Yesterday I came across an article written in 2003 by Stephen Downes about copyright and its relationship with ethics. The subject interests me due to its great impact on the empowerment of citizens. It relates to free access to educational/cultural products. It relates to culture and income distribution too. It’s also about exposing your work (and yourself) to those with opinions different from your own. It’s about controlling others. Need I say more?

As usual, I tend to agree with Downes’s points AND keeping my mixed feelings about the subject. Among other things he says, “Copyright, from my perspective, is a haven for thieves. It is a license to claim ownership over anything you might happen to find on the internet (and elsewhere) that isn't clearly nailed down. Worse, it is providing a means for those who enter this free and open space called the internet to put up fences and say "this is mine," to appropriate a network designed for open exchange and to convert it to a private publication and distribution system.”

This sounds quite right and fair. What bothers me is that going against (disrespecting) copyright is illegal. On one hand, well, it could be argued simply that it shouldn’t be illegal (at least not totally illegal), but, on the other, while it is, I don’t feel comfortable advocating for breaking the law. Then I come to a dilemma: as an educator who preaches for citizen empowerment, should I be advocating for a law that prevents/limits the access to education of those who need most? But shouldn’t empowerment and democracy be based on the respect of laws?

I was reading Donald Clark's blog about how much more public life's supposedly become and I thought of myslef. I’ve been fighting my tendency to fight personal transparency. My need to veil my life, my habits, my likes. My discomfort (disgust) for being too open to the world, too traceable, too public. I’m an e-Learning educator; I need to have a public/accessible online Anamaria. I need to socialize and share and learn and network. So far, it’s seemed like a reasonable price to pay, considering how much I’ve learned (and hopefully have helped others learn). So I blog (in English and in Portuguese), I’m on Facebook and Orkut. I’m on SCoPE. I read (with great pleasure) some edubloggers I have come to admire. Yet, every now and then, this weird suspicion comes to my mind… how public, transparent, open is this new world where I’ve come to be a constant visitor (and eventually a contributor)? And of course I don’t ignore the fact that it’s accessible to anyone with an internet connection. I mean open in terms of providing different opinions, opinions I don’t immediately agree with. How transparent is a world where apparently all inhabitants share the same core values, the same basic opinions about education and learning? Sure anyone can disagree—and some do in fact write about their disagreements, but, in general, I’m still protected by a cozy community of peers much like in my private life… Shouldn’t I be openly/transparently networking with those whose opinions I despise? I particularly liked a sentence I found in elearnspace where George Siemens says, “A few good cynics are always nice to have around”. Where are the cynics in the edublogosphere? Perhaps I need to look for them in the private, obscure, offline world?

I came across and interesting post by Dean Shareski comparing the end of religion to the end of school. Basically, he links the structures and rules of religion, which, according to Bruxy Cavey will turn religion obsolete, to the structure and rules of school. This got me thinking about the need for schools as they currently exist. Many thinkers, such as Stephen Downes, have been talking about deschooling for a long time, and it’s difficult not to agree with a lot of what they say. However, what would deschooling cause in developing countries? What effects would children and adults suffer if, instead of going to the existing schools, they were given the chance to decide what, when and where to study. Let’s considering of course they had access to web 2.0 technologies, adequate bandwidth and all the necessary support. What would be our roles as educators? How would we promote self-directedness in a teaching/learning culture where students are still so used to being told what to think and do? Who would replace the schools’ role in promoting tolerance to difference among young people? Would these people become too individualistic? Food for thought…

The Google generation - not enough critical thinking skills

A new report, commissioned by JISC and the British Library portrays the ‘Google Generation’ – people born or brought up in the Internet age – in a way that might be surprising to many. Basically, it claims that, although these people exhibit an ease and fluency with computers, they rely on the most basic search tools and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to asses the information that they find on the web. Now, consider that in Brazil, those with easy access to high speed Internet are most frequently those coming from better educated families and with access to the best schooling opportunities. These people lack critical thinking skills, and, as we have been told by recent studies about Brazilian reality (the latest ISEP), cannot read or write in the fullest sense of these terms… What then can be expected from the vast majority of the Brazilian population? I see the “teaching” of literacy skills—basic, digital and media literacy—the only way to promote their empowerment. However, what does this ‘teaching’ encompass? Hopefully not the throwing of the “right” content, but the cultivation of thinking habits, the promotion of meaningful networked discussion towards real independence and not reliance on the same old experts.

Very informative writing on Steve Hargadon's blog about the ways the Web2.0 will impact the future of Education. He pictures bright horizons, and I can't hardly disagree with him. My only question is to what extent this future will come to developing nations. What can we do to broaden the roads for this future in remote places? Do we really have to wait for physical roads to be built before these ways are cleared? Is it not possible to leapfrog our way to a more prosperous future?

2008 is election year in Brazil. We'll have the chance to choose new mayors, but unfortunately prospects are not very bright: the same people who never get tired… Let me tell you I’m really tired of them. Just in case your hopes are not completely dead, I’m sharing here this fantastic post I found in Harold Jarche’s blog. It's called Remixing Cities and it's absolutely amazing. I just wish our dear candidates had similar ideas. Well, at least we should know what to demand.

Results from the latest ISEP

The results obtained by the latest International Student Evaluation Program, made public by the Oragnisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, showed disastrous results for Brazil and its future generations. According to these last results, among 56 countries researched, Brazilian students are in the 53rd position, the worst in Latin America. Brazilian students scored badly in Maths, Science and, what’s worst of all, in reading ability.

Of course, results from investment in education take a long time to show, but if we don’t start changing this situation now, the future of Brazil will be tragic in terms of economic growth and, most importantly, in terms of human growth.

Could e-Learning help change this situation? I definitely think so. Reaching and preparing teachers in remote areas. Allowing for more reading opportunities for both teachers and students. Promoting discussion and reflection through virtual communities. Fostering the creation of knowledge in and outside the formal school system. How long will Brazilian youth be deprived of the education opportunities they need? Will we be forever doomed to be 3rd class citizens of the world?