Subject: The 4Q
Now that the talk on the 4Q comes up once again, and as most
of you know I don't want to participate in making our stuff
impersonal due to fear. But there are other thoughts I have
on this issue. I know some of you share some and some don't
but I would like to use the opportunity to wonder aloud.
I watch Epi try to cope with all the mass of letters
answering the 4Q that very few do anything with and I feel
that now when we have grown and are large that it has in a
way grown out of context. Every single day all the year around
a huge pile of anwers comes to Epi's team, they have difficulty
coping and today only there are 587 letters waiting, yesterday
they where 735 so they have read through at least 150 letters
plus the quantity that arrived since then. June 23rd 101 letter
waited. I have myself helped out a tiny tiny bit and it took
me 2 hours to read through 70 letters BUT I left all letters
that where problems, not all questions answered or something
that had to deal with. Also letters with languages I didn't
understand. It warmed my heart to read some of those answers
and thought how much waiste it was to just sent them to a pile
and not do anything with them.
Somehow I feel that we have grown and should consider change.
It is though risky to grow and change, people's feelings get hurt and
things aren't as we remember them. Still we want to recreate
good personal and friendly environment. But I think it is
so much work and so much time that is spent on reading through
all those answers and so exhausting that I am worried.
I know we want to count our kids, maybe and maybe not the 4Q's
are the right method. I have thought if kids should introduce
themselves into projects and topics and the managers report
quantity with soem quality information. How important is it
weather we have 90.000 kids since 1991 or 100.000 when we grow
to the 100.000 figure does the work on finding out if they are
105.000 or 110.000 justify all the work?
What kind of information do we want to give to others? How many
projects we do? How many kids participated? and so forth. Then
comes reports on projects which have been done greatly by many
of you on the content.
I like the 4Q and want kids to answer them, but is it the right
way to send the information to a huge pile of same information?
I know it can make good projects and topics but how is the feedback
to the kid that wrote it? Do we have time for it?
What have we time for? What do we HAVE to do? What do we want
to do?
Where is our soul and where is our heart?
Yes we can automate, we can solve some of those things but
what does that give us?
My son answered the 4Q he expected something to happen but
I had to explain to him that nothing would happen, nothing
at all. That made him sad. Well I have to go and pick up
my granddaughter, lovely new role in my life, maybe she
will answer the 4Q one day;-)
Kaer kvedja
Lara
Lara Stefansdottir, lara@ismennt.is, http://rvik.ismennt.is/~lara
Box 472, 602 Akureyri, Iceland Tel: 354-463-0921, 354-896-3357
Consultant on IT in Education
Top
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 11:35:29 -1000
From: Odd de Presno
Subject: Re: The 4Q
Lara,
You said:
>It is in my mind, there is a difference between developed
>activity in a project and 4 questions that are always the
>same. We have had brilliant ideas through the years on
>making an activity around them. They are ideal for it
>but I am not aware of any.
Yes, it is an advantage that it is the same four questions over and over
again. This allows us to gather experiences and share them among teachers
in ways that is prohibitive with one-shot projects or topics. Sharing our
experiences is essential for continued success.
We've heard from teachers who are doing the 4 questions again and again,
year after year. We know that it is working well.
We have had topic/projects/activities building on the four questions,
ranging from Kidclub to Kidforum topics. One of them was run while you were
heading Kidforum.
You said:
>>There are so many things that we can do to make RESPONSE more successful.
>Yes, no doubt but can we handle it? People who join us
>now seem to be more eager for service than co-operation.
There's only one answer to that question: Ask for help. There has always been
people around waiting for an opportunity to help. We must regularly look for
more volunteers.
You said:
>>(While these texts are good, they're old. The REPORT file was last updated
>>in 1994. We are not systematically collecting information to make these
>>resources available to new teachers, and they are hard to find. We depend
>>on new teachers to discover how to use this resource for themselves.)
>Exactly, we don't have the time to do this well.
I understand that our current RESPONSE team is overworked with approvals.
So, we need new volunteers to do the job, and help out with approvals. Why
not send out an application for more help?
You said:
>Other good news is that the Icelandic Kidlink got money from
>the Cultural Children Fond in the Ministry of Education and
>Culture. Small amount BUT huge acknowledgement;-)
Congratulations!
Thanks,
Odd
Top
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 08:16:13 -1000
From: Lars-Erik Nilsson
Subject: Re: The 4Q
Odd et al,
The discussion about 4Q comes up now and again. We have different opinions
about it. I am one of the few who doubt the educational value of it at
least the way it is used now.
This years discussion has focused more on the value and impact on Kidlink.
Odd states results of having 4Q and they are questioned by Lara. The
questions raised by Lara are questions I raise myself.
There are many parts of what Odd mentions that adhere to thesis that if you
can show numbers you can prove things. Fortunately that is not a common
scientific theory even among natural scientists today and I would strongly
object to statements indicating that the number of people responding to 4Q
is in any way a measurement of success.
In fact I am surprised that you still maintain this because it has been one
of the earliest points where Kidlink has been criticised by teachers and
educational scientists. Both our large volume lists Response and
Kidcafe-Individual meet with the same critic. They are shallow and show
little quality. In Sweden they even have a name for this coined at one of
the schools of education. They call them rabitt-messages.
Odd may object to this. He does after all have success when he shows
messages to journalists. I don't doubt his words. The problem is I have to
wade through ten messages to find one with acceptable quality and maybe
fifty to find one that interests me through originality or compassion.
This is however not the main point, the one I raised earlier in the
discussion. To me it's obvious that 4Q can be used well and not like a
formula. To me it's also obvious that 4Q can exist inside Kidlink. It's not
a question for or against the quality. I do however along with what Patti
says sometimes feel tired when I enter a project and the kids writes the
same presentation for the third or forth time. 4Q often overlaps the
presentations wanted in the projects and maybe that's the best place for them.
Now to the main point. It's funny how this discussion is brought up by Lara
after trying to help Epi moderating. What was it she said. She moderated
something like 70 messages before she got to tired. And she only moderated
those she could OK not the once that required support.
I have told you once and again but it seems to me like nobody wants to
listen. It is not the first prize in a lottery to moderate messages in the
large volume lists. At first you feel like you are doing something good,
that you contribute. Then as the nights grow long and you put in your 2-3
hours of moderating you start to question what you are doing. Recruit says
Odd. Sure, I admire my Cafeteam that keeps on moderating, what in my honest
opinion should have been moderated by the teachers concerned. They think it
is very boring but they continue because they feel they owe Kidlink. It is
not easy to recruit. You can't use Kidproj as an example because that is
status. People inside Kidproj do not spend hours a day looking at messages
that always look alike. They run projects. They do what teachers feel is a
challenge. You can't even compare it to IRC. That is still status among the
kids and not at all as boring as the moderating in Response and
Kidcafe-Individual.
Kidlink pays a price for having Response and Kidcafe-Individual. The price
is the price of moderation. If we decided the lists should run unmoderated
the same people that runs them could devote their time to make something of
the lists. Unfortunately moderation, "the right for teachers to load the
work to keep the lists clean on others", seems to be as crucial as 4Q to
Kidlink. In my opinion the question raised here by Lara, me and other is
not so much the question about 4Q as the question of how we should get the
best of people.
OK so moderation has kept me from running my own projects for two years.
Since I became manager for Kidcafe I have only stepped in and arranged two
KIDART exhibitions. Others then that I have only backed up teachers running
projects in my school or supported teachers internationally and nationally
that have had problems participating. Some may think it's not a great loss.
Especially those who do not share my educational ideas. But it's not about
me. I have had four teachers helping me through the years. They have all
given up because it took much more then it gave. I have had 20-30 kids
helping me who could instead be instrumental in running kids discussions or
editing html-pages. They very seldom last a year. The exceptions are
extraordinary and I feel ashamed that this is the work we offer them. And
that's only my list. I have heard the comments staying with Claus in
Copenhagen. We are both regarded as partly crazy by our wives and I would
be surprised if Epi's husband doesn't question her activities. You may have
questions about my activites but I can assure you that Claus, Epi, Sonia,
Mary, Kathy, Bo could be better used running projects or doing quality
support then moderating messages.
So people let's really think this through and weigh the pros and cons.
There may be solutions we have never thought of that can stop this misuse
of manpower (womenpower). If not, well frankly I suggest maybe those of
feel most strongly that 4Q and keypals should be Kidlink activities should
start moderating.
Lars-Erik
Lars-Erik Nilsson
Utvecklingsledare KIDCAFE Manager
Kristianstad University KIDLINK SOCIETY
Top
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 05:43:23 -1000
From: BR1BEO@VMANDINO.VNET.IBM.COM
Subject: 4Q's Who are they answered for?
Dear friends:
Reading your messages about the 4Q's and their worth
I thought about a project ran at the Hennigan School in Boston where5
grade students made computer programs to teach 4 graders about fractions.
As a results the 5 graders were the ones learning a lot about fractions
the project was not really thought with 4 graders in mind but to find
a better way for 5 graders to understand the concepts.
In the same way
I think our 4Q's can help a lot the kids who answer to understand them-
selves, to take a time to think about their role in shaping our future
and teachers as well who can better know their students, I am sure many
of you who work directly with children have discovered previously un-
known things about the children who were answering. It requires from
teachers to make the answering of the 4Q's something more than a bureucratic procedure required to get into the "real thing" and begin using it
as a purpose in itself.
If we do this then it doesn't matter if somebody
ever reads the answers because they have an objective just in being ans-
wered, this approach would make each teacher the moderator of the answers
tehy get and eliminate the requirement of moderation for all but the indi
vidual respondents.
Hugs and warm regards to all of you who are enjoying summer as we enter
one of the warmest winters we ever had (due to El Nišo which may be an in
teresting subject for an international project).
Oscar Becerra
Top
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 04:34:45 -1000
From: Laurie Williams
Subject: Re: The 4Q
On Wed, 16 Jul 1997, Lara Stefansdottir wrote:
> Lars-Erik, others, can you add to this list of both positive
> and negative circumstances? We need to look at this clearly
> because we don't jump into changing this.
Lara, Lars-Erik and all,
I really like the 4Q's, too. I incorporate it as part of our
"getting to know each other" time the first week of school. (I usually
have between 24-29 kids, and I help other teachers with theirs, if their
classes participate during the year.) Here's how we handle it at Casis:
*Day 1(first day of school): We talk about KIDLINK and ways we'll
be participating during the year (kids from 4th grade all are aware of it,
because of the previous year's demonstrations to the school.)
I give each child the 4Q's as a homework assignment. I
model them, using my own info.
I give each child our districts AUP, they can't become a
KIDLINKer without the written authorization of their parents.
*Day 2: I check over their answers, to be sure that they are
appropriately answered and descriptive. (It also gives me a chance to
check their handwriting and grammar/punctuation/spelling skills.)
*Later that week (at the lab): This is our first lab assignment.
The kids save their 4Q's to disk. While they are typing, I assess their
skills, and look for the 3 or 4 most skilled students. I pull those
students aside and show them how to send the 4 Q's to RESPONSE@... These
kids can then help me to send them in over the next day or so. (Note: No
4Q's are sent in without a signed AUP form on file.)
*Second Week (or a few days after the first big batch has been
sent in): To make them feel "official", I make each one a laminated card
that says (in fancy script): "Firstname Lastname has been hereby made an
official member of KIDLINK Telecommunications Organization for 10-15 year
olds. Effective Date: August 1997 Expiration Date: May 2003". The kids
really hold onto those things! It's a nice tangible proof that they are
active members in an organization. It's at that time, we talk about
netiquette involved. Kids who haven't finished their 4Q's really rush to
get them done...and I have, by that time, "experts" who can help them get
them sent.
I've really been able to incorporate the process easily into the
first few days of school. The kids enjoy it and see it as a "means to and
end".
Laurie
Top
Go to the Village Cafe Home Page
The KIDLINK name and logo are service marks of the
KIDLINK Society.
Reg.no. 976 536 258 - Enhetsregisteret, Norway.
Page designed and maintained by Lynne Sueoka of the KIDLINK WWW Team
Updated August, 1997
