[Yr7-10it] RE: Year 7-10 IT structures

[Costello, Rob R]

Hi all 

I'll try to respond to some of this : 

Paul, I'd be interested to add you phd on to my reading list if you have
an electronic copy, or if its published somewhere?  Next holiday reading
:) 

I'm willing to hand over powerpoint, word formatting, blog posting,
movie making, clip art, screen dumps and annotations, basic web
construction, blogging, wikis, concept mapping, netiquette, network use,
publisher, basic excel, etc to other subjects, if they're wanting to use
/ develop those skills. 

Also happy to see them supported to do that. Have been in schools where
this happened and not felt threatened - have run PD for the subjects
taking on these skills

I've currently inherited a year 7 course that lists most of these things
almost as "skill lists" and I couldn't really defend the need for that
to stay as a stand alone subject (except movie making / media studies
which becomes another subject). When it comes time to teach some of
these skills  I often go looking to see what they're doing in other
subjects, in order to find a context etc (poetry for powerpoint at
present, was fractions for Excel etc). in the past I've sometimes
invented projects in order to teach a "skill" (the perennial travel
brochure) and that seems a bit pointless when they could do it in a more
integrated way (ie in parallel with a well considered sose curriculum) 

lots of good thinking and activities can be done in that integrated way
- and I know primary schools often do that well, and can be done in
secondary subjects - the Intel approach

One of things Bill sent me was this link to a discussion thread where
Alan Kay talked about skill development  
< http://squeakland.org/pipermail/squeakland/2007-August/003737.html >

Interesting parallels - he talks of the 10, 100, 1000 and 10,000 hour
version of various skills (musicianship, higher maths, sporting skills,
*language learning* etc) - mentions that he and Seymour Papert had
similar feelings on these levels - familiarity versus deep / creative
skill 

I taught in a girls school for a number of years and I noticed year 11
kids liked learning powerpoint in unit 1 IPM, in 1998, since they had
never seen it before. But a few years later the incoming grade 6s were
generally competent in powerpoint and in finding their way around that
sort of app - so we moved on to some other presentation software -
probably to web pages 

What does that say about the powerpoint sort of skill? (1) Its engaging
whenever its learnt - and (2) is accessible and appropriate down the
school / levels   

We're all wanting kids to get into higher order thinking -  whatever
that means - if Bloom's taxonomy is any guide it still means creativity
is a "higher order thinking skill" 

So creativity with powerpoint is a good thing, if we can scaffold and
model that (which comes more from the poetry or task, then the prebuilt
animation effects)   

We also want challenging and sustained development of ideas (PolT 4).
I'm not sure that "skill lists" listed above really qualify for that,
especially considered over 12 years of schooling - needs something
bigger 

We also presumably all want to teach kids in the "zone of development" -
not too high or low for where they're at - challenging but achievable. 

Nobody wants to force technical stuff down kids throats when they aren't
interested or curious about it  

But neither to we want to limit secondary IT to "skills" that tend to be
able to slide down the curriculum. 

I didn't have a problem in the other school when we integrated our 7&8
courses into sose, maths etc - nothing that couldn't be "delivered"
there. (Excel can be complex of course - but I think maths/sose/science
is an ok place for it). 

I have something of a battle over introducing Microworlds Logo though -
I thought it offered something the flashier Toolbook, the proposed
alternative  - lacked; an accessible intro to programming ideas. I lost
that battle - we bought Toolbook instead 

I felt so passionate about it - because I think we tend to teach some
"version of our own history" and making programming accessible felt
important to me, amid all these media tools - if the students were ever
going to experience the creativity of *creating software* they needed an
accessible start 

I offered the kids an option to do their toolbook assignment as a
programming option instead - since Toolbook had a scripting language.
About a fifth of the class chose that option. I wrote a game as an
example, and gave them half completed templates to work from. 

It was hard work for student and teacher but I kept some of their self
evaluations, since they were full of comments like "I think is the most
frustrating thing I've ever done. But its also one of the most
satisfying and I'm proud of myself for making it work ... its made me
think about my career / the idea of writing my own program is cool" etc


Enough to encourage me - but I knew it would have failed if I'd tried to
mandate it on all the girls - many were very happy tweaking their
assignments on travel brochures and bands - nothing wrong with that. And
I'd spent about 80% of my time on the 20% who were wrestling with their
first programming (in a very non-optimal environment) (toolbook
scripting and debugging was not very friendly. Gamemaker etc would have
made it much easier)

We employed one of these students, one year, after year 12 as a
technician - she was being already paid to moderate chat rooms in year
10. Her other teachers were rather amazed that this otherwise non
academic kid ,who hadn't stood out in other subjects, had become so
competent over the holidays, a few months after year 12; now that her
job was solving their computer problems. (note though, that not any
"digital native" would have done. 10,000 hours on Nintendo is not a very
transferable skill, despite what Mark Prensky says). Although she was in
my class for a few years, I didn't do anything but encourage an existing
interest and ability - the rest of the students weren't at that level of
interest or skill with technical ICT. 

But here's the real sort of story I want to be possible for kids :
making and constructing software.  Maybe only a minority are interested,
but I think we have to cultivate it - open it up as a possibility 

Eg one year I found this applet - that shows art works, and dynamically
filters and sorts by keyword, author etc 
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/copernica/
it's a nice blend of art / ICT in itself - and the author (martin
Wattenberg) does lots of cool, original stuff like that 

I want kids to be able to do that  - make their own original,
innovative, pieces - once you've felt the power of creativity in this
way its hard to feel that the promise of ICT is realised in learning
software apps - valid as that is. 

For those who like it, making your own software feels like the essence
of constructivist learning; you find yourself designing, adjusting,
thinking on several levels at once - switching between big picture idea
and localised problems 

(In this case, I noticed the number of stars in the applet was
comparable with number of students in our school - so I found how it
stored the lists of art works and images, asked the author, who agreed,
and replaced them with student images and timetables - by poking around
in the code etc. The result was not efficient, visualising class lists
as rotating circles of stars, but cool to play with.  

My thing is we're limited to just admiring the applet if we don't /
can't tackle it like that - and its nice to model that approach to kids 

i hope to do some work with students at Swinburne next year - which
happens to where the other student went, though years ago - and
hopefully they'll program up a simulation, in the style of River City - 

(coincidentally, I talked about what ICT "is", with their lecturers,
they see varieties of ICT studies - from fully technical / mildly
technical (content) / through to sociological (how do games affect us
etc) 

They have also wrestled with best ways to teach programming. 

As some here have said, ICT as discipline is very new. 

We haven't found its "fit" yet 

The historical story is often missing, and so we get a bit stuck with
the way it is now; papert and kay remind us its up for grabs 

Agree its often unclear in industry as well - many debates there about
the best way to plan and use IT, best ways to manage, program, project
manage etc 

We all want whats best for kids - we all teach some version of ourselves

Cheers 

Rob 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:yr7-10it-
> bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of yr7-10it-request at edulists.com.au
> Sent: Friday, 19 October 2007 5:09 PM
> To: yr7-10it at edulists.com.au
> Subject: Yr7-10it Digest, Vol 32, Issue 29
> 
> Send Yr7-10it mailing list submissions to
> 	yr7-10it at edulists.com.au
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/yr7-10it
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	yr7-10it-request at edulists.com.au
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	yr7-10it-owner at edulists.com.au
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Yr7-10it digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. RE: Year 7-10 IT structures (Dr Paul Chandler)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:07:07 +1000
> From: "Dr Paul Chandler" <paul.chandler at YVG.vic.edu.au>
> Subject: RE: [Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
> To: "Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List"
> 	<yr7-10it at edulists.com.au>
> Message-ID:
> 	<442B8BAB0827E1438ABFB75152F52D05013866E0 at yvgmailsrv.YVG.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I've been strangely quiet (ie busy) whilst this discussion has rolled
> around, but I am also of the opinion that integration with specialist
> support is the the way forward, and there is also room for computing
in
> the curriculum.  In fact, in my perfect world, I'd have both.
> 
> My PhD considered "self-taught computer-using teachers", and I'm not
> going to try to summarise it all here.  There are some observations
> which can be made.  Firstly, there is remarkably little research on
such
> teachers, how they teach, what they value, how/what they teach ICT etc
> etc.  We can make links to studies (also relatively few in number)
which
> have considered teachers who teach outside of their speciality.  Put
> starkly: sometimes it works really well, and sometimes it doesn't.
One
> study I read of a non-legal studies teacher (from Qld) who took up
> teaching Legal because there was no-one else to do it showed great
> success and adapation.  In general, the literature shows very little
> relationship between capacity to teach in a particular discipline and
> formal academic background in that area.  So I would argue that the
only
> ultimate thing stopping our non-ICT colleagues from delivering good
ICT
> is a desire to do it.
> 
> My thinking is not related to demolishing parochialism, but this: the
> self-taught computer-using teachers I studied had an implicit (and
> sometimes explicit) expectation that students "knew how to do it",
that
> they could simply "use" students ICT skills without having to teach
> them.  There is no way that we could ever fully equip, in a timely and
> effective manner, students with all the ICT skills they may ever need
in
> the range of other subjects they are studying.   In Science (my other
> discipline area), we have certain expectations of the language and
> standard of presentation which are required, for instance, in prac
> reports.  It would be naive of me to think that I never have to remind
a
> student of how to write neatly, spell correctly, title a table or
write
> in past tense, although these are English skills.  I see that as the
> parallel with other subjects using ICT.  In fact, I think we need to
> deliberately move some (not all) ICT skills to be the province of
other
> subjects to teach because it is the means by which they will "own" the
> skill rather than expecting to be a "consumer" of it.  If we try to
> 'keep it all to ourselves', we will never foster the desire in others
to
> develop; collaborative culture rather than consumer culture.  That is
> not to say that teachers don't need any formal knowledge of ICT (I
think
> they do).  I once worked at a school which had a school objective that
> all teachers would develop skills at teaching English (such was the
ESL
> population).  This went well beyond the generic "we are all teachers
of
> English" but to specific teaching strategies; it was loved by some,
and
> hated by others; but we did it.  We can "all be ICT teachers", but
> schools need to help teachers get in touch with particular teaching
> procedures.
> 
> I would also observe that a full discussion of the parallels between
> language learning and learning ICT would be enormously complicated.
I'm
> not a teacher of English at all, but I know that in the early years of
> schooling, immersion is a big part of language learning, but so are
> approaches such phonemic awareness and spelling (and a language
teacher
> would be able to name quite a few other techniques).  It is far from
> simple to draw parallels between the two.  Perhaps, to parallel
language
> learning closely, we would develop a range of interventionist
strategies
> to direct student learning about ICT (ie what might be the ICT
> equivalent of 'phonemic awareness'?)
> 
> Language teachers in the early years use a nice phrase, "barking at
> text" - kids who can apparently read the words on the page, but don't
> understand a word of it. In our apparently ICT-savvy world, how do we
> know that students aren't doing the ICT equivalent of barking at text?
> I once knew a student who was writing some relatively detailed PERL in
> Year 7, and when I met him in a programming class in year 9 I was
amazed
> to find out that he had absolutely no concept of a variable, and he
> struggled for some time to develop one.
> 
> I had a colleague a couple of months ago say that she felt generally
OK
> with teaching ICT in her English classes, but she felt that she was
not
> doing justice to it because the only teaching approach that she had a
> "demonstrating" - what could I offer which is 'more' than this; 'more'
> like how ICT teachers do it.  And it got me thinking - I do an awful
lot
> of demonstrating; the range of teaching procedures (to borrow a PEEL
> phrase) in the ICT classroom about ICT content strike me a typically
> being pretty narrow.
> 
> And so my circuitous thinking bring me back to the wiki which I
> established a while back http://pdchandler.wikispaces.com specifically
> to help foster a community of ICT teachers which are concerned with
> issues such as developing a range of interesting teaching procedures
for
> ICT and being interested in cultivating deep understanding (compared
> with barking at text).  I have some concern that we have used the
> "interest" generated by using ICT in other subject areas as an excuse
> for not having terribly exciting and engaging ways of fostering ICT
> knowledge of itself.  And whether you believe in "integrated" or
"stand
> alone", these fundamental issues of pedagogy need to be addressed.
The
> wiki is a work in progress ... largely by me ... but a community would
> be better ... please join in ....
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au
> [mailto:yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of Anne-Marie
Chase
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 3:21 PM
> To: 'Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List'
> Subject: RE: [Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
> 
> 
> 
> Hello all
> 
> 
> 
> I think this idea of understanding what "ICT" is exists at industry
> level too.  I was involved in organizing a GoGirl
> <http://www.gogirlwa.org.au/>  event in 2005.  The event is a Careers
> Showcase for female students to be introduced to the many faces of the
> Information, Communication and Technology Industry.  I worked with a
> voluntary organisation from the IT industry to organise the event
which
> included speakers from the IT industry telling the students about what
> they did and how they got there.  It's a great event and the feedback
> from students and teachers is very positive.  The speakers included
> programmers etc which you'd imagine as being part of the IT industry.
> However, the speakers also included a vet, a dentist and a few others
> you wouldn't really call the IT industry, yet IT was integral to their
> job's.  IT is the tool in these roles.  Incidentally GoGirl is
concerned
> with the falling number of students studying ICT and the need to
attract
> students to the ICT industry.  At a speaker level the support is
great,
> at an organisation level the support from the ICT industry is
virtually
> non-existent as is the support from state (WA) and federal government.
> Not sure what that says about a skills shortage in the ICT industry or
> the value of the ICT industry to the economy.
> 
> 
> 
> As for a future model for ICT..........  I think it would be great if
an
> organisation like VITTA or ICTEV could organize a group of interested
> parties, consulting with industry (AIIA) and gov (MMV & DET) which
could
> develop this whole line of thinking and provide some sort of
> advocacy/lobby group role.  At all levels there is confusion about a
way
> forward from classroom level, school leadership, regional, state and
> federal government.  It would be good to see IT teachers push a
> direction.
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think integration of ICT with specialist support is the
way
> forward.  Like the role of the Atelierista in Reggio schools. (An
> Atelierista assists children to express themselves through materials
> (The 100 languages of children)).  This provides benefits too in terms
> of:
> 
> *                Project based learning/constructivist approach
> 
> *                Development of multi-literacies
> 
> *                Vocational skills
> 
> *                Resourcing - access to skilled ICT teachers
> 
> *                Resourcing - access to specialist hardware and
software
> 
> *                Mentoring/PD for teachers
> 
> *                Encouraging non-IT specialists to have a go etc etc
> 
> Integration offers the opportunity to draw on students ICT skills
> (digital natives) and their interest and motivation in using ICT
> (assists with engagement).  This is the area I am currently doing a
> doctoral study in so anyone interested please go to
> http://digital-kids.wikispaces.com
<http://digital-kids.wikispaces.com/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, there is a place for computing in the curriculum, is this
> different to ICT?  I read a recent post on Digital Chalkie with
interest
> http://www.digitalchalkie.com/2007/09/12/picaxe-2007/ I kind of think
> computing is different/separate to ICT, yet I first learnt to program
> when I was at school and I'm sure this has helped me in the digital
> world, so not separate at all???
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> 
> 
> Anne-Marie
> 
> 
> 
> P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au
> [mailto:yr7-10it-bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of Bill Kerr
> Sent: 18 October 2007 04:53
> To: Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had another go at this on my blog:
> http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2007/10/decline-of-it-in-education.html
> 
> it gets a bit complicated because probably many traditional subjects
are
> at least sometimes taught in routine, formulistic and uninspiring ways
> eg. maths out of the textbook
> 
> certainly its asking too much for any teacher to be continually
> innovative in whatever subject they teach, given the pressures on
> teachers in general
> 
> but when computers came along as new, important, "vocational" some of
> this was then converted into skill routines at the school level -
here's
> a new application (eg. Office), how do we use this properly -
initially
> this was enough to establish the subject but has not been enough to
> sustain it R-12 or K-12 in the longer term
> 
> Yes the IT teacher knows how to use Word better than the English
teacher
> 
> But it's not reasonable for a subject (IT) to sustain itself long term
> mainly on a skilling basis. It would  not be reasonable for any other
> subject to do that
> 
> In some cases the forces for IT have not developed a compelling enough
> argument for IT to be retained as a separate subject
> 
> In other cases a compelling argument - a deeper approach - has been
> developed and the stakeholders (students, school admin, universities)
> have heard it
> 
> For the students who think they are "digital natives" it has to be a
> good argument since it is coming from the "immigrants"
> 
> In other cases the argument has been developed but fallen on deaf ears
> 
> I'm saying that its not reasonable and not inspiring for IT to remain
as
> a separate subject unless it does develop an argument that is
equivalent
> to the best argument that English, Maths, Science could develop. To
> teach IT mainly as a skill is boring anyway - who really wants to do
> only that?
> 
> These other subjects have a 400 year plus magnificent tradition
> 
> Now what is it about IT that makes it equivalent to these subjects?
That
> is the argument that has to be developed for IT to compete long term
as
> a standalone with these subjects, if we want that.
> 
> Your comments could also be read as an argument for a new subject such
> as "media studies"
> 
> How do media changes effect our learning - eg. if students watch as
much
> TV, play computer games, web surfing, use their mobile phones etc. -
how
> does that impact on their ability to sit in a class and listen to a
> teacher?
> 
> Media studies might be an elective in school - but there is something
> happening here in the way media is changing that is having a profound
> effect on everything that happens in school
> 
> IT teachers losing their subject is a wakeup call for a bigger problem
-
> like a species becoming extinct might signify a broader significant
> change in the whole environment
> 
> --
> Bill Kerr
> http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/
> 
> On 10/17/07, Costello, Rob R < Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au
> <mailto:Costello.Rob.R at edumail.vic.gov.au> > wrote:
> 
> 
> making the parallel with English / computer literacy is suggesting
that
> "digital native" status does not mean we necessarily abandon attempts
to
> build on kids skills in a concentrated way
> 
> what are the ideas that computer literacy opens to us?
> 
> Well, what is software?
> It is medium in which we carve and express ideas. It provides a milieu
> in which we increasingly communicate. It is an increasingly dominant
> substrate in our culture. It is mirror in which we see ourselves -
> watching my 5 year old snap himself on the web cam.
> 
> there is a plasticity in software, that means it can morph into every
> domain - can be video editing, email, spreadsheets, game design,
> blogging, CAD etc
> 
> and teaching kids how to work with it, be creative with it, in
whatever
> form or context, can be valuable
> 
> sometimes the very diversity of forms works against seeing what the
> deeper ideas are
> 
> Also can lead to the "ICT is just a tool, lets not focus on the
> technology" - "its teachers who make sure its used in meaningful
> contexts" sort of thing
> 
> and I broadly agree with the sentiment, in many cases
> 
> Yet given the plasticity of the software, it would also be nice to let
> kids experience how to work with that - to take control at that deeper
> level, to have some ideas of how to write it, not just read
(experience)
> it  (=literacy)
> 
> Its harder, but potentially it goes further than mastering
applications
> - valuable as that is
> 
> Kay says that putting a piano in a classroom is not going to make
> musicians - the teacher, and the music (software) are the key elements
-
> the music is also the expression
> 
> the discipline of performing music is "hard", takes years of training
to
> reach higher levels
> and it builds in complexity as it goes - builds on previous skills
> 
> Systems thinking, object orientation, etc, is possibly as hard to
> master, just as useful and adaptable when mastered  - and accessible
at
> earlier stages with the right tools
> 
> Agree we don't have a clear sense of what these big ideas are - too
> taken with the range of apps (=music appreciation, reading?)
> 
> though playing with them does also give some measure of the ideas,
> indirectly- and may payoff in other ways (the communication or
> expressive or analytical power of the tool) - and may be appropriate
in
> many cases, classes etc
> 
> PS here's one spinoff of tinkering with software at school age -
> wouldn't have occurred if I'd been left to the apps of the day - a
> little induction into BASIC started the accessibility of constructing
> 
> www.brainshapes.com
> experimental, may change, copyright, incompletely documented etc
> cheers
> Rob
> 
> PS lots of disciplines are making some sort of extended "literacy"
claim
> - not just ICT (financial literacy, ethical literacy, scientific
> literacy - the multi-literacy grab-bag)
> 
> 
> > Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 10:17:10 +1000
> > From: "Bill Kerr" <billkerr at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Yr7-10it] Year 7-10 IT structures
> > To: "Year 7 - 10 Information Technology Teachers' Mailing List"
> >       <yr7-10it at edulists.com.au>
> > Message-ID:
> >       < 5d2dce520710151717x5d8d6618h6708ca82433b91bc at mail.gmail.com
> <mailto:5d2dce520710151717x5d8d6618h6708ca82433b91bc at mail.gmail.com> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > I'm interested in this argument about the "information age" and "IT
is
> 
> > equivalent to English", which has come up before on these lists
> >
> > The term "information age" is too vague now IMO. The "information
age"
> did
> > not start with the computer - it started with the printing press.
> > ...
> >
> > The argument that "we can all read and write" implies that IT is
> another
> > form of literacy (equivalent to reading and writing) and so deserves
> an
> > equal place in the curriculum to English
> >
> > That argument might turn out to be correct, eg. we could argue that
> > students
> > could learn to program the computer to represent dynamic systems
(eg.
> the
> > spread of AIDS or a traffic jam simulation or global warming) and
that
> 
> > this
> > systems theory knowledge is a new form of literacy required by the
> modern
> > citizen. If we understood systems theory better then society would
> have
> > picked up on global warming earlier or developed other perspectives
on
> 
> > global warming to our current ones (ie. panic)
> >
> > But it's wrong to equate the ability to read and write English with
> the
> > ability to learn basic computer skills.
> >
> > The English curriculum does not or should not justify itself in
> secondary
> > school on the basis of learning to read and write. It might justify
> itself
> > on the basis that the study of Shakespeare for example provides
> students
> > with new insights into the human condition.
> >
> > "Computer science" (which is perhaps not a real science yet) could
> only
> > justify itself on this sort of basis - that it provides new unique
> > insights
> > into the human condition.
> >
> > Integration of computers into the rest of the curriculum (and
> computing
> > being phased out as a stand alone subject in the middle years) is
> > proceeding
> > on the basis that all computing has to offer is basic (computer)
> literacy
> > skills and that the "digital natives" will pick that up anyway. The
> > comparison here is with oral literacy. Humans learn to talk without
> formal
> > teaching. They don't learn to read and write without formal
teaching.
> That
> > process is meant to happen in primary school and is the major focus
of
> > primary school. The ability to read and write then opens doors to
the
> > collected wisdom of humanity, be it through books or the web.
> >
> > So, what is the argument that computer skills are somehow equivalent
> to
> > English - the subject which provides the underlying basis for all of
> > modern
> > human knowledge, post Enlightenment?
> >
> > Maybe there is such an argument. But the fact that IT teachers
haven't
> > developed it coherently is the underlying reason why they are losing
> their
> > subject.
> >
> > --
> > Bill Kerr
> > http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> 
> Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
> received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before
> opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects.
> Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the
> negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from
> the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying
> any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed
are
> those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the
> Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
> Authority and
> http://www.vitta.org.au  - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
> Teachers Association Inc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
> Authority and
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
> Teachers Association Inc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
> Year 7 - 10 IT Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
> Authority and
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
> Teachers Association Inc
> 
> DISCLAIMER:
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended
> solely for the use of the individual to whom they are addressed.
> 
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender
> immediately by return email and then delete this message.
> 
> Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender
and
> may not necessarily reflect the views of Yarra Valley Grammar.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/yr7-
> 10it/attachments/20071019/a3fabce2/attachment.html
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Yr7-10it mailing list
> Yr7-10it at edulists.com.au
> http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/yr7-10it
> 
> 
> End of Yr7-10it Digest, Vol 32, Issue 29
> ****************************************

Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.