Among this week’s reading materials, I totally agree with Morris & Stommel (2018) that critical digital pedagogy contributes a lot to our personal learning. It forms a platform where different people from different areas can share their critical thoughts. Students can learn through these political, social and professional spaces.
However, I push back slightly, arguing that critical digital pedagogy can also be used and applied in traditional institutions of education. In my opinion, certain traditional institutions might lay more emphasis on face-to-face communication or manual courses. However, these institutions can consider critical digital pedagogy into daily application. For example, teachers in traditional classes can use online heated news to lead open discussions and supported with visualized online pictures or videos.
When it comes to my most impressive “aha!” moment, I am quite surprised by the FERPA, which is a federal law to protect students’ educational records (Regan & Jesse, 2019). To be honest, I know the importance of big data, since it can push notification or information according to our preferred interests, and in turn helps us personalize our learning. However, I did not pay attention to the aspect of private information protection. FERPA illustrates clearly that schools must tell parents or eligible students about directory information. It reminds me of the survey I have done in Topic 0. I filled a survey if I was willing to make my blog public to others. I think this survey is inclined to some rules in FERPA, since they informed the possibility that our thoughts on blogs might be viewed by others. That’s why I feel surprised at reading FERPA.
What’s more, I want to access to the field about FERPA in our personal learning, such as the accurate regulations about private data collection, publicity and presentation.
I got to know that I got confused by the issue of shared responsibility. In Vaughan & Cleveland-Innes’s (2013) article, they mentioned that all participants in a collaborative learning environment must assume various degrees of teaching responsibilities. Here, this concept does not mention the proportion of shared responsibility among students, teachers and the school administration. Also, it did not introduce some appropriate responsibilities for students.
References
Morris, S. M., & Stommel, J. (2018). An urgency of teachers: The work of critical digital pedagogy. Hybrid Pedagogy.
Regan, P., & Jesse, J. (2019). Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: Twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 167-179. DOI: 10.1007/s10676-018-9492-2
Vaughan, N. D., Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. AU Press
Leave a Reply