the primary or even secondary role of K-12 education? How do you define ‘workplace readiness’? Employers can say what they wish new applicants knew, but can they know what will be needed in the future, or even what skills they take for granted that might be lost with wanton changes in the education system? 

My impression since my son entered school is that his education is much more rigorous than anything I experienced before college. More depth, more analysis, more group work. I’ve been pleased with this as, after I entered college, I found my own elementary education lacking. However, there were many in my college who obviously had been in better schools that prepared them better for college. I saw this as an indication of the weakness of my California educational, in general, and the two school districts I attended, in particular. The bottom line is that there have always been better and worse schools, and our goal should be to raise all schools up to as near the same high level as we can.

We can agree on many goals, such as fostering creative thinking and problem solving. However, what is the best way to do this? Children are frequently very creative. And, all too often, we do educate it out of them. However, they are almost never ‘usefully’ creative or innovative until they have learned what is possible. Being creative can include discovering things that are already known, but that you were never taught, but this doesn’t help someone be ‘usefully’ creative unless they learn enough to come up with ideas that have never been thought of before. What is needed to give students the tools they need to be creative and innovative? Is it just an exposure to opportunities? Is it just making sure they thoroughly understand what they are studying? I’d say it’s a combination of them all as well as creating an environment that both encourages this and shows what is needed, including background knowledge, to be creative.

Part II: Can school’s foster creativity?

I love the video of Sir Kenneth Robinson that I posted last week, and am glad to have a reason to discuss it. While it is not about the 21^st Century Skills Movement, it certainly is about 21^st century education. Sir Ken makes the case that while we can’t know where the future will lead us we do know that solutions to problems require original ideas and we can’t afford to squander our children’s capacity for creative problem solving. Near the conclusion of the talk he says, 

We have to rethink the fundamental principles on which we are educating our children… our task is to educate the whole child for the future. We may not see this future, but they will, and our job is to help them make something of it.

Sir Ken defines creativity as,

The process of having original ideas that have value.

This is not an “artsy-fartsy” definition. I believe whether children are educated to be creative, or to discourage their creativity, is one of the great equality questions of our time. It’s no longer accepted in our schools that we can choose groups of people and educate them for the jobs we believe those kinds of people are suited. We call that racism. However, when education fosters creativity in some and not others it can have the same discriminatory effect. 

As Sir Ken says, children start out creative— and then we educate it out of them. We may not be able to educate children to become creative, however, I do believe we can make changes that will keep from educating creativity out of them. One way we can keep from doing this is by expanding what we value in education. I believe the best part of the 21^st century skills movement have the potential to do this. It is that part that I (selectively) embrace.

Incorporating Audio into an Online Presentation

Back to school_night

View more webinars from RC07042.

Wow, that was a lot of work. I tried to include what I, as a parent, would like to hear, but I’m not sure I hit the mark. I included information that fit the school I observed in Newark last semester, but added the kind of technology that I would like to incorporate. I tried to create a presentation that could realistically be presented to a back-to-school audience, but as I listen to it I’m not sure it would be right— or that I would have the nerve to present it. In any case, preparing this with the idea of uploading it for all to view, and re-view, is intimidating.

Sometimes a “picture is worth a thousand words”, and sometimes a video is worth much more. However, they are not without their disadvantages, and I believe video and audio recordings should be used with restraint and only when the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. I have watched many teaching videos online. These have varied from short YouTube videos, to recordings of live lectures, to full courses; and from topics I know little about to those I am more or less expert in. 

At their best these have been opportunities to experience a “live performance” when I could not be there in person, and where no “text” exists. Occasionally I have also found these videos to offer a degree of clarity than would be much more difficult with a more traditional presentation or written words and pictures. 

However, from my perspective as a “consumer” there are significant disadvantages to recorded videos and audios over print. Until fully downloaded it is difficult to skip around, and even then it is not always easy to find what you are looking for. To a large degree, the rate of information flow is fixed. It can seem unbearably slow if the information isn’t of interest to me or is presented in a way I do not find interesting, or is just paced more slowly than I would like. Being paced too fast can also be a problem. However, it is easier to go back and re-listen than it is to fast forward. Also, I sometimes find it hard to understand the material when I don’t know where the presentation is going. With print I can look ahead to preview the information, or skim to see if it is interesting enough to read fully. Also, without the ability to ask questions or the presence of others in the room to check for their understanding or reactions, it is hard to know if it is just me. Another disadvantage is the inability to skim on either first or subsequent viewings. If I haven’t made notes while viewing or listening it’s difficult to review what was said without listening to the entire piece all over again. Finally, taking notes from a recorded presentation is more difficult than from written text, and unless there are clear benefits to the video or audio presentation it does not have the advantages of a more spontaneous classroom environment. Perhaps that is why I find “boring” pre-recorded information more difficult to pay attention to than the same information delivered in much the same way by a live person.

The article “How PowerPoint is Killing Education” by Marc Isseks showed me that some of my complaints are with how PowerPoint and PowerPoint like technologies are too frequently used, and I was pleased to see that the article echoed some of my points. Key for me is that, whatever the delivery method, it is still all about the teaching.

I finish this blog with an example of how I, as a student, like to use technology along with written documents. I prefer if documents are provided in a form that allows me to place the text and images into my own notes. I can copy and past text from a webpage, pdf or word processing document and then add my annotations and notes. Below is a screenshot of a paragraph from this weeks reading along with my annotations:

A favorite new method of processing what I’m reading is to copy quotes (for example, the yellow highlighted sentence above) and then to reflect, or make comments and notes, below it (like the simplified comment in red). I have used this method to keep an entire course’s worth of reading notes in one place. I believe the ability to re-read information and to make notes and later reflect on and add to or change those notes has significant benefits. 


If we are going to make video and audio recordings a part of our teaching, I believe we, as teachers, need to ask, for each situation, if the benefits of a video or audio presentation method outweigh the limitations. In my own personal experience there have been times where I felt it was worth the presenter’s efforts and times when it was worse than if they had only given me an outline of what they wanted to say. I hope that I will be able to walk this line in my own courses.

As a final side note, Marc Isseks’ final prescriptions for good presentations … 

Remove many bullet points. Class notes should be derived from discovery and discussion, not a predetermined list of facts. Create presentations that are rich with images, videos, political cartoons, diagrams, and maps—presentations that feature questions rather than answers.

Don't waste time with fancy transitions and sound effects.

Perhaps most important, keep the classroom lights on.

… reminded me of a presentation I was pointed to a couple of years ago. I just Googled “Great Keynote presentations” and found it again. Although it isn't about teaching, I embedded it for anyone who is interested in seeing a really simple PowerPoint (well Apple's Keynote actually) style presentation which I think has been made immensely engaging and fun. Unfortunately, it also shows how much more difficult it is to do it right rather than filling a presentation full of bullets and built-in effects.

As educators (or future educators) you might like this video about creativity in education: 

Online “Back to School Night” Presentation.

As a parent, I’ve been to a few “back to school nights”. This year was typical where we followed our child’s schedule from room to room and had a 7 minute presentation by each of his teachers.  I’ve heard teachers say they try to pack the time with their presentation to cut to a minimum questions by parents, because these frequently turn into child specific questions more suited to a one-on-one discussion.

Generally, the teachers introduce themselves, try to convey how much they care about your child’s success in their class and gives some information about what the class entails and how to stay in contact. For this weeks assignment we were to include something about technology in the classroom. One of my questions included whether to treat this as a real back to school presentation or concentrate on the technology aspect? Some of our class made the presentation totally about technology, some included it in a general presentation. From my perspective it seemed to make sense to include some info about the class, but to concentrate on explaining how and why technology would be used in the my class. I do think parents today would appreciate this information. 

I do like the idea of uploading these kinds of presentations so that they can be viewed or re-viewed by parents and students. Of course, the fact that they will be available on-line increases the importance of expressing yourself clearly and being sure that School, District and State standards are accurately presented. This is not the place for making comments or promises that will come back to haunt you! 

I also found the idea of using Google Docs for my presentation appealing— at least at first. I found formatting to be frustrating, as some changes seems to happen- or not happen- randomly. I’m not sure that I won’t go back to using either PowerPoint or Keynote.

One concern I have is uploading a complete presentation and not just the slides. Any good PowerPoint type presentation should have just the key points bulleted. If all the information is on the slides why not just do a written document? There is an implied performance to the presentation— which is generally spoken. I know we will be recording a presentation to go along with our slides. I am concerned with how much practice I will need to record something that doesn’t make me sound stupid and/or confusing. My concern is not so much about this one assignment, as how realistic it is to do this on a regular basis as a teacher?

My son’s chemistry teacher puts her PowerPoint presentation on her website. She has told her students not to copy down the presentation in class, but to view it as homework and make notes and copy graphs, etc. from it then. I think my son has found this helpful, but it is just her presentation. It is assumed that the student has already seen the class lecture and is using the slides to help remember what was covered. Trying to record a complete lecture every day seems like a tremendous amount of work. Is that what is expected in the 21^st century classroom? 

I inevitably find it harder to create the content than to do the technology. Coming up with the content for this assignment was no exception. I hope some of the work that is unrelated to learning the technology will be adaptable for later “real life” presentations.