Here’s a great discussion specifically on the use of IM in classrooms. Both points are well thought out. Personally, I take the counterpoint and would argue as the author states,
The key is purpose and engagement, not restrictive policy. The more we impose rules on kids, the more we distance them. Develop parameters with kids rather than for them. Engaging students in the process reminds us how technology fluency transpires. The transition from learning about to learning with technology starts with exposure and exploration. Only after realizing the nuances of applications can we connect these technologies with purposeful activity.
Great points here. This discussion isn’t really about IM as much as it’s about how we deal with technology. I’m not suggesting as the other side of the argument isn’t valid. As the point side states,
Our principal, reluctant to take away the IM privilege from students, issued a stern warning to students. They did not, sadly, exercise self-restraint, so we removed the iChat application from each laptop and banned any instant messaging during the school day.
It’s not easy. The versatility of technology will by nature offer multiple uses and some aren’t very good. There has been many discussions lately around the use and misuse of blogs. I’m not advocating a “carte blanche” attitude towards students and technology, but the discussions and efforts of teachers like Bud the teacher and his wiki, in my mind represent the changing of the guard where student involvement becomes a key component of teaching. I wonder how things might have been different if the IM discussion had been done with students and allowed them to created the rules?