One more on Kellogg… two framings, in particular, really made me think:

Mimi Ito (whose work anyone in socialtech should follow) is an anthropologist and comes at digital kids with that perspective. Using an anthro framework, the key is to think about kids in their terms, not trying to project or assert an adult framework on kids. In other words, the goal is not to save kids, but to respect them on their terms. She points out that age is one of the most oppressive forces in society, even more naturalized than gender. Because kids grow into adults and we were all once kids, people tend to treat kids as young adults. The goal is to get them to adulthood, not to be valued on kid level.

We also talked about technological tinkering and how many kids learn to explore technology that way. Liz Keith pointed out that a lot of digital participation by kids is social tinkering.

I think that point is really key because we tend not to value the social tinkering or give kids the framework to value that, even though it’s such a key feature of their lives. [And there are nice parallels to my Etcon rant about social hacking vs. technological hacking.]