Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [WWWEDU] Is Online Safety creating a problem in dissemination of great Project Based Learning? Is Internet Blocking a Problem for you?

Expand Messages
  • Peter Butts
    Hi All- I ve been a lurker here since the mid- 90s as my career has gone from middle school media specialist to district technology director to elementary
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 19, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi All-

      I've been a lurker here since the mid-'90s as my career has gone from middle school media specialist to district technology director to elementary media specialist in another district. While I've seen filters inhibit some student searching, I never worried too much about it because our big message at the time was to have students take advantage of the many great Internet Directories available at the time rather than blind searching. Back then, it was pretty easy to get filters to except changes when good sites were blocked. And I've also seen teachers scared away from Internet projects because of Internet safety scares. However, I feel very strongly that the biggest impediment to project-based learning comes from standardized testing and No Child Left Behind. Project-based learning is viewed as too time-consuming, too resource-intensive, and just plain too difficult to link directly to standards-based tests.

      I can't thank Nancy enough for all the work she does on this issue, but the "big picture" is that we've lost sight of what LEARNING really looks like in this country and it is frightening to think that we are allowing our children to be "taught" by Google, Wikipedia, Facebook, the Home Shopping Network and MTV.

      -Peter
       ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      Peter Butts
      Library Media Specialist
      Amberly Elementary School
      Portage, MI 49008
      http://amberlymedia.edublogs.org
      pbutts61@...
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      "if you're not getting answers,
      ask better questions."
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




      ________________________________
      From: Nancy Willard <nwillard@...>
      To: wwwedu@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Fri, February 19, 2010 10:28:03 AM
      Subject: Re: [WWWEDU] Is Online Safety creating a problem in dissemination of great Project Based Learning? Is Internet Blocking a Problem for you?

       
      Hey Bonnie,

      Please find a way to link me in on this - to the folks at the top who
      are trying to figure this out. I will be in DC for COSN next week. March
      1 - 3. If there is a way to arrange a meeting, I can help them
      understand what has been happening and how to fix it.

      I have been focusing on online safety since 1995. I told both the COPA
      Commission and the NRC Committee that the "filtering solution" was not
      going to be effective. My testimony for this is here:
      <http://csriu. org/documents/ nwnas.php>

      I actually wrote and self-published a book on effective Internet use
      management in schools - that downplayed reliance on filtering in 2003 -
      but no one was interested in this crazy idea.

      Also, there have been 4 Technopanic eras since 1995 - Porn, Predators,
      Cyberbullies, Sexting, Oh My! All of these eras have been epitomized by
      disinformation - false information or half truths - and then simplistic
      "block" solutions.

      The predator fear has been the most significant - and just about every
      thing that people think is accurate about this is wrong. 1 in 7 youth
      have not been sexually solicited online by predators. Predators are not
      tracking young people when they post personal information, images,
      school name online - and abducting and raping them. Predators are not
      pretending to be teens and tricking children or teens into meeting with
      them with no knowledge that they have been communicating with an adult
      who is interested in sex. Only an exceptionally few youth are at all at
      risk from those creeps that they are capturing in chat room stings - the
      ones who do not run the other way when some stranger sends a crotch shot.

      I actually started a direct challenge against NCMEC and US DOJ this week
      telling them they have to change this. Virtually everything the state
      AGs are telling people about online predators is wrong. And I do not
      think the AGs even know how wrong it is.

      I also know which filtering company has close corporate relations with
      the American Family Association. And all of the constitutional arguments
      against school's reliance on filtering in the manner they are.

      Some in the Internet Safety field do not like me because I have also
      been trying to get them to change what they are saying. But I have
      established a private group of this nation's top researchers and risk
      prevention professionals in this field. And so have direct contact with
      the folks who really understand these issues.

      Lastly, I know how to effectively teach Internet safety - I have a full
      scope and sequence for Internet safety education on my site - please
      also link to me <http://csriu. org/professional s/>. I will have my 2 hour
      professional development presentation for teachers available as soon as
      the site I am distributing through fixes their server problem <sigh>. I
      also have 2 other presentations almost done about effective Internet use
      management for web 2.0 - and one of the legal issues that schools will
      need to address as they shift to web 2.0.

      ALSO - everyone needs to find my last message about the comments to
      submit to the FCC on CIPA and directly and clearly tell the FCC that
      CIPA is the PROBLEM. The way that schools have implemented CIPA - out of
      fear they could lose ERate funding if any student ever accidentally
      accesses any porn - is at the heart of what is wrong. They have to know
      this.

      Note my new signature.

      Nancy

      --
      Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
      Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
      http://csriu. org
      nwillard@csriu. org

      Trying to teach students social networking without Web 2.0 in schools is
      like trying to teach a child how to swim without a swimming pool.




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Nancy Willard
      For the record, I am in total agreement. But there is also something else about NCLB. This law requires that all instruction be Scientifically-Based. Every
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 19, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        For the record, I am in total agreement. But there is also something
        else about NCLB. This law requires that all instruction be
        Scientifically-Based. Every instructional program has to have been
        proven by research to be effective - and listed as effective in the What
        Works Clearinghouse.

        This means that NO INNOVATIVE Web 2.0 based program can safely
        implemented - because there is no research indicating it is effective.
        And it can take a decade for such research to occur.

        So in the reauthorization of ESEA is is essential that this provision be
        changed to allow for the implementation of innovative programs under
        conditions that will allow for effective evaluation. There are
        provisions in the safe schools laws that allow for innovative, untested
        approaches. These provisions could be more wide-spread.

        Bonnie, this is an issue to raise with the STEM folks. They are in a
        great position to further this. I can provide more background.

        Nancy
        --
        Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
        Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
        http://csriu.org
        nwillard@...


        Peter Butts wrote:
        >
        >
        > Hi All-
        >
        > I've been a lurker here since the mid-'90s as my career has gone from
        > middle school media specialist to district technology director to
        > elementary media specialist in another district. While I've seen
        > filters inhibit some student searching, I never worried too much about
        > it because our big message at the time was to have students take
        > advantage of the many great Internet Directories available at the time
        > rather than blind searching. Back then, it was pretty easy to get
        > filters to except changes when good sites were blocked. And I've also
        > seen teachers scared away from Internet projects because of Internet
        > safety scares. However, I feel very strongly that the biggest
        > impediment to project-based learning comes from standardized testing
        > and No Child Left Behind. Project-based learning is viewed as too
        > time-consuming, too resource-intensive, and just plain too difficult
        > to link directly to standards-based tests.
        >
        > I can't thank Nancy enough for all the work she does on this issue,
        > but the "big picture" is that we've lost sight of what LEARNING really
        > looks like in this country and it is frightening to think that we are
        > allowing our children to be "taught" by Google, Wikipedia, Facebook,
        > the Home Shopping Network and MTV.
        >
        > -Peter
        > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        > Peter Butts
        > Library Media Specialist
        > Amberly Elementary School
        > Portage, MI 49008
        > http://amberlymedia.edublogs.org <http://amberlymedia.edublogs.org>
        > pbutts61@... <mailto:pbutts61%40yahoo.com>
        > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        > "if you're not getting answers,
        > ask better questions."
        > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: Nancy Willard <nwillard@... <mailto:nwillard%40csriu.org>>
        > To: wwwedu@yahoogroups.com <mailto:wwwedu%40yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Fri, February 19, 2010 10:28:03 AM
        > Subject: Re: [WWWEDU] Is Online Safety creating a problem in
        > dissemination of great Project Based Learning? Is Internet Blocking a
        > Problem for you?
        >
        >
        > Hey Bonnie,
        >
        > Please find a way to link me in on this - to the folks at the top who
        > are trying to figure this out. I will be in DC for COSN next week. March
        > 1 - 3. If there is a way to arrange a meeting, I can help them
        > understand what has been happening and how to fix it.
        >
        > I have been focusing on online safety since 1995. I told both the COPA
        > Commission and the NRC Committee that the "filtering solution" was not
        > going to be effective. My testimony for this is here:
        > <http://csriu. org/documents/ nwnas.php>
        >
        > I actually wrote and self-published a book on effective Internet use
        > management in schools - that downplayed reliance on filtering in 2003 -
        > but no one was interested in this crazy idea.
        >
        > Also, there have been 4 Technopanic eras since 1995 - Porn, Predators,
        > Cyberbullies, Sexting, Oh My! All of these eras have been epitomized by
        > disinformation - false information or half truths - and then simplistic
        > "block" solutions.
        >
        > The predator fear has been the most significant - and just about every
        > thing that people think is accurate about this is wrong. 1 in 7 youth
        > have not been sexually solicited online by predators. Predators are not
        > tracking young people when they post personal information, images,
        > school name online - and abducting and raping them. Predators are not
        > pretending to be teens and tricking children or teens into meeting with
        > them with no knowledge that they have been communicating with an adult
        > who is interested in sex. Only an exceptionally few youth are at all at
        > risk from those creeps that they are capturing in chat room stings - the
        > ones who do not run the other way when some stranger sends a crotch shot.
        >
        > I actually started a direct challenge against NCMEC and US DOJ this week
        > telling them they have to change this. Virtually everything the state
        > AGs are telling people about online predators is wrong. And I do not
        > think the AGs even know how wrong it is.
        >
        > I also know which filtering company has close corporate relations with
        > the American Family Association. And all of the constitutional arguments
        > against school's reliance on filtering in the manner they are.
        >
        > Some in the Internet Safety field do not like me because I have also
        > been trying to get them to change what they are saying. But I have
        > established a private group of this nation's top researchers and risk
        > prevention professionals in this field. And so have direct contact with
        > the folks who really understand these issues.
        >
        > Lastly, I know how to effectively teach Internet safety - I have a full
        > scope and sequence for Internet safety education on my site - please
        > also link to me <http://csriu. org/professional s/>. I will have my 2
        > hour
        > professional development presentation for teachers available as soon as
        > the site I am distributing through fixes their server problem <sigh>. I
        > also have 2 other presentations almost done about effective Internet use
        > management for web 2.0 - and one of the legal issues that schools will
        > need to address as they shift to web 2.0.
        >
        > ALSO - everyone needs to find my last message about the comments to
        > submit to the FCC on CIPA and directly and clearly tell the FCC that
        > CIPA is the PROBLEM. The way that schools have implemented CIPA - out of
        > fear they could lose ERate funding if any student ever accidentally
        > accesses any porn - is at the heart of what is wrong. They have to know
        > this.
        >
        > Note my new signature.
        >
        > Nancy
        >
        > --
        > Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
        > Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
        > http://csriu. org
        > nwillard@csriu. org
        >
        > Trying to teach students social networking without Web 2.0 in schools is
        > like trying to teach a child how to swim without a swimming pool.
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
      • BBracey@aol.com
        This can be discussed on the ISTE SIGDE wiki.. if you have comments. Prepared Remarks of Chairman Julius Genachowski Federal Communications Commission New
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 24, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          This can be discussed on the ISTE SIGDE wiki.. if you have comments.


          Prepared Remarks of
          Chairman Julius Genachowski
          Federal Communications Commission
          New America Foundation
          Washington, D.C.
          February 24, 2010

          "Mobile Broadband:
          A 21st Century Plan for U.S. Competitiveness, Innovation and Job
          Creation"

          As many of you know, as part of the Recovery Act, Congress and the
          President charged the FCC with developing a strategy to bring
          high-speed Internet and its benefits to all Americans. Less than a
          month from now, we will deliver this National Broadband Plan to
          Congress.

          In the past, I’ve likened the development of this plan to running a
          marathon at a sprinter’s pace. But as I was watching my required 3
          hours of NBC last night, I realized that a more apt sports metaphor for
          the National Broadband Plan would be the Winter Olympics.

          Let me explain:

          First, the National Broadband Plan will be the culmination of a
          tremendous amount of hard work and effort.

          For months a dedicated team has been working around the clock. A team
          that includes engineers, economists, and entrepreneurs; lawyers,
          academics, analysts, and consumer advocates; some of the very best
          public servants in the business, drawing from every bureau at the FCC.

          They have been driven by the imperative of developing a meaningful plan
          for U.S. global leadership in broadband to create jobs and economic
          growth; to unleash new waves of innovation and investment; and to
          improve education, health care, energy efficiency, public safety, and
          the vibrancy of our democracy. Hats off to this world-class team.

          The second way the National Broadband Plan is like the Olympics -- the
          ultimate goal is to earn a gold medal for the United States.

          The challenge is: we are lagging behind when it comes to broadband.

          Multiple studies have the U.S. ranked outside the top 10 when it comes
          to broadband penetration and speed. While some people take exception
          with those studies, few would suggest that we are leading the world in
          broadband, or are even as close as we should be.

          And I can tell you from speaking to my counterparts in other countries,
          the rest of the world is not sitting around waiting for us to catch up.

          Consider a study that Intel CEO Paul Ottelini described yesterday. The
          study ranked the U.S. 6th in the world in innovative competitiveness,
          and 40th out of the 40 countries ranked in “the rate of change in
          innovative capacity.”

          The first of those rankings is enough of a concern. That last-place
          statistic is the canary in the coal mine.

          The costs of our failure to lead are high.

          As IBM CEO Sam Palmisano recently put it, “Without pervasive broadband,
          our country will not be prepared for a new world that is increasingly
          built on the fusion of the physical and the digital.”

          For U.S. businesses to lead across the globe and for innovation to
          flourish at home, we need to invest in the infrastructure of the
          future: broadband.

          We need robust and open broadband, flourishing with applications and
          services that we can only begin to imagine.

          We have extraordinary capacity in the U.S. to build the best computers,
          chips, and applications in the world. But we are at risk of that asset
          being wasted if we don’t have great broadband infrastructure, wired and
          wireless.

          It would be like having the technology for great electric cars, but
          terrible roads.

          When it comes to mobile broadband, our goal is clear: To benefit all
          Americans and promote our global competitiveness, the U.S. must have
          the fastest, most robust, and most extensive mobile broadband networks,
          and the most innovative mobile broadband marketplace in the world.

          This will be a core goal of our National Broadband Plan.

          To meet that goal, our plan is ambitious but straightforward:
          Accelerate the broad deployment of mobile broadband by moving to
          recover and reallocate spectrum; update our 20th century spectrum
          policies to reflect 21st century technologies and opportunities; remove
          barriers to broadband buildout, lower the cost of deployment, and
          promote competition.

          The Mobile Opportunity

          No area of the broadband ecosystem holds more promise for
          transformational innovation than mobile.

          Breakthrough new devices that put the power of a “PC-in-your-pocket,”
          combined with billions in network investments have liberated broadband
          from the desktop and made it possible to imagine a world where the
          Internet is available to anyone, anywhere, anytime.

          And some of America’s greatest innovators have clearly been working
          overtime to seize the opportunity, as the iPad and the Kindle attest.

          While mobile broadband is still in the preliminaries (to stick with the
          Olympics theme), we’ve seen enough to say some things definitively:

          This is a sector that can fundamental transform our society and
          economy.

          Mobile broadband can be about job creation and economic growth.

          Jobs in the mobile network economy – jobs building out and managing
          extensive mobile broadband networks.

          And jobs in the mobile apps economy. According to Gartner research,
          $4.2 billion in mobile applications were sold last year – up from
          essentially zero just a couple of years ago. The number of apps has
          crossed 150,000.

          Studies show that increases in mobile broadband adoption translate into
          increases in economic growth and job creation.

          Mobile broadband can be about education.

          Last week, a New York Times article described an Arizona school
          district that installed Wi-Fi on one if its school buses. The bus was
          instantly transformed into a rolling study hall. And if anyone ever
          doubts the power of mobile broadband tell them this: the driver says
          that bus of high school kids is now quiet.

          Mobile broadband can be about healthcare.

          Mobile medicine takes remote monitoring to a new level. A patient’s
          heart rhythm can be monitored continuously, regardless of her
          whereabouts, and diabetics can receive continuous, flexible insulin
          delivery through real-time glucose monitoring sensors that transmit
          date to wearable insulin pumps.

          Mobile broadband can be about energy.

          With mobile broadband, consumers and businesses can utilize Smart
          Grid-enabled information services. A whole new world of “energy apps”
          can adjust lights, heating, and cooling from a smartphone or netbook,
          saving electricity, saving our environment, and saving money to boot.

          Mobile broadband can be about public safety.

          With mobile broadband, EMTs can beam images of a patient wirelessly
          from the road so that emergency room doctors can review them while the
          patient is in transit. First responders can also access a patient’s
          medical records almost instantaneously when they arrive on the scene.

          Mobile broadband can about 21st century government and enhanced civic
          engagement.

          During the recent snowstorm, Howard County, Maryland equipped all 120
          of its snow plows with GPS receivers. A website displayed the trucks’
          positions and the status of county streets, and county residents could
          see which streets had been plowed, salted or sanded. Families who lost
          power used their smartphones as a lifeline, coordinating cleanup
          efforts.

          We’re all seeing the ways in which mobile services like Twitter can
          enhance participation in public life – and of course that’s just the
          beginning.

          The Mobile Challenge

          And so these early days of mobile broadband demonstrate tremendous
          opportunities.

          But they also reveal serious challenges to America’s hopes for global
          leadership in mobile.

          For starters, although the potential of mobile broadband is limitless,
          its oxygen supply is not.

          Spectrum – our airwaves – really is the oxygen of mobile broadband
          service. Without sufficient spectrum, we will starve mobile broadband
          of the nourishment it needs to thrive as a platform for innovation, job
          creation and economic growth.

          And the fact is America is facing a looming spectrum crunch.

          As part of our broadband process the FCC received a letter from over a
          hundred companies – including Amazon, Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Dell, Intel,
          Microsoft, Motorola, and Verizon – entities representing billions in
          investment and millions of American jobs. These companies were united
          in telling the FCC [quote]: “Without more spectrum, America’s global
          leadership in innovation and technology is threatened.”

          Let’s look at some numbers.

          Mobile data usage is not just growing, it’s exploding.

          AT&T reports that its mobile data traffic is up 5,000% over the past
          three years.

          That’s not surprising when you consider that a typical smartphone
          generates 30 times the traffic of a traditional data-enabled phone—and
          a netbook generates 450 times more traffic.

          According to Cisco, North American wireless networks carried 17
          petabytes per month in 2009. By 2014, they are projected to carry 740
          petabytes per month.

          Now even if you think a petabyte is something that sends you to the
          emergency room, you know that that’s a game-changing trajectory.

          There is spectrum coming to market. Counting 2008’s 700 MHz auction,
          the FCC in recent years has authorized a 3-fold increase in commercial
          spectrum for mobile broadband. But that increase will not allow us to
          keep pace with an estimated 30-fold increase in traffic.

          While the spectrum crunch is a serious obstacle threatening the growth
          of mobile broadband, it is not the only one.

          Wireless providers also face red tape and needless barriers, which slow
          deployment and increase the costs of investment.

          The costs of obtaining permits and leasing pole attachments and rights
          of way can amount to 20 percent of fiber deployment, which is necessary
          for wireless networks as well as wired networks. With our tower-siting
          shot-clock order in November, the Commission has already begun taking
          action to cut red tape, lower the costs of investment, and accelerate
          network deployments – but more needs to be done.

          Another serious problem is that the mobile broadband revolution is not
          reaching all Americans.

          Many homes are technically passed by mobile broadband networks, but
          still cannot get a clear signal inside their home. And a mobile divide
          is an increasingly important part of the digital divide. In Alaska, for
          example, 23% of its population doesn’t have access to 3G mobile
          broadband. In West Virginia, at least 29% of its population lacks
          coverage. We also see disproportionately low adoption rates among
          certain populations, such as persons with disabilities.

          A final major issue: we are still way behind on communications
          interoperability for first responders, years after a call to action was
          issued by the 9/11 Commission. And the situation is even worse when it
          comes to mobile broadband for first responders. While a portion of the
          700 MHz spectrum has been allocated for public safety broadband use,
          our country still needs to build out that network.

          America’s 2020 Broadband Vision

          With our National Broadband Plan, the Commission will lay out its most
          dramatic actions yet to position America as a global leader in mobile
          broadband innovation.

          What are we going to do?

          The Broadband Plan will represent the first important step in what, my
          colleague, FCC Commissioner Meredith Attwell Baker, has urged us to
          pursue: “an ongoing strategic planning process on spectrum policy – to
          ensure that the agency’s stewardship of the public’s airwaves is smart,
          future-oriented, and serves as an ongoing engine of innovation and
          investment.”

          First, we are going to announce a gameplan to unleash more spectrum for
          mobile broadband.

          The National Broadband Plan will set a goal of freeing up 500 Megahertz
          of spectrum over the next decade. We will work closely with NTIA to do
          so.

          One of the best ways for us to achieve the right balance in the supply
          and demand of spectrum is to establish market-based mechanisms that
          enable spectrum intended for the commercial marketplace to flow to the
          uses the market values most.

          The Broadband Plan will recommend one such mechanism. It will propose
          a “Mobile Future Auction” -- an auction permitting existing spectrum
          licensees, such as television broadcasters in spectrum-starved markets,
          to voluntarily relinquish spectrum in exchange for a share of auction
          proceeds, and allow spectrum sharing and other spectrum efficiency
          measures.

          Now, I’ve mentioned broadcast spectrum – so let me be clear: the
          recommendation is for a voluntary program.

          While overwhelmingly -- roughly 90% -- of Americans receive their
          broadcast TV programming in most major markets through cable wires or
          satellite signals, there are still millions of Americans who receive TV
          through over-the-air antenna TV. Broadcasters would be able to
          continue to serve their communities with free over-the-air local news,
          information, and entertainment; and they would be able to experiment
          mobile TV.

          The Mobile Future Auction would allow broadcasters to elect to
          participate in a mechanism that could save costs for broadcasters while
          also being a major part of the solution to one of our country’s most
          significant challenges.

          Why look at broadcast spectrum as a major part of our spectrum
          strategic planning?

          First, a broad range of analysts, companies and trade associations
          participating in our Broadband proceeding agree that a clear candidate
          for allocation is spectrum in the broadcast TV bands.

          They point to a massive amount of unlocked value in that spectrum,
          which has characteristics that make it particularly suitable for mobile
          broadband – one study suggests that as much as $50 billion in value
          could be unlocked if we adopted policies to convert some of the
          broadcast spectrum to mobile broadband. This suggests that there are
          inefficiencies in the current allocation.

          A second reason is that the highly valuable spectrum currently
          allocated for broadcast television is not being used efficiently –
          indeed, much is not being used at all.

          About 300 megahertz of spectrum have been set aside for broadcast TV.
          In markets with less than 1 million people, only 36 megahertz are
          typically used for broadcasting. In cities with more than 1 million
          people, on average about 100 megahertz are used. Even in our very
          largest cities, at most only about 150 megahertz out of 300 megahertz
          are used.

          This is true even after the recent reallocation for digital television,
          which freed up some spectrum for mobile broadband. New technologies
          allow – indeed, they require – new strategic planning to ensure the
          most efficient use of spectrum, a vital public resource, especially
          given our broadband needs.

          Because of the billions of dollars of unlocked value in broadcast
          spectrum, and because of the current inefficient spectrum allocation,
          the Mobile Future Auction is a win-win proposal: for broadcasters, who
          win more flexibility to pursue business models to serve their local
          communities; and for the public, which wins more innovation in mobile
          broadband services, continued free, over-the-air television, and the
          benefits of the proceeds of new and substantial auction revenues.

          One thing is clear. It typically takes quite some time from the
          beginning to end of a Commission strategic spectrum reallocation
          process. But the clock is ticking on our country’s mobile broadband
          leadership opportunity and our global competitiveness challenge, and we
          have to get started.

          Our Plan for mobile broadband will also recommend applying a flexible
          approach to other frequency bands, where our rules—technical rules,
          service rules—may be holding back the broadband potential of large
          swaths of spectrum. We need to bring our spectrum policies into the
          21st century.

          The Plan proposes resolving longstanding debates about how to maximize
          the value of spectrum in bands such as the Mobile Satellite Service
          (MSS) or Wireless Communications Service (WCS) by giving licensees the
          option of new flexibility to put the spectrum toward mobile broadband
          use—or the option of voluntarily transferring the license to someone
          else who will.

          Vital elements of the Commission’s charter are to ensure that, in
          exercising our responsibilities with respect to spectrum, we promote
          competition and ensure that spectrum use is in the public interest, and
          of course all spectrum policy decisions will be made with that in mind.


          In addition, our National Broadband Plan will encourage innovative ways
          of using of spectrum, including what some call “opportunistic” uses, to
          encourage the development of new technologies and new spectrum policy
          models.

          Unlicensed spectrum, for example, has been a proven testbed for
          emerging competition, injecting new investment and innovation into the
          marketplace, and spawning new services and devices from Bluetooth to
          WiFi technology. The market for WiFi network equipment alone is about
          $4 billion a year, and analysts project the market for WiFi-enabled
          health products will reach $5 billion by 2014. This is what people used
          to call the “junk band” until the FCC released it for unlicensed use
          and innovators got to work.

          In addition, new ideas such as databases that dynamically enable—or
          revoke—access to spectrum in particular times and places promise to
          change the way we think about spectrum.

          For example, entrepreneurs could create new types of devices and ad hoc
          networks, enabling innovative new uses of spectrum.

          And, spurred by the smart persistence of my colleague Commissioner
          Michael Copps, the Plan will include a recommendation that we invest a
          sufficient amount in R&D to ensure that the science underpinning
          spectrum use continues to advance

          To close the adoption gap, our Plan would propose the creation of a
          Mobility Fund, as part of broader reforms of the Universal Service
          Fund. Without increasing the overall size of universal service
          funding, the Plan will seek to provide one-time support for deployment
          of infrastructure enabling robust mobile broadband networks, to bring
          all states to a minimum level of mobile availability. Bringing all
          states up to a national standard will help enable Americans in unserved
          areas participate in the mobile revolution.

          Finally, and critically, to improve mobile communications for our first
          responders, we will develop the 700 MHz public safety broadband network
          to achieve long overdue interoperability.
          I will have more to say on public safety tomorrow, but let me just
          mention now that we will have a comprehensive public safety strategy in
          the National Broadband Plan.
          At a high level, our goals will be achieved through public-private
          partnerships between public safety and 700 MHz commercial providers,
          including, but not limited to, a commercial licensee of the “D block.”


          The plan will also recommend that we establish and fund an Emergency
          Response Interoperability Center (ERIC) within the FCC to develop
          common technical standards for interoperability on the public safety
          broadband network from the start, and to update these standards
          periodically as broadband technology evolves.

          These are all programs in an ambitious Plan to deliver the benefits of
          broadband service, both wireless and wired, to all Americans and to
          invest in and build a world-leading broadband infrastructure in the
          U.S.

          There is an enormous amount of work to be done.

          The National Broadband Plan will chart a clear path forward. And if we
          do not seize the moment, I fear for the opportunity we will have lost.

          I’d like to close with one last comparison to the Olympics. The
          Olympics are unique in sport because they only come every four years.
          When you get your chance, you better make it count, because you don’t
          know when, or if, you’ll get another shot. With this Plan, we have a
          special opportunity to lay a foundation for American leadership in the
          21st century.

          If we get it right, broadband will be an enduring engine for creating
          jobs and growing our economy, for spreading knowledge and enhancing
          civic engagement, for advancing a healthier, sustainable way of life.
          This is our moment. Let’s seize it.


          What does this mean to education? We would like your comments and
          questions..
        • BBracey@aol.com
          Today, the Department announced the availability of the grant application for the highly anticipated Investing in Innovation (i3) program. These grants will
          Message 4 of 6 , Mar 8, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Today, the Department announced the availability of the grant
            application for the highly anticipated Investing in Innovation (i3)
            program. These grants will support local districts and nonprofit
            organizations—working in partnership with several districts and/or
            several schools—as they seek to implement educational innovations with
            promising or demonstrated effective outcomes for students.

            Through this program, competitive grants will be awarded to applicants
            with a record of improving student achievement and attainment in order
            to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative
            practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on:

            improving student achievement or student growth,
            closing achievement gaps,
            decreasing dropout rates,
            increasing high school graduation rates, or
            increasing college enrollment and completion rates.
            The notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and
            selection criteria (NFP) for the i3 program can be found here on
            ED.gov: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html In the
            coming days it will be published in the Federal Register. As you’ll
            note, there are three types of grants for which funding is available
            under the i3 program: Scale-up Grants, Validation Grants, and
            Development Grants. We advise interested local parties to carefully
            review the specifics regarding each of these grant types, as they look
            to determine which grant category is most suited to the specific
            progress level of their local activities.

            As many of you have expressed interest in the announcement of these
            grants, we wanted to make you immediately aware of their availability.
            Applicants will have 60 days to develop applications. We are including
            the press release below for your convenience.

            Our apologies if you are receiving this announcement more than once, as
            we are attempting to reach as many groups as possible with this
            information.


            The Communications and Outreach Team
            U.S. Department of Education



            U.S. Department of Education
            Office of Communications & Outreach, Press Office
            400 Maryland Ave., S.W.
            Washington, D.C. 20202

            FOR RELEASE
            March 8, 2010
            Contact: Sandra Abrevaya
            (202) 401-1576 or press@...


            SECRETARY DUNCAN RELEASES APPLICATION FOR $650 MILLION TO SUPPORT
            INNOVATION

            WASHINGTON — U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan today
            announced the Department of Education's final priorities and the grant
            application for the $650 million Investing in Innovation Fund (i3). The
            fund, which is part of the historic $5 billion investment in school
            reform in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), will
            support the development of path-breaking new ideas, the validation of
            approaches that have demonstrated promise, and the scale-up of the
            nation’s most successful and proven education innovations.

            “Many of our generation’s greatest breakthroughs occur when
            people are willing to invest in small scale projects with big scale
            potential,” said Duncan. “We need to identify these pockets of promise
            in the education community and give them the resources they need to
            grow.”

            Individual school districts or groups of districts can apply
            for the i3 grants, and entrepreneurial nonprofits can join with school
            districts or a consortium of schools to submit applications. To qualify
            for the competitive grants, applicants will need to address one of the
            four areas that are driving the Obama administration’s school reform
            agenda: supporting effective teachers and principals; improving the use
            of data to accelerate student achievement; complementing the
            implementation of standards and assessments that prepare students for
            success in college and careers; and turning around persistently
            low-performing schools.

            Applicants will receive a competitive preference if their
            project addresses one or more of the following priorities: improving
            outcomes for young children; expanding students’ access to college and
            preparing them for success in college; addressing the unique needs of
            students with disabilities and of limited English proficient students;
            and serving schools in rural areas.

            Unlike other federal grant programs where evidence is a
            selection criterion, in the i3 program evidence is a formal eligibility
            requirement. The i3 regulations also include specific definitions for
            what constitutes strong evidence, moderate evidence and a reasonable
            hypothesis and will award three types of grants based on these three
            levels of evidence. Development grants will require a reasonable
            hypothesis and will be aimed at helping develop fresh ideas, Validation
            grants will require moderate evidence and will be aimed at validating
            and spreading promising programs to regional scale, and Scale Up grants
            will require strong evidence and will be aimed at bringing proven
            programs to national scale. The Department expects to make Development
            grants of up to $5 million each; Validation grants of up to $30 million
            each; Scale Up grants of up to $50 million each.

            “This fund awards three different grants to programs at three
            different stages of development that all share one thing in common-
            evidence of success,” said Duncan. “We will award modest grants for new
            ideas, more for programs with moderate levels of evidence and
            significant funds to those with the strongest track records of success.
            There is no argument for investment more powerful than a program that
            is making a difference in the lives of our kids.”

            Once identified as an award recipient, successful applicants
            will need to demonstrate how their programs will be sustainable after
            their federal grants are completed as well as find a 20 percent cash or
            in-kind match of the federal award from the private sector. To assist
            recipients in their efforts to find private matches and to serve the
            larger purpose of creating an innovation community, the Department of
            Education has launched an online community, the Open Innovation Portal.
            This is the first national forum within which entrepreneurs, education
            stakeholders of all types, and funders can partner to develop and fund
            innovative ideas in the education sector. Through this portal, the
            Department will hope to facilitate partnerships by convening
            like-minded individuals to accelerate the development, identification,
            and broad use of innovative products, practices, and processes to
            improve education in schools.

            Applications will be due in mid-May and grants will be awarded
            in September. In the coming weeks, officials from the Department’s
            Office of Innovation and Improvement will hold informational workshops
            in Atlanta, Baltimore and Denver that will be web-accessible. President
            Obama has proposed an additional $500 million of the i3 program in his
            fiscal 2011 budget.

            Applications available here:
            http://www.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html

            ###
            Forwarded by Bonnie Bracey Sutton
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.