Technologies: empowering or restricting? The responsibility of education

Technology:
empowering
or restricting?
The responsibility
of education
Technologie: bevrijdend of beperkend?
De verantwoordelijkheid van het onderwijs

Prof. dr. Frederik Questier

Samen werken aan de leraar van morgen
Studie- en ontmoetingsdag IDLO
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 4 mei 2011

This presentation can be found at
http://questier.com
http://www.slideshare.net/Frederik_Questier

Copyleft Frederik Questier, Vrije Universiteit Brussel 2

My background

Frederik Questier
Werken met portfolio's May 2011
04/10/05 | pag. 3 3

My research interests


Research and Innovation Director

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 5 5

Our social responsibility:
how open is the future?
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 6 6

Would you accept
tools with these rules?
➢ You are forbidden to

➢ modify this paper-clip

➢ let other people use your hammer
➢ use this hammer for removing nails

➢ tell others what is written in this book

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 7 7

Why do we accept such
rules for software tools?
➢ You are forbidden to

➢ copy
➢ reverse engineer
➢ modify
➢ use in certain circumstances
➢ use in certain countries
➢ ...

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 8 8

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 9 9

Electronic books?

➢ Would you buy or advise your students
➢ electronic versions of (educational) books
➢ if they were 30% cheaper than paper books
➢ maybe many books on a good reading device ~ paper?
➢

➢ Be aware: often
➢ limited to 1 year
➢ no access in the higher years of study
➢ limited to buyer
➢ no second hand buying or sale
➢ no library
➢ no extensive printing
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 10 10

Expensive and incompatible

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 11 11

Text To Speech software
on e-books
➢ Blessing for the blind

➢ 'Copyright violation' according to
'Author's Guild' (publishers)

→ TTS disabled in Amazon Kindle 2
Remote kill flags discovered!

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 12 12

DRM:
Digital Rights Management or
Digital Restrictions Management?

➢ Restricted
➢ export
➢ copying
➢ printing
➢ Text To Speech
➢ in time
➢ to buyer (no second hand market)
➢ biometric identification
➢ user info “inscribed” in the work (Microsoft Reader)
➢ access info sent back to publisher
➢ to certain hardware (e.g. Mac OS X - Apple hardware)
➢ to geographic regions
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 13 13

Regional lockout
(DVDs, Videogames, UMD, ...)

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 14 14

DRM

➢ is killing innovation
➢ can prevent legal rights such as
➢ fair use private copying
➢ time shifting
➢ lending services (library)
➢ 2nd hand resale of works
➢ donation
➢ access for disabled
➢ archival
➢ public domain
➢ …
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 15 15

Limiting your control

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 16 16

The horror of
'Trusted' computing
➢ DVD User Operation Prohibition
➢ HD-DVD key revocation system (disable your player)
➢ Broadcast flag (no TV recording)
➢ Advanced Access Content System (AACP)
➢ High-Definition Content Protection (HDCP)
➢ Image Constraint Token (ICT)
➢ MS Next-Generation Secure Computing Base (NGSCB)
➢ not protecting
➢ users against viruses and malware,
➢ but media companies against users

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 17 17

DRM in cars

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 20 20

Side effects
of DRM
➢ extra cost
➢ extra waste
➢ lower quality
➢ less competition
➢ less innovation

Digital Rights Management:
A failure in the developed world,
a danger to the developing world
http://www.eff.org/IP/DRM/itu_drm.php

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 21 21

The computer
of the future?
➢ # mobile phones = 3 x # PCs

➢ powerful performance

➢ positive mobile e-learning studies!
➢ P. Thornton & C. Houser, Using mobile phones in English
education in Japan, 2005, Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning 21, pp217–228

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 22 22

→ Dead of the
multi purpose computer !
➢ (Initially) forbidden to
➢ run your own programs
➢ use other phone company
➢ Unlocked iPhones remotely
destroyed
➢ Now
➢ software requires
➢ approval
➢ non disclosure agreement
➢ no approval for 'duplicate software'
➢ e.g. no iTunes competition
➢ remote software kill switch
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 23 23

iPad tablet-pc

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 25 25

➢ Apple customers
➢ “We want porn, if necessary with parental control”
➢ Steve Job, CEO Apple
➢ “Folks who want porn, can buy an Android phone”

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 26 26

But maybe (this porn) filtering
is good for schools?


Well first of all,
there is something rotten
about what they do filter and do not filter


Schools for years had an emphasis on office software

Some of the popular devices today
are designed to make
commercial consumers of its users

In schools we need software and devices that invite
and inspire kids to learn and to be creative!


My fear

➢ (Media and software) companies
will do everything possible
to limit your possibility to copy their works,
or to maximize their profits,
even if it means that user freedoms and privacy
are reduced in internet, technologies and law,
to an unworkable level.
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 34 34

Effect on education?

➢ Computers without programming environment
➢ Black box devices and software
➢ Point and click courses

→ less students study computer science

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 36 36

If you train people on a specific software product,
they will need to be retrained
when the product changes

Give them the opportunity
to explore programs


Is parental supervision
a protection
against the unknown?

➢ Internet literacy of parents
➢ Low
➢ → high parental supervision
➢ High
➢ → trust their children and hardly regulate Internet usage.

➢ Lou et al., 2010 S.-J. Lou, R.-C. Shih, H.-T. Liu, Y.-C. Guo and K.-H. Tseng, The influences
of the sixth graders’ parents’ internet literacy and parenting style on internet parenting,
Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 9 (4) (2010), pp. 173–184

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 38 38

Is supervision effective?

➢ There is no simple direct relationship between
➢ parental supervision
➢ and the (un)safe Internet usage by their children

➢ S. Livingstone, M. Bober and E. Helsper, Internet literacy among children and young people:
Findings from the UK Children Go Online project, LES Research Online, London (2005)

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 39 39

Yearly “Speak Up” survey
among 300.000 US
students

➢ Number one complaint about the technological school
infrastructure:

➢ 2005
➢ “internet at school is too slow”

➢ 2010
➢ “school filters and firewalls block websites that

we need for our schoolwork”

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 40 40

2010 “Speak Up” survey
among 300.000 US
students

➢ Major obstacle to better technology use in schools?
➢ “The ban of personal devices”

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 41 41

2010 “Speak Up” survey
among 300.000 US
students
➢ In terms of streamlining or increasing the effectiveness
of their traditional school processes, high school
students say that they would use their mobile device at
school to:
➢ check grades (74 percent)

➢ take notes in class (59 percent)

➢ use the calendar (50 percent)

➢ access online textbooks (44 percent)

➢ send an email (44 percent)

➢ learn about school activities (40 percent)

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 42 42

BYOD?

➢ (How) are we evolving to the “Bring Your Own Device”
model at school?

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 43 43

1 computer per user?

➢ Esperenza
Computer
Classroom
➢ with software
sponsored by
Microsoft

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 44 44

One library catalog computer per user?
Werken met portfolio's
04/10/05 | pag. 45
Frederik Questier
May 2011
45

1 computer per user?

Computer access for every person
is a nice goal !

But is there really a need
for one computer per user?

The typical commercial model:
“maximum one concurrent user
per license (computer)!”

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 46 46

Free yourself
from dogmas!

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 47 47

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 48 48

K12LTSP
Linux Terminal Server Project

Networked classrooms
Fat server
runs the applications
Thin clients
visualize the applications
Frederik Questier
need no hard disk
04/10/05 | be 15 years old PC's
can pag. 49 49

"The most fundamental
way of helping other
people,
is to teach people
how to do things better
or how to better their
lives.

For people
who use computers,
this means sharing
the recipes
you use on your
computer,
in other words
the programs you run."
50

Free Software

➢ The freedom to
➢ use
➢ study
➢ distribute
➢ improve

the program

51

The software Freedoms
require access to the source code

Source code: if encrypt(password) == encryptedpassword, then login=1, end

Compiled code: 001001011101010011001100001111011000110001110001101

→ “Open Source Software”
Free Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS)
52

Vrije software voor scholen
Lees en reflecteer
➢ Lees
➢ L. Welther, Scholen met lef kiezen vrije software,
➢ Didaktief jaargang 37 (juni 2007) Nr. 6

➢ Reflecteer en beantwoord:
➢ Waarom belangrijk voor onderwijs?
➢ Maatschappelijk belang?
➢ Uitdagingen
➢ Vragen rondom het onderwerp?


http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/
publicaties/default.asp?nr=261


Desktop

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 55 55

Linux

➢ GPL unix-like kernel
➢ 1991 Comp Sci student Linus Torvalds -> 1000 dev, 100 professionals
➢ GNU/Linux distributions
➢ (K)ubuntu (35K programs), Debian, Redhat, Mandriva, Suse, ...
➢ With user friendly window managers (KDE, Gnome, ...)
➢ Support for many languages, also the non-commercial profitable

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 56 56

➢ Free Open Source version of Sun's StarOffice
➢ Compatible with MS Office
➢ Cross-platform (Win, Linux, Mac, ...)
➢ Open document Format (ODF)
XML based, OASIS & ISO standard
➢

➢ >50M users, 170K community members, 12500 developers
➢ 60 languages
➢ PDF & Flash export
➢ Bibliographic manager
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 61 61

➢ Platform independent web browser (Win, Linux, Mac, PDA, ...)
➢ 40 languages
➢ '101 reasons why Mozilla is better than MS IE'
➢ Standards compliancy, popup-blokkers, tabbed browsing, ...

➢ in contrast with MS IE which
➢ Security problems!
➢ Only for Windows. (no longer for Mac)
➢ Development was stalled for many years
➢ MSHTML violates W3C standards
➢ Try validator.w3.org !

FLOSS characteristics

➢ User friendly ← written by users for users
➢ Cross-platform ← recompile source code
➢ High development pace ← reuse of best modules
➢ High quality ← peer review, reuse = survival of the fittest
➢ High security ← peer review, Unix origin, modular, encryption
➢ Many business models

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 63 63

Study on Economic impact
Study on the Economic impact of open source software on innovation
and the competitiveness of the Information and Communication
Technologies (ICT) sector in the EU, 2006, R.A. Ghosh, UNU-MERIT, NL.
et al., 287 pp.

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 65 65

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 66 66

Android

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 67 67

Why is FLOSS
not used more?
➢ Anti-competitive behaviour of closed source companies
➢ Monopoly abuse
➢ Secret formats & protocols
➢ Data lock-in
➢ Vendor lock-in

➢ Not a lot of advertising
➢ Not a lot of teaching

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 68 68

Who can
break the monopoly?
➢ Education
➢ We teach MS because that is what companies use
➢ Companies
➢ We cannot use OSS because our employees don't know it
➢ Employees
➢ Growing number starts using OSS at home
➢ Not happy with inferior software at work

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 69 69

Why for education?

➢ Social responsibility
➢ freedom and user rights
➢ home use for students without costs or piracy !
➢ Savings
➢ Zero cost of software acquisition
➢ Less administration effort
➢ No license management effort
➢ Study of internal workings of software
➢ Student projects
➢ experience international online collaboration
➢ FLOSS knowledge = competitive advantage
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 70 70

Why for education?

➢ Social responsibility
➢ freedom and user rights
➢ home use for students without costs or piracy !
➢ Savings
➢ Zero cost of software acquisition
➢ Less administration effort
➢ No license management effort
➢ Study of internal workings of software
➢ Student projects
➢ experience international online collaboration
➢ FLOSS knowledge = competitive advantage
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 71 71

The possible effects
Example: extremadura
➢ poorly developed region → economic revival
➢ based on FLOSS (customized GNU/LinEx)
➢ computer access for every student
➢ saved >18M € on initial 80,000 school computers
➢ total software cost: 1.08 Euro/PC/year
➢ bigger project
➢ stimuli for companies, centres for citizens
➢ economic revival -> European regional innovation award

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 72 72

Where to find more
FLOSS?
➢ Use your software package manager
➢ if your are using a Free and Open Operating System!

➢ Sourceforge.net
➢ Hosting and tools for >240K Open Source projects
➢ >2M registered users (contributors)
➢ Freshmeat.net
➢ >40.000 projects, mostly Free Software
➢ Google: x AND GPL OR “open source”
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 73 73

Where to find more
FLOSS?
➢ http://livecdlist.com/
➢ If you want to test software without installing

➢ http://www.theopendisc.com/
➢ High Quality OSS for Windows: Firefox, Openoffice,
Inkscape, Scribus, Clamwin, GIMP, Audacity, Filezilla, 7-
zip, PDFCreator, Freemind, ...

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 74 74

Total Cost of Ownership

➢ Free Software is about freedom, not price
➢ In practice: zero cost acquisition
➢ Support is similar or cheaper because of competition
➢ No license management / procurement needed
➢ Cheaper hardware can be used
➢ Less administration work
➢ Bandwidth savings (local central update/software repository)
➢ Training
➢ Usability tests
➢ {MS Windows XP → Vista} = {MS Windows → Linux}
➢ {MS Office 2003 → 2007} > {MS Office 2003 → OpenOffice}
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 75 75

What should we teach our
students about copyright?

How and why to avoid plagiarism?

How to share and reuse!


Information and Communication
Technologies
have amplified
the possibilities for
mass collaboration
and (incremental) innovation

But laws are far from perfect for it

Copyright
th st
18 century vs 21 century
➢ “for the encouragement of learning” ➢ Economic motives

➢ “to promote the progress of science

and useful arts”

➢ Protection on request of author ➢ Protection automatically
➢ 14+14y ➢ Till 70y after death author

➢ Protect authors against publishers ➢ Publishers demand the copyrights

➢ If you give copy to every library

➢ Private and non-commercial reproductions
➢ “Private copiers are pirates”

allowed
➢ Protection for DRM

Creative Commons

➢ www.creativecommons.org
Share what you
want,
keep what you want

➢ 6 combinations of
➢ Commercial – no commercial use allowed
➢ Modifications – no modifications allowed
➢ Sharealike – not sharealike
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 79 79

Why Open Course Ware?

➢ Increase quality
➢ Teachers working together
➢ Best course modules are
➢ reused most often
➢ getting most feedback
➢ getting better again

➢ Saving time & costs
➢ Teachers can start building course from existing material
➢ Creation of animated or interactive learning objects is
often too expensive for development/use by only one
institution
Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 80 80

(Firefox) Creative
Commons Search

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 82 82

www.gutenberg.org
(public domain)

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 83 83

ocw.mit.edu (CCPL)

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 84 84

www.merlot.org

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 85 85

cnx.org

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 86 86

wikibooks.org

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 88 88

Example made with my students
nl.wikibooks.org/wiki/Onderwijstechnologie

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 89 89

Recommendations
for teachers
➢ Publish your teaching material using
➢ Free Licenses
➢ Open repositories
➢ Teach students FLOSS and give Free CD/DVDs
➢ Don't ask your students to give their home work in
➢ a secret format
➢ from software that is
➢ not Free
➢ closed source
➢ non-cross-platform

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 90 90

Recommendations
for schools
➢ Start with pioneers and sensitization
➢ Consider migrating in phases
➢ servers / (multiplatform) desktop applications / desktop OS
➢ starting with new computers
➢ Policy: FLOSS, except if no good alternative
➢ Ask argumentation and which alternatives considered
➢ Policy: open formats
➢ Share experiences

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 91 91

Questions? Comments?

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 92 92

Credits

➢ Photo Keys CC By-SA-NC By BlakJakDavy
➢ Photo Gears: Ralphbijker @ Flickr (CC-by)
➢ Screenshot http://www.olsonbroserv.com/autorepair.htm
➢ Screenshot http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/05/right-repair-law-pro
➢ Screenshot http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/
➢ Screenshot Google
➢ Share matches CC-by-nc-nd by Josh Harper

Frederik Questier
04/10/05 | pag. 93 93

DARE
TO SHARE


Technologies: empowering or restricting? The responsibility of education

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Similar a Technologies: empowering or restricting? The responsibility of education

Similar a Technologies: empowering or restricting? The responsibility of education (11)

Más de Frederik Questier

Más de Frederik Questier (20)

Último

Último (20)

Technologies: empowering or restricting? The responsibility of education