I completed this assignment prior to the readings being posted. While I noted that the readings were missing and that this was unusual for Professor Lott I took the statement “I’m not requiring that you read all of them or that you are limited to only these…go where your exploration of the questions takes you!” as permission to design my own response to the assignment. Once the readings were posted I went back to read several of them. While I inevitably decided not to make any changes to my screen cast video I did see that the shortcomings of my exploration were in the history of privacy. I payed no attention to where the idea of privacy came from and how we got to a point where it is legally protected. In exploring this facet of privacy I found the video https://www.coursera.org/lecture/data-science-ethics/history-of-privacy-7e36E and the reading https://www.thoughtco.com/right-to-privacy-history-721174 extremely informative.
The questions I came up with are more like scenarios but I am curious to get the thoughts of others. Let me know what you think!
The definition of reasonable accommodation explains that an accommodation is not unreasonable if it does not create an undue hardship for the employer. At what point is an accommodation an undue hardship? If an employer has to spend $20 to make an accommodation for one employee this is not an substantial cost but it is $20 more than they will spend on a non disabled employee.
If a city owns a park on top of a hill that is only accessible by stairs what sort of accommodation would the city have to make in order for the park to be ADA compliant? Requiring a costly ramp to be built in order to grant access to a facility that does not generate revenue seems like an undue financial hardship for a local government.
One of the requirements to be a certified pilot for a jet powered aircraft is to be able to see color. Colorblindness is a condition that an individual is born with, much like a disability. By not making accommodations to allow individuals with colorblindness to become pilots are airlines ADA compliant?
For Weave It I decided to step back a collection and look at our Back to the Future assignment. I have said before that I thought that the concept of digital literacy is somewhat of a moving target so I was curious how after being subjected to the the same readings and activities that I was last collection if any of my classmates had come to similar, or different conclusions that I had. For this assignment I chose to look at my own Back to the Future activity as well as the activities of Deana Waters, Liz Hollers, and Nina Fehrenbach.
Looking first to my own response we see that I verbally weighed how my thinking had changed from the beginning of the collection to the end of the collection. We see that my personal definition of digital citizenship had evolved to consider digital literacy to be developed on a spectrum similar to traditional literacy. We also see that I had started to consider digital citizenship in the same vein as traditional citizenship with certain requirements, expectations, norms. After a review of my own back to the future assignment I looked to the assignments of my classmates.
The first classmates work that I turned to was Deana’s, In her back to the future assignment I found very similar definitions to that of my own. Deana also had come to the conclusion that “Digital Citizenship includes being able to find, create, collaborate, and share. She likens being a good digital citizen to being a good neighbor which falls right in line with my own definition and made me think that I had reached an appropriate conclusion from the readings and there was consensus between our assignments.
Thinking that I had reached a consensus with my classmates on the take away for the collection 2 readings I looked to Liz’s Back to the Future activity. What I found was that Liz’s definition differed from the good neighbor explanation of digital citizenship and instead focused on digital citizenship being knowing how to use the internet appropriately. She explained that “digital literacy is like literacy of a language in that once you know how to read and write it you have to determinate what its appropriate usage is.” Liz’s appropriate usage based definition of digital literacy and digital citizenship provides some similarity to Deana and I’s good neighbor definition as someone who focuses on appropriate usage would most likely be a good user but it also differs in that Liz’s definition doesn’t consider the digital world as a community but instead a place that people go to interact while remaining rooted in their own communities.
The last Back to the Future activity I examined was Nina’s, what I found was that Nina Along with Liz had developed a definition around digital citizenship that focused on “how to work various programs.” and “how it is important to understand where the information we are reading comes from and rather or not it is accurate.” This definition also put the emphasis in digital citizenship and digital literacy in proper usage instead of building a community.
I have said many times during the course of this class that I believe that defining digital citizenship is like hitting a moving target. After going through our Back to the Future activities from collection two I stand by that notion. During collection two we were all exposed to the same readings and activities, and while we all refined our understandings of digital citizenship and created definitions that offer similarities their are still differences as we either consider digital citizenship as digital community or as a more formal place to interact. I suspect that over time and through examining more information that my personal definition will continue to change and shift. Even then I don’t know that I will ever end up holding the exact same definition as anyone else as the concept of digital citizenship appears to be what it needs to be to fit a different context of understanding for every person.
For work together Abdulallah, Maureen, Deana, and I chose to work together again for this assignment we decided to make a short slide show using google slides. We discuses options using a group chat on twitter and decided that we would like to make a slide show on fair use. We each volunteered to take a factor and make a slide or two about it with the hope of having a short comprehensive explanation of fair use. This was my first time using google slides, it proved to be just as handy for asynchronous group work as google docs.
Prior to this collection I had given the subjects of intellectual property and copyright very little thought as to how they would apply in the classroom. Having not thought about the limitations that this places on materials that can be used and distributed in the classroom i found the Fair(ish) Use and Copyright Conundrums activities especially helpful. Throughout this class I have tried to approach each activity with an open mind and asses how I might be able to use the different methods and technologies in my own classroom so I particularly enjoy activities that already place me in that mind set. As I consider the education loop hole in fair use of copyrighted materials I understand now that there is a lot of grey area and educators are given more free range than I would have originally thought. What I found most challenging in this activity was deciding where uses are fair and where they are abusive, for instance in my Fair(ish) Use assignment I opted to use photos from three famous photographers as examples but even then I am not 100% certain if this is covered under fair use because in order to show their would I had to use the whole image not just part of it. This assignment was just the tip of the iceberg as far as creating an in depth understanding of Fair Use but it did get me thinking about the topic which builds well into the Copyright Conundrums assignment providing an opportunity to ask classmates the questions that keep poping into my head! For future students I would encourage them to approach these assignments with an open mind and not be afraid to ask questions. The intentionally vague wording in copy right laws needs to be discussed and questioned or else no one would be sure what is fair.
For my get productive assignment I created a feedly as explained by Chris on the Nousion page. He was right it was super user friendly and as soon as I completed entering everyone blog information I saw that Nina had just responded to a comment I left for her before I had received an email saying she had! I posted a screen capture of my feedly below as proof that I actually did it.