In Meaningful Learning and The Participatory Web, a web book by Grabe and Grabe, they ask:
“How do the risks match up with the educational potential of applications that may involve a certain element of danger?”:
A couple of data points from this study (The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children):
- Four percent of those surveyed indicated experiencing an “aggressive sexual solicitation” (perpetrator made an effort to take the “experience” offline through phone contact, mail, or face to face meeting).
- Location of computer when experiencing an aggressive sexual solicitation – 79% home, 12% friend home, 9% school, library, or other.
- Age of solicitor associated with “aggressive solicitation – 44% <18, 34% 18-25, 15% >25, 7% – no clue
- Means of access – chat 32%, IM 54%, other 13%
- Reaction – 44% removed self from situation, 23% warned solictor, 7% changed online name, 15% ignored, 2% reported to parent or authorities, 7% met person
It is the combination of these percentages we have to process. Is there a risk to adolescents? Obviously! Are school uses of communication technology involved? Rarely! Do adolescents act responsibly? Mostly!
I’m sorry but I can’t help but liken this unto the politically and religiously hot question of educating children about safe sex or promoting celibacy. Personally I take a middle-of-the-road stance because I believe in promoting celibacy but recognize that not all kids are going to hold out. So why ignore the problem – arm them with the tools they need to be safe no matter what their choice is.
The same idea applies to Internet use and education; according to the studies referred to above, the potential risks to teenagers and younger kids is low and the potential benefits of use of social media is high. To combat the risk, educate them. Why is this so hard?
Work cited:
Grabe, M. and Grabe C. (2008). Meaningful Learning and the Participatory Web (registration required). Retrieved on June 17, 2008 from http://learningaloud.com/participatoryweb/
