Month: October 2023

This last week I read Chapter 6 of Argument in the Real World by Turner and Hicks. This chapter focused on how users can interact with discussions on social media in a responsible way without spreading or sharing misinformation. With the widespread posting of misinformation via Internet platforms like social media, we must be vigilant in evaluating and questioning the validity of the information we encounter (Khan & Idris, 2019). Turner and Hicks (2011) offer the “MINDFUL heuristic” (p. 108) to help us do just that. MINDFUL helps us remember to always: MONITOR what we read and write; IDENTIFY the main claim of what we read or write; NOTE what evidence is used to support claims; DETERMINE if the evidence clearly supports the claim and what the mindset of the author is; FACTS – Identify if the evidence is based on facts, opinions, or both; UNDERSTAND opposing views to the argument; and LEVERAGE how others will take your response (Turner & Hicks, 2011, pp. 109-110).

The State Department of Education of California has recently undertaken the daunting task of rewriting the math framework for the state.  Several prominent mathematicians have criticized the framework. Much of the criticism revolved around the citing of research that was not peer-reviewed in the document as well as some research that had opposite conclusions to what the framework document reports. The other big criticism is the introduction of new courses that would substitute for a second year of algebra. Many of these proposed courses are labeled as “data science,” when in reality they would be more appropriately named “data literacy.” Brian Conrad, a math professor and director of undergraduate studies in math at Sanford University, offers a helpful analogy to drive home his concern about these substitute courses for a second year of algebra. Conrad (2023) states “…much as music-appreciation courses won’t teach you how to play a piano, data literacy is not data science.”

Proponents of the new courses claim that the new courses will offer better outcomes for typically underrepresented groups in mathematics, for example, girls and students of color. Conrad argues that this will have the opposite effect by closing off access to careers in quantitative fields requiring the foundational knowledge and skills learned in Algebra II. The framework is misleading students and parents into believing that the substitute data science courses cover the same skills learned in Algebra II that will set students up for success in calculus in college. Without these skills, students may not be able to successfully navigate the quantitative courses at college that rely heavily on calculus.

I chose a discussion that occurred on Twitter between Dr. Jelani Nelson, an Engineering and Computer Science professor at UC Berkeley, and Sunil Singh, a former mathematics and physics teacher (see below). Singh starts off the conversation with a claim that seems to criticize a post made by another person, Mike Lawler. Singh’s main claim – actually more of an opinion – is that the only people who take issue with the California Mathematics Framework (CMF) are white, male college professors who view math from a competitive perspective with only the prestigious being able to succeed in the field (Singh, 2023). Singh presents no evidence to support his claim. Lawler is a white, male and also a former math professor.

Dr. Nelson offers a rebuttal (see below) by stating that Singh is incorrect in his claim that the only people who have voiced concerns over the CMF are white, male college professors (Nelson, 2023). Dr. Nelson provides evidence in the form of a public open letter written by faculty members from 4-year colleges and universities across California. He provides a direct link to the open letter and also identifies professors who are not male or white. Dr. Nelson also offers another link to an Op-Ed piece written by two females to further support his counterclaim against Singh.

Singh responds to Dr. Nelson’s counterargument with the claim that there were no K-12 educators listed in the evidence presented (2023). This had nothing to do with his original claim that only white, male college professors took issue with the CMF. Dr. Nelson agreed with Singh about there being no K-12 educators involved in the open letter he presented as evidence. He follows that up with his own argument that the critique made in the open letter was that the new CMF does not prepare all students for college (Nelson, 2023). Dr. Nelson argues that college professors would be better judges of whether students will be prepared for college since they work at those colleges that future students will seek admission to. Singh responds to Nelson stating that the professors listed in the open letter are all “privileged university elite” (Singh, 2023). Again, this is more of Singh’s opinion and not supported by any evidence. 

If Singh’s ultimate goal was to push out a narrative that a group of white, male professors are against the CMF as a way of keeping the status quo, he has not been very persuasive. His opinions are not backed up by any evidence to support his beliefs. On the other hand, Dr. Nelson does a great job of utilizing some of the digital writing skills outlined by Turner and Hicks (2011). Namely, Dr. Nelson’s claim was easy to understand. He offered evidence to support why Singh’s statement was incorrect in the form of hyperlinks that took the reader directly to the artifact and also served as a form of in-text citation.

The website housing the open letter has the names of eight faculty members from six different colleges and universities in California as well as the signatures of professors from other universities and colleges in the state. The signatories list their names, title, and the university/college with which they are affiliated. I found it easy to search and verify that these professionals were actually affiliated with these institutions and what their current roles were. With regard to the open letter itself, I liked that the authors used a Google Site to post the letter. Within the letter, hyperlinks were used to connect to the CMF document that was being critiqued. Other hyperlinks were used as a form of evidence to support the author’s concerns regarding the CMF document.

With the amount of information available on the Internet, users will eventually encounter biased and inaccurate information. Therefore, it is important that consumers of this information be able to “carefully filter, evaluate, and verify information to separate reliable content from wrong information” (Khan & Idris, 2019). Looking at the social media exchange I examined, it also requires the reader to be able to separate opinions from facts. With the way we consume information today, it is imperative that we all do our part to stop the spread of misinformation.

References

Conrad, B. (2023, October 2). California’s math misadventure is about to go national. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/california-math-framework-algebra/675509/

Khan, M. L., & Idris, I. K. (2019). Recognise misinformation and verify before sharing: A reasoned action and information literacy perspective. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(12), 1194-1212. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2019.1578828

Nelson, J. [@minilek]. (2023, October 11). This is incorrect. Perhaps the most significant pushback by university faculty is this letter: https://sites.google.com/view/mathindatamatters/home There are 8 authors:  Moses [Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/minilek/status/1712120663643971822

Nelson, J. [@minilek]. (2023, October 11). That is correct. The purpose of the letter was to inform the public that the alternative math being proposed would [Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/minilek/status/1712120663643971822

Singh, S. [@Mathgarden]. (2023, October 11). Ever think that the only people who had problems with the CMF were mostly white, male college professors who have [Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/minilek/status/1712120663643971822

Singh, S. [@Mathgarden]. (2023, October 11). Fair. But all privileged university elite [Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/minilek/status/1712120663643971822

Singh, S. [@Mathgarden]. (2023, October 11). Zero K to 12 educators [Tweet]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/minilek/status/1712120663643971822

Turner, K. H., & Hicks, T. (2017). Argument in the real world: Teaching adolescents to read and write digital texts.

After reading Chapter 5 of Argument in the Real World, I took the information in the text about creating arguments in the video and used it to revise an introductory video I had created. With Digital Citizenship Week coming up this month, I decided to incorporate this into my video text. I have noticed that the students at my school are good about citing text resources that they use in their writing, but they are not so good about citing media sources such as images or videos. My goal with this project was to create a video text to quickly remind students of the importance of citing the media elements they use in their projects. Here is the video that I created.

Digital Citizenship

Our students use technology every day. While we do our best to keep our students safe, it is important that students take ownership of their ethical and legal use of technology (Hollandsworth, Dowdy, & Donovan, 2011). Digital citizenship is an important concept that can easily be modeled in any classroom by any teacher. The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) has a “Digital Citizen” standard that states that students should be able to “recognize the rights, responsibilities and opportunities of living, learning and working in an interconnected world, and they act and model digital citizenship in ways that are safe, legal and ethical” (ISTE, 2023). “Intellectual property” falls under this standard. With respect to “Intellectual Property,” students should be able to “demonstrate an understanding of and respect for the rights and obligations of using and sharing intellectual property” (ISTE, 2003).

Hollandsworth, Dowdy, and Donovan (2011) provide a good analogy for digital citizenship. The authors state that “digital citizenship can be compared to American citizenship in that all digital citizens have the same basic rights: to privacy, free speech, and creative work rights” (p. 41). They also state that “students should also understand that when something is created it belongs to the creator” (Hollandsworth, Dowdy, & Donovan, 2011, p. 41). As a result, it is imperative that we as educators help students understand how to conduct themselves in an ethical and responsible manner when they are online.

Creating the Video Text

More components and planning went into this video text when compared to the original video I made. Based on the craft elements mentioned by Turner and Hicks (2017), I wrote a script and outline. I utilized a combination of still images I created in Canva along with a video I made. The still images utilized text and images to emphasize what was being narrated. I chose to use a still image of me since most of the students know who I am, and I really wanted the focus to be on digital citizenship.

When creating the video, I wanted to show students how quick and easy it is to give attribution to resources that are found using the Creative Commons search engine. I kept the video clean and simple with basic transitions between the images and the video to help underscore how easy it is to use. By using the video, I was also able to show students how digital writing allows them the opportunity to use hyperlinks with images. This was mentioned in the text as a way to take viewers directly to the source of an image with an attribution license that allows others to use the image (Turner & Hicks, 2017). The video also illustrates how easy it is to give attribution to images by copying the information from Creative Commons directly into their reference list.

Once the video was complete, I merged all of the elements together using iMovie. This program allowed me to add basic transitions when moving from picture to picture and then to the video. I was also able to add a voice-over component to the portion of the video where I used the still images. The biggest challenge I experienced was getting the running time of the video down to the bare minimum. Overall, the process was pretty easy with the tools I had at my disposal.

References

Hollandsworth, R., Dowdy, L., & Donovan, J. (2011). Digital citizenship in K-12: It takes a village. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 55(4), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-011-0510-z

International Society for Technology Education. (n.d.). Digital citizen 2c: Intellectual property (ITSE standards for students) [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/cOD-WNdsPBA?list=PL6aVN_9hcQEH6D0zMdylQbDkSrV-MNOwD

International Society for Technology Education. (2023). ISTE standards: For Students. Retrieved October 9, 2023, from https://iste.org/standards/students

Turner, K. H., & Hicks, T. (2017). Argument in the real world: Teaching adolescents to read and write digital texts.