MirandaNet is an international fellowship that networks leaders of information and communication technologies (ICT). We use technology to support our networking across England and other countries of the world. But how does the use of technology to communicate vary to show respect for every participant’s culture? Is it possible to model good inter-cultural practice for our students and colleagues in education in our countries?

These are just two of the questions being debated by our ILET project’s international reading group. The group will move its discussion from the SITE forums in the USA to MirandaNet in the UK on October 16 for strand 2. This topic is informed by two readings by the discussion leaders for this topic: Christina Preston & Niki Davis.

You can find details of the reading group, the web environments, the discussion leaders and the readings on [www.public.iastate.edu]
Use that web page as your and join the reading group on this important topic. You are welcome to use your web browser to travel to the USA to join the other topics there too.

The discussion of strand 2 ‘Intercultural perspectives with professional organizations’ starts/started here on October 16, 2002.

Some aspects needs to be considered when using computer and Internet
First we need to find the needs of the teacher who want to use the computer and Internet.
What’s the purpose for using the computers? What the most frustrating this for the instructor to use the computer? If the instructor can use the computer properly, this will not only make him/her work more efficiently but also a lot time.

Second from the administrators’ point of view, the universities or institutions should have the necessary support for the use of the software.

Three the teachers can consult the computer expert and use the user-friendly designed software. The teacher can learn from the students, especially in the college level. Many of the students are more computers knowledgeable than the instructor.

Some of the software are much powerful in database and search engine but are so complicated to implement. Not all the software and tools are use-friendly. Maybe the software is designed for the professional. Maybe the software is too new that the new user finds it hard to use because they lack of information resource.
Also the instructors also need know some skills about information security and protect their information from sniffering.
Using Internet like driving a car, the instructor not only needs how to drive, but also need to learn how to protect him/herself.

Lei Zhu
Iowa State University

I was particularly struck by the ideas raised by what was included (and not included) within the "5C's." Where these ideas were clearly rooted in the meaningful integration of technology into classroom instruction - I wonder if there is a "mindful" quality that isn't encapsulated here. We need a few more C's -- starting with a critical lens. Does the technology allow us to empower and enrich student learning in ways that we were formerly not able to do? Are we selecting (and how do we select) the right tool for the right task and the right students? As I'm working with preservice secondary English teachers, we're working to figure out what this looks like in a teacher's practice. Students are beginning to question, to probe, and to challenge their assumptions and understandings. I'm curious as to whether or not this "criticality" becomes internalized - or whether the dynamic nature of the technologies which fill classrooms command a different sort of practice.

Contributing to these discussion boards requires such committment in time , loading up each site in turn , refreshing your memory of what has been said. considering your response and to what - the previous message - an empathetic sentence in some earlier message board - then wandering around each site to familiarise yourself with the club - oops culture - the tone and tenor of other threads - working out the company - is it interesting - as one contributor asked somewhere in this site - is it worth the candle? - - I think it is. the posted messages indicate the diversity and calibre of the group - I have certainly been stimulated and intrigued by some of the messages that have been posted - I am sympathetic to Chuang's 'which hat to put on to be understood and to carry on a dialogue' and the reflection and consideration of what one's own thinking and understanding consists of. More importantly I agree that we must be patient and willing to accept different worldviews. I also felt sympathy with Oral's idea that we should try to 'perceive the similarities—the common ground—among ALL the cultures .......... grounded in a more inclusive international perspective - a trans-national perspective asuming ..... a prior ground of RELATIONSHIPS
In the eighties in London within the art and design community the debate focussed around the ' is it a tool or is it a medium' argument. Much was made of the fact that graphic/product/architectural design software was being created by programmers/analysts who used the nomenclature without being into the culture.

I really appreciated Bellinda's comment about culture: "Understanding culture is an issue that we all struggle with because there isn't A culture anywhere in the world. There are always thousands of cultures: personal cultures, group cultures, family cultures, etc. It is hard to talk about African, Japanese, or John's culture without overgeneralizing, because there is always an exception to the rule."

I have to admit that I looked at Niki's question, Wednesday morning, Wednesday night and Thursday and finally gave up trying...deciding instead to wait till others had posted. The reason I think it was so difficult to answer is partly answered by Bellinda's comment. I struggled with knowing what culture was I supposed to talk about; My own personal culture, the Universities culture, the Virginian culture, the teacher's culture or American culture.

When deciding about technology, I wonder if the question is culture or the needs of the individual or group in question, whether this is a school or office group, international or otherwise (Gurinder, if I read him correctly, pointed to this issue as well). Moreover, I wonder if even within a relatively narrow range of "culture", say just the UVA students particpating in ILET, whether the question would be just as significant. I think it would be. Even within a small group of relatively similar people, there are individual diffences or considerations when dealing with an online environment or technology in general. These might be characterized as cultural differences.

I guess my point (I think there is a point somewhere in here ) is that I wonder if we need to define culture?

Dear colleagues,

I agree with Kathy and Bellinda, in sense that we need to converge when we speak about "culture", "inter-culture", etc. The concepts must reflect our think about the same things (as some partners explains in other forums, as our SITE forum, in relation with how the same terms or non verbal signals means different things for people from different cultures).

But, as John Fraser advice us, firstly, "we must accept the difference worldviews and to be patient and willing" (our field of knowledge is not easy), "perceiving similarities" (as that we work with the same media and very similar softwares, we are expressing our thoughts and opinions based in our experience and in our knowledge in the same language -English, although it could be our second or third foreign language-, finally, as a universitarian people -students, teachers, researchers...-, we know about ICT in Education and the situation in our countries, etc.) in order to start to create, if it is possible (as Davis asks us at the first message) to model an inter-cultural practice in Education (with ICT) in our countries.

From my point of view, I think it is a good idea to start as Gurinde recommend us: the needs of teachers and students in relation with Education using ICT. Lei show us some practical points about the perspective of teachers, in this sense, Christina Preston in her paper stress the idea that, coming back to the perspective of inter-cultural education by ICT, the "advanced technologies allow teachers to reach out across social, cultural, economic and vocational divides in the global village, breaking down ignorance and creating hope and new opportunities" (as show some experiences in MIrandaNet from UK and, as Davis explains in her paper too, in the SITE web from USA).

Both papers are adressed to issues in technology and teacher education. In the Preston's paper, it is interesting to see the profile of the teacher who uses ICT and how learn it (nobody asks to teachers, they have no time or enough help to learn...), the impact of ICT in pupils, the 5 Cs (¡the needs!), etc. Because these data coincide with other countries, as Spain, for example. Finally, she stresses the human factor again, the factor that I thing it is fundamental for inter-cultural perspective. In the Davis' paper, we have the opportunity to know better how SITE are trying to shared leadership for an intercultural future. It is interesting to have present the "significant role in promoting reflective, participative leadership in the deployment of new technology, especially in teacher education" in SITE and the effort in international collaboration (as ILET). I think we can contribute with in one of the knowledge community, the social engineering to address our inter-cultural needs of communication effectively by ICT, and for this aim we must be creative and sensitive professionals of education (and I think that in this group we have all the ingredients!!!).

Best regards,

Olatz

One question that may be raised is the idea of technology creating a culture of its own. This culture may be "culture-blind" when talking about culture in the typical sense. If I write "c u soon" , "btw" (by the way) "imho" (in my humble opinion) or a myriad of other "instant messaging terms, the computer culture knows and understands a language that wasn't in existence just a few years ago. I've had 2nd grade students talk about the heavy print in a text as being "bold" and handwriting referred to as different fonts. This is a new language and a culture of the computer literate.

Tammy raises a very relevant points:
"... the idea of technology creating a culture of its own. This culture may be "culture-blind" when talking about culture in the typical sense."

But is it really blind or is it reflecting the dominant culture of the people who use the particular culture? Or indeed, is it reflecting the culture of the people who designed the Internet software, who are predominantly of a USA-European culture?

I'd be interested to see if the reading group can come up with evidence in reply to this issue, either from the literature or from this reading group's postings and software environments, or both.

Niki

I understand and admire what MirandaNet is trying to do. Connecting teachers to talk, collaborate, reflect together is a wonderful tool, especially when you have such a diverse group with so many different experiences and realities. I do have concerns however, and would like to ask a few questions.

I seems to me, and I may be mistaken, that these types of environments, such as MirandaNet, but not limited to, are creating a larger divide between the "haves" and the "have nots". Those who have are able to further their professional development, while those who "have not" are left behind and do not have access to the same tools to further their professional development. Is MirandaNet and others like it doing anything to curb, as much as it is able, this division?

I also have another question about access. Connections and such are different everywhere in the world, and many websites, such as MirandaNet, take time to load. I know even on my dial up at home MirandaNet takes some time to load. Is there a text only alternative so those teachers who may not have the best access, or who have to pay for their access can quickly load the page and then be able to more fully participate in the collaboration going on within the community.

I don't want to come off sounding negative. That is not my intention. As I said at the beginning, I think this is a wonderful tool, and one that I think not only aids in-service teachers, but could also aid pre-service and student teachers as well. I am simply concerned with access and leaving others behind.

Sara

I really like Nikki's 7th proposed action:
'Encourage the infusion of international perspectives into programs and organizations'. The EuroTurtle example is great - has anyone got any others to share?

ammy raised an interesting question about technology creating a culture of its own. In my opinion, technology seems to be a catalyst that changes the nature of culture. In his article "Mind the Gap!-How to ensure that global e-training meets local environments" George F. Simons emphasizes this characteristic feature of technology to bring about the learning paradigm shift in education, the shift that is happening globally (if you think of it in terms of electronic and blended learning), the shift that counteracts all the assumptions, values and principles that people used to have about the culture of learning. The point I am making is that, as Niki Davis remarked, technology does reflect the dominant culture of people designing it, but it also is a culture itself the personification of which is the so-called "Artificial Intelligence" within the medium of the Internet. So, technology has a culture of its own that influences the culture of people designing and using it, just like the culture of people affects the culture of technology.

As I read the contributions of this week, I felt the richness that comes from people gathering together and reflecting about a topic. Many ideas came to mind as if I were back in class, sharing thoughts and possibilities for the future with my students.

I feel the same way as Sara J. Rinkleff when she states: “I am simply concerned with access and leaving others behind.” And when I read Niki Davis article, I was positively impressed by the implementation of the “new Digital Equity award”. Although it has been argued by some (Sandy Schuck and others) that sometimes awards could be negative (because of excluding important efforts), I truly think that with this award a point is being made toward the importance of addressing equity issues. This comes to answer my questions on my last posting about social equality, laying out a bridge to “underrepresented populations.” (Please give applause to SITE in this effort!) The future is all in our hands, and it will be up to us to continue implementing new efforts toward a better and richer world for all.

Other points were made about culture and language by Hsueh-Hua Chuang, Clare Furneaux and others, related to “respect and understanding,” to withdrawal and lost of diversity. Many thoughts came to mind when I read their contributions: the importance of having a common language (that might not be our first) in order to share, collaborate and reflect together; the importance of knowing more than one language, in order to bring about a bridge between different cultures, regions in a country and different countries; the importance of being empathetic of others; the importance of not letting go, to persevere even in very hard situations.

And I go back to my students in Puerto Rico and remember when they talked about their new cyber-friends in Latin America. Friends they met through the Internet only because they talked the same language (Spanish). Which they learn to respect even though they did not know them face-to-face, even thought they did not know much about the regional expressions of their culture. And so, the world became a bigger place for them, with more diversity, and a “willingness to see things in a different” way.