First of all, Dimitri A. Christakis, MD, writes a thought provoking editorial in the same journal as the paper entitled, “What to Do About the New and Growing Digital Divide?” Christakis writes:

We may be alarmed by the fact that 1 in 3 children report having friends that they have never met in person. This simple statistic reveals just how the Internet has changed children’s social networks.

We also may be alarmed that the majority of children shared personal information online including their real name, phone number, and address. We may be alarmed that 20% of children reported unwanted interpersonal victimization online.

Should we be alarmed? Perhaps. In an earlier post I describe being online is like being in a big city with the red light district just around the corner. Kids will peek down those streets. Some will even venture onto them. And some will try to slip in the doors. The world is changing. There have always been kids that have lived in big cities with red light districts. As parents, many of us have avoided those neighborhoods for a reason. But today, the neighborhoods are coming to us. It’s time we teach our kids responsible street behavior, just like parents and teachers do in big cities. Christakis continues:

Online victimization appears to be about as prevalent as in-person bullying, suggesting that it is not a new or added harassment but rather uses a different format.

The most salient risk factors for victimization found in the study by Ybarra et. al. are just what parents might expect: talking about sex with someone known only online and being rude or nasty oneself. The ways children put themselves at risk in the virtual world appears to mirror the ways they do in the real one.

So, if a door swings open and a child gets an “unintentional” peek at the dark side of bedroom behavior, what happens? What emotional trauma occurs? Well, actually, no one really knows. The Ybarra summary report admits:

There is still no research that sheds light on whether, how, or under what circumstances involuntary exposure to pornography may trigger adverse responses in youth. Clearly the extent of exposure is great enough that even if adverse effects occur to only a small fraction of youth, the numbers in absolute terms could be fairly large. Researchers in the field of sexual development do not know whether there are important “primacy effects” relating to early exposure of youth to sexual material or what the effects of such exposures might be on
anxieties, normative standards, or patterns of arousal in some youth (Escobar-Chaves, et al., 2005; Rich, 2005).

Hmm …interesting, especially since research does show lack of sexual knowledge has been shown to lead to sexual dysfunction. I’m not advocating children intentionally be exposed to pornography, but I do think we should be taking into account our own cultural bias towards sexuality when we begin wondering what harm unintentional exposure might cause. Much of Europe, for example, is very open-minded when it comes to sexuality.

The summary report concludes to say:

Obviously we need to look more closely at this problem to identify additional tools to decrease unwanted exposures.

I’m going to disagree. Pouring money into ineffective software solutions (i.e. “tools”), threats to ISPs, and mandates into public institutions to protect our children perpetuates the fear-based strategies we’ve been following since the first YISS. We need to shift strategies and teach responsible use and street smarts as kids venture out into the internet. Take a clue from Europe.

Can I have my *french* fries now?

To some degree, pulling such activities into the schools is apt to deaden them because school culture generates a different mindset than our recreational life.

I’ve been advocating bringing participatory culture into our education system as an answer to student engagement and learning 21st century skills. The openness of social networking such as MySpace and to some extend, Facebook, is of grave concern to many educators, in particular school administrators that must deal with the legal ramifications of predation and abuse. The fear is a part of school culture. As parents, we expect our schools to lend a certain degree of protection over our children.

So how do we balance protection and participation? We could try to bring in participatory culture and social networking from the broader internet, and filter it, but that has proven to be largely ineffective (see the Wolak, J., Mitchell, K. J., & Finkelhor, D. (2007) study in Pediatrics). Perhaps the solution lies in creating an engaging education participatory subculture.

Imagine if you will, students shifting roles from in-school to out-of-school. But the engagement level remains peaked in both roles. Flow, as Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi refers to, is maintained not only in recreational participatory out-of-school culture, but also in-school participatory learning culture. The school environment can do this as long as the students are engaged in meaningful, global projects that reach out to a global audience for feedback.

Now imagine how these students will adopt to a workplace in which the expectation is to separate in-work global participatory collaborative culture from out-of-work global recreational participatory culture. To be sure, I have no idea if such productivity skills could transfer, but there have been numerous reports (Gartner being one source) concerned with web surfing and loss of productivity in the workplace.

This is a broad topis for discussion. This will be the first of many post on the topic of participatory culture and schools.