 Thank you very much for the introduction and again, I apologize for this technical difficulties. It was by accident that my contribution will complete David's contribution, but from another perspective, I cannot rely on a UK report since I'm, as you know, I'm coming from Germany and in addition, I fear I'm not half as entertaining as David. However, you will, I hope you will enjoy my presentation. My aims and objectives are as follows, that we live in the internet age, but our educational system is stemming from some centuries ago. And I wonder what will be the consequences for our educational structures when we discuss the consequences of the internet age. And my main thesis are that the current discussion about the internet for modern ways of knowledge acquisition within our institutional framework will lead into a dead end. And the impact of the internet goes beyond those phenomena which could be integrated into the given educational institutions. Since knowledge acquisition during the childhood and in early life has always been twofold. We have the expert knowledge as mediated by educational institutions and the whole and the entire society is educating our children and youth in social, emotional and or action-oriented matters. But the internet, and this is my firm conviction is decisively changing the way how education works, worked so far. And therefore, we have to reintegrate both trends, the future role of education institutions and the future of childhood in the light of the internet. To make one thing clear, I cannot introduce any report or any own research results. And so far, this contribution relies on speculation, stereotypes, imagination and a few research results because nobody of us knows about the future and I would include myself. I have also no knowledge of the future. But I want to emphasize some pointers which may give us some hints so far. Okay, with regard to the first thesis, I have found one example which came up from a conference announcement end of this month in Vienna organized by the OECD and the title is Imagine Exploring Radical Visions of Tomorrow's Schools and How to Make Them Work. Of course, you are curious what could be the future bring and when you see the headlines of the program, I found it rather not boring but not in the same way stimulating. These are our topics. These are the topics which are discussed over the days here in Nottingham about ICT in education. And I fear that the topics of the conference exclude the modern reality of the young generation. As you said, students come today with a certain expectation to universities or schools but we do not know what will be their future expectations when they go to school and when they go to the university. But the conference program is discussing the issues we are discussing today. And this is our typical access to the future, namely the linear continuation of what we experience today. So when you look at the perspective of the conference and namely to talk and discuss about issues in 50 years, then you have some reservations or at least I have some reservations because school is not or education is not got given. Educational institutions are stemming from a certain historical background situation, 17th, 18th century. And at that time, sometimes we forget about it, the armies and military people have the main pushes for educational institutions. The historical background was characterized by giving children a proper education and this was limited to a fixed location and a fixed time in order to satisfy the needs of a national economy and society as well as supervising children for a certain time of the day, not a minor issue. And in the past, these issues have been very important and have been agreed by all parts of the society. The internet is completely going beyond this given structure because it's universal, it's independent of space, time and control, not following a national curriculum but voluntarily and intensively used for knowledge acquisition by all ages. Why I'm saying this, I'm sure you all know about this. I only want to make one point and this is a point of voluntarily when you think how restrictive you and I are in giving any data to state authorities and when you compare this, what you are giving voluntarily to let's say Facebook or any other social network, it's incredible, the discrepancy and I will give you an example of my own family. One of my sons spent his holiday last year in Finland and as usual, they have been together with friends and have drunk some beer and they put the photo on the Facebook. The consequence is that everybody all over the world knows now my son is drinking beer, which could be hidden in another private environment but no, he has given voluntarily this information to all the world. This is incredible difference to what we know about how to handle information. And I'm sure such a development will have an impact on educational structures. Next example, sometimes I work as a reviewer for European project and this was one of the project I had to review. And I'm showing this to you because you have in this structure, you have two halves, a left half and a right half. And for getting the EU grant, the left half was by far more important because the left half is mirroring the traditional structure of our educational institutions. You have all participants in this structure and even if the student has this size on this picture, please see that you have five teachers surrounding the student for controlling. You have publishers who want to sell their old material via new channels. So this is not surprising. For me, decisive is the other half. And I think for knowledge acquisition of a modern student, of a modern child, the right half of this picture is by far more important. And when you see that this project was planned in 2003, not talking about the work program of the EU, which was developed in 2000 then and in 2001. It was approved in 2003. It ran from 2004 to 2008. Now it's dead. And the taxpayer has spent 13 million euros for this project. Compare this with Facebook. I know some of you think this is an unfair comparison. I think it's not unfair because the success of Facebook is depending on the demand stemming mostly from the young generation. They are not looking for the left half. They are looking for the right half of this project. And this is one of the reasons of the success of Facebook. So the state authorities spend a lot of money for this. But the misunderstanding stems from the assumption that new media can be integrated into the traditional school system by mostly taking over routine tasks and thereby training the students in future skills. What may make sense for my standpoint is that we discuss the internet or the introduction of new ICTs in schools in order to reduce the digital divide because not all students will have access at home. We need a new discussion about content supply because schools and universities have lost their monopoly in content supply. What is very important, and here I think we are close together, is the social dimension of the internet, global communications, cyberbullying, blocks and so on, and new algorithms. So we will go to new algorithms by offering an example of the invitation of the conference gallery. It reads like, the dress code for the evening is smart evening dress, not black tie. And this was, for me, how to get information, or what is meant by smart evening dress in the British environment and where most participants are coming from the educational sector. In the past, you have to build an algorithm. Do I know somebody from that group? How to contact? How expensive is it to call him or her? How to explain? Or do I have to go to the library and read in British encyclopedia Britannica? Whatever. Nowadays, I click the URL of Wikipedia and all algorithms are already built in by Google, and this is the result shortened by me. When you give it in a smart business suite, you will get more than 600,000 pages offered. And I hope you have your designer jeans with you. The consequence is that we have to teach our students how to build new algorithms. They have to understand that Google is not a charity organization, but that on the top is always the information which follows the business model of Google. Levy, which I will give you in the reference list, speaks of complex communication. Students need to communicate with the machine and with their own experience. But for me the most, if I may require 90 seconds, for me the most important issue in this context is the changes of our childhood. And I found this quotation by the American academic David Blunter. And I'm very found of the term, knownness. Students know everything about know. And therefore the relationship between childhood and knowledge acquisition has completely changed. In former days, school and universities, they have decided what content is important for you. Now children have access to any information they want to have. I will not only blame the usual suspects as pornography or violence or horror, think of health. When I did not want to go to school, I have to say to my parents, oh, I feel so ill, I will certainly die within the next 24 hours. And my parents answered, okay, but go to school and say a last farewell to your comrades. Now it is very difficult because your children will have all the arguments, all the medical arguments from the internet. I do not have the medical arguments to discuss with my children about their health. This is only a small example, but I'm sure you can widen it. And think of Tom Sawyer how difficult it was for him to get access to the secrets of his own poly. So I have to run to the rest of my slides the conclusion is, for me, similar as your need more social possibilities in schools or in general, in educational institutions. Why? Because I think the young generation need to explore the information in a social context. I can decide now what is a smart business suite according to my experience. My children couldn't, but they could if they have this social experience which is so difficult for them to get in the isolated way in front of the internet. So these are my references and I will close with the quotation of Pink Floyd. Leave us kids alone. I'm not sure whether we should them alone with the internet, but this is for me a very exciting discussion. Thank you very much indeed. It's interesting how for an association of learning technology it's the social aspects that have come out in the two talks today. Any questions for Hans-Peter? If I could decide which edge to be in this society right now I would hear to be a teenager it would be just the worst time ever. Being a teenager is the worst time in life anyway when you look back, but actually nowadays have all the people assuming that you're keeping up with what's going on in technology now which I think is what you've just said but also because of that you're kind of cut off and you're living in this island world from the past and as a former historian I realise just how much students don't get the past but also I think that you're assuming that young people kind of automatically keep up with stuff and can use that for learning. Is that what you're saying that are fair with the social tools but you weren't necessarily saying that they know what they're doing for learning? Interesting question but I only wanted to stimulate a discussion about the relationship between modern childhood and educational institutions. I would disagree that children are only taking the knowledge and information from the internet. They still believe in authorities like parents, teachers or whatever. But just to give you an example sometimes I moderate online seminars on intercultural management and the student brought up the website of the one child policy in China. So you see I have lost my monopoly of telling them what is going on in China. They can look everywhere but I have no control. I cannot say to others this is a good information, this is a bad information to a certain extent I'm helpless. I can only give what I know but the new generation of students they will get their information from everywhere and this brings a conflict into educational institutions and we have to be aware at the moment we have to be aware of this conflict but we have to look for solutions in our pedagogical theories for example. So if you take constructivism then the reality of the students are now composed for more elements than in the past. I want to show the complexity. I'm not a follower of a monocausal approach. Okay, thank you. And one over here. Andrew Ravenscroft, London Metropolitan University. I think things might not be as drastic as you actually present here because you've taken a very knowledge-centric view of learning. Now a lot of especially early childhood learning is learning through modelling people in social situations and that's unlikely to be as affected by the internet as the more sort of studious institutionalised learning. So I don't think, I think that notion of learning through modelling, through becoming through modelling people in real situations needs to be taken into account as well. I can completely agree with you that social learning is a very important part of any childhood. I do not know about the situation in the UK. When in Germany we have increasing and increasing development with regard to cyberbullying. And some of the youngsters have lost the feeling that they are dealing with real people. And when you blame somebody on the internet, everybody will know. This was not the case in maybe in your use or in my use. This is why I conclude that they need a better experience, more experience that even if they go to the internet and blaming someone, comrades, teachers, parents, whatever, that they deal with real persons. Any more very quick questions? If not, I think lunchtime has arrived and I'd like to thank Hans-Peter and Dave for their interesting, stimulating, very thought provoking contributions. Thank you.