Children+and+the+Internet

**Ch**  **il****dr** **en and the Internet ** //Author: Evelin Hernandez //

It is apparent that in this growing technological world that Internet technologies are available in classrooms and communities across the nation. In fact, the latest generation has been named after technology. According to Johnson (2010) when asked about their activities the previous day, 22% of American 8 to 10 year old children indicated they had visited websites. Other research found by Valcke, De Wever, Van Keer, & Schellens (2011) presented that 91.2% primary school children surf on the Internet at home and 66% at school. Livingston (as cited in Valcke et al., 2011) described three categories of children's Internet usage: entertainment, education and edutainment. Valcke et al. (2011) found that playing games is dominant in 10–12 year olds and decreases after this age. The focus shifts to chatting, social networking and commercial usage from the age of 11 years on. Social networking dominates all types of Internet usage from 13 years on" (p. 1293).
 * Internet usage of Children **



In addition to difference between Internet usage and age, differenences in gender also exist. Gros (as cited in Valcke et al., 2011) discovered gender difference in older children. Gros noted that girls used the Internet for social networking and chatting and boys focused on games and entertainment like activities. Internet usage amongst children posses certain risks. Children can easily participate in unsafe Internet usage from content risk to contact risk. Valcke et al. (2011) define content risk as "the exposure of children to content that might be harmful. Examples of such content are: images or text reflecting pornography, violence, racism, or hate" (p. 1294). Contact risk is related to different types of internet usage such as blogging, chat rooms, instant messaging all manifested on websites like Facebook. Online contact can result in situations such as cyber-bullying, sexual solicitation, and threats to privacy. According to research of Berson & (as cited in Valcke et al., 2011) a "significant number of girls adopts unsafe online contact behavior: they disclose personal information, send personal pictures, and engage in face-to-face contact after initial online contact" (p. 1294).



Because of the accessibility to information the internet offers, the questions of what kind of information is available is a cause for concern and needs to be addressed.

**Children's Internet Protection Act (COPA)**

**What is it?** A federal law enacted by Congress to address concerns about access to offensive content over the Internet on school and library computers. CIPA imposes certain types of requirements on any school or library that receives funding for Internet access or internal connections from the E-rate program - a program that makes certain communication technology more affordable for eligible schools and libraries.

Callister and Burbules (as cited in Kauchak and Eggen, 2011) articulated that "states typically use filters to prevent students from accessing five broad categories: criminal skills, hate speech, drugs, gambling, and sex.

CIPA was signed into law in December 2000 and was found to be constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2003.

//CIPA should not be confused with COPA, Children's Online Protection Act, which only limits commercial speech and only affects providers based within the United States. //

**No Child Left Behind and Technology Integration** <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">NCLB emphasizes the improvement of student achievement with the use of technology in elementary and secondary schools. According to the Learning Point Associates Quick Key, which was developed to help understand and implement the NCLB Act, the guide lists four ways to do so. The first is technology integration initiatives which entails building a technology infrastructure. This includes integrating technology in the classroom. library media center, administrative office and district office. The second form of integration is Building access. This entails making sure that the local area network provides a broadband, high-speed Internet connection in order for students to be able to communicate with fellow peers and teachers. This is especially true for students who live in geographically isolated areas. The next issue, Accessibility, takes into account providing technology integration and literacy for all students including those with disabilities, racial and ethnic minorities, low-income students, migrant populations and English language learners. The last issue is parental involvement. NCLB wants parents to have access to training and accessibility so that they may be equipped with tools to be supportive in the achievement of their children.

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 140%;">**Classroom Implications** <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">According to the Quick Key to NCLB, "Effective research-based technology can enhance student learning in language arts, mathematics, science, social science, foreign language, english as a second language and technology literacy". 21st century tools such as social networking, graphic presentations, audio and video files, online portfolios and web page creations are are a few medias that can be integrated into various areas of the content.

media type="youtube" key="wGUtUY8H0nY" height="333" width="405" align="right" <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 18px; line-height: 27px;">**Reading and Writing** <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">﻿Kelly & Safford (2009) conducted a study to analyze how students developed complex sentences structures in a web-log. The authors of this research were interested in how language, grammar and culture would come together in a digital interactive media. They created a class blog based on the topic of the World Cup. The inclusion of a class blog was motivated by ideas of social networking. The blog ran for the 6 weeks of the soccer tournament. The students had access to the blog from school and most from home as well. In order to provide safety, the blog was a secure, password protected site and the teacherdemonstratedd how to post comments and made them aware that the blog would be monitored for unsuitable content. No student in the study had experience blogging, but had access to computers. The writings of the students consisted of encouragement of teams, voicing of opinions, reflections and hypothesizing. Out of one child's 248 entries, 125 were complex sentences, 91 simple and 32 compound sentences. This child, who was underachieving based on the National Curriculum Assessments. according to Kelly and Safford (2009), they found that blogging offers a real-world digital medium for communication. There are opportunities for feedback, not only from the students within the classroom, but from their peers in other classrooms, as well as family and friends. The blog gave the students to freedom to express their thoughts and opinions on this real-world topic. Kelly and Safford (2009) state that "it is possible to offer children meaningful experiences and resources, which create opportunities for them to enact implicit syntactical knowledge.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">The information found on the Internet is immediate and consistently growing everyday, the opportunities to support children's literacy development via the Internet appear to be increasingly available" (Baker, E. A., 2007). The literature review done by Baker (2007) found multiple sources indicating how the Internet can be readily aligned with instructional approaches to support children's literacy. In regards to Internet opportunities within a classroom, Baker found that Internet technologies provide support by reinforcing skills learned in the classroom. For instance, the internet can reinforce basal/skills approaches because certain websites provide games with isolated reading skills. "Children can work on parts of speech, sentence fragments, the alphabet, spelling, vocabulary...". (Baker, 2007, p. 5).

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 140%;">**Math** <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">In a study done by Hudson, Kadan, Lavin, & Vasquez (2010), the researchers were interested in students who had been exhibiting difficulties with number sense that interfered with understanding and recalling basic math fact. The study consisted of a total of 92 students in grades fourth, fifth, sixth and ninth. They came up with four research based interventions, one of which was technology integration. To reinforce and explore various basic skills conceits, the teacher researchers recommend using technology such as software programs, PowerPoint, Elmos, Smart Boards, projectors, calculators, Internet websites, YouTube videos, DVDs, and CD's. according to Hudson et al (2010), "teachers should strive to present mathematics concepts in a variety of settings and use a diverse collection of teaching methods in order to reach the widest possible range of students" (p. 52). One lesson included having the students participate in an interactive game projected from a website titled mathisfun.com because the students were struggling with positive and negative numbers. In a different lesson about fractions. One area that the students had struggle with fractions was finding a common denominator. after re-teaching the concept, the teacher then had the students go to an interactive website xpmath.com. In another lesson, students were engaged in a PowerPoint presentation based on the Key Train software on the mechanics of multiplying and diving fractions. with this software, the presentation demonstrated to the students information about multiplying and diving fractions and gave the students plenty of opportunities for independent practice. subsequent lessons also used these PowerPoint presentation using other math basic skills topics. Hudson et al. (2010) found that with the four interventions, technology integration being one, the targeted fourth, and fifth grade students improved from 51% to 74% of students receiving a 70% or better after the interventions. The teacher researchers "understood that some of this increase could occur after the natural maturation and development of the students, but also believed that re-teaching with technology was a key factor for the increase of students showing mastery of basic skill problems" (p. 54).

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 140%;">**Science** <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Jerry Everhart, a professor of elementary education at eastern New Mexico University and a professional development school coordinator, was himself, a technology skeptic, and then he discovered youTube. In his article, "YouTube in the Science Classroom: Tips on incorporating this popular video file-sharing website into your science lessons" (2009), Everhart shares his experience and ideas for using this video sharing website via the Internet in the science classroom. The author shares that "incorporating YouTube into science lessons has energized my teaching and helped motivate students too" (p. 32). For example, in a study of weather, Everhart showed his students a NASAConnect video and a video recorded directly from the Weather Channel. While they watched the video, students were asked to record in their notebooks questions that reflected a KWL chart which gave the teacher feedback for classroom instruction and explorations prior to the beginning of the unit about weather. The author also suggest creating YouTube-enhanced units and one possible development has teacher collaborating in order to create these units. Teachers divide the works between collecting and organizing videos. The videos must meet a certain criteria before being included into the YouTube enhanced unit. Some of the criteria includes : age appropriateness, alignment with objectives and standards, audio and video standards and accurate and devoid of misconceptions, to name a few. Everhart does express that although YouTube is a valuable source of information, "there is no substitute for a teacher's selecting of content, instructions and running commentary" (p. 33). The teachers input adds depth, encourages students to look at the details, and makes connections to align with standards. One example is providing questions to scaffold learning that may not be included in the YouTube video content. With the inclusion of YouTube in the science classroom, teachers can watch actual video and listen to audio of scientist out in the field. YouTube also allows students to explore phenomena from multiple perspectives. Virtual field trips are also accessible, being able to visit an ocean mountaintop, rain forest, or polar reign. Everhart again suggest to make sure to prescreen sites to confirm whiter they are age appropriate for the students.

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 140%;">**Differentiating and Technology** <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">There are many challenges for teachers in the classroom today. One of them is meeting the needs of the diverse population of students. Effective teachers have always been capable of differentiating instruction. with the inclusion of the Internet, there are more possibilities to this teaching strategy. There are many advantages to including the Internet in the classroom with children. As discussed above, different mediums can be integrated to enhance instruction in various content areas. Stanford, Crowe and Flice (2010) present information in their article about the different technological medias that educators can use to differentiate instruction for students. According to Stanford et al. (2010) they state that "technology offers many tools to help teachers decrease the gaps in reading, math, social studies and science" (p. 4). The use of technology to differentiate instruction can be motivating, allows for academic growth, enables teachers to attend to students' learning needs, creates environment that lead to on-task behavior. Stanford et al. (2010) also heed warning that "curriculum comes first" (p. 5). They recognize that understanding the curriculum and the students is central to effective teaching. As with any tool used as an instructional strategy, "technology for technology's sake is not effective teaching" (p. 5). Some tools listed by Stanford et al. (2010) to help with differentiated instruction include Powerpoint, geared for visual learning styles, and offers many different opportunities to present information such as book reports. Other tools consist of Web 2.0, blogs, podcast, and wikis. Blogs for instance have many different ways to incorporate them into a classroom. It can be as simple as a class website, to post announcements, to hosting student works. Blogs have the opportunity for interaction as students write and others can give immediate feedback. Wikis can also be used as a way to create collaborative learning environments. Using the Internet is another tool that can be used to differentiate instruction. stanford et al. (2010) suggested the website "Read Please" which allows students to check their work by having the website read what they've written back to them. A website like this allows students with specific learning needs to practice vocabulary words by typing. Differentiating with the use of images to teach vocabulary can also be done with another website "Scrap Blog" which allows teachers to create or locate images for students. One trend that some schools are participating in is differentiating by gender. All these tools have potential to being used as instructional strategies to differentiate instruction.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Below is a video of a program aimed for girls.

media type="custom" key="10035211" width="289" height="271"

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 120%;">**Resources** >
 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">[|Children's Internet Protection Act Guide]
 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">[|YouTube in the Science Classroom] An article from a teachers perspective giving tips on incorporating YouTube in the classroom.
 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">This guide is a little more wording, but I think from a reliable source. Aimed for Parents [|FBI Children's Guide to Internet Safety]
 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">This guide, also from the FBI is more kid friendly and has different links [|Kids Safety Tips]

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 120%;">**References**


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">http://www.fcc.gov/guides/childrens-internet-protection-act


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">http://otal.umd.edu/uupractice/children/


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">Baker, E. A. (2007). Elementary classroom websites. //Journal of Literacy Research, 39 (1)//, 1-36.


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 120%;">Everhart, J. (2009). YouTube in the science classroom. //Science and Children, 46 (9)//, 32-35.


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">Hudson, S., Kadan, S., Lavin, K., & Vasquez, T. (2010). improving basic math skills using technology. (Action research project). Saint Xavier University, Chicago, Illinois.


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">Kauchak, D. & Eggen, P. (2011). The school curriculum in an era of standards and acceptability. In Winstead, L, EDEL 536 Curriculum theory and development: Connections to issues and practice (273-305). Boston: Pearson.


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">Kelly, A., & Safford, K. (2009). does teaching complex sentences have to be complicated: Lessons from children's online writing. //Literacy, 43//, 118-122.


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">Stanford, P., Crowe, M., & Flice, H. (2010). Differentiating with technology. //Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 6 (4)//, 1-9.


 * <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 23px;">Valcke, M., De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., & Schellens, T. (2011) Long-term study of safe internet use of young children. //Computers & Education, 57,// 1292-1305.