I am currently sitting in the NETS-A release celebration at the National Educational Computing Conference (NECC 2009). The NETS are the National Educational Technology Standards written by ISTE, the International Society for Technology in Education.
The NETS standards for administrators were created in 2000 and this refresh is a much-needed follow-up to the recent releases of standards for both students and teachers. In a later post I will go further into my thoughts about the necessity of administrative leadership in this area. This is a topic I have tapped on in the past, and will surely be one I continue to explore as we go forth. There is no doubt that carefully articulated transformational standards are needed. What is even more important is that these standards are for not only our students, but for teachers and administrators as well.
What do you think about the new standards for leadership in regard to educational technology? Do you think the focus is appropriate? Do you believe they have both appropriate breadth as well as depth? Check out the word cloud (Wordle) above that illustrates the standards. Please click to view the detail. What do you think this view says? Does this type of view provide a different look from the raw text? Any interesting first thoughts?
Yep, I just quoted myself. It’s OK, I’ll take that one. In fact, I think I’ll take it and run with it for a bit. Check it out. See, I don’t deal well with what one of my science department colleagues refers to as the “Negative Nelson.” These are folks who jump quickly to the most negative outlook possible to begin any task, discussion or debate. Now I’m certainly not talking about people who exhibit the valuable skill of being able to ferret out potential pitfalls in any new endeavor. Karl Fisch, in a recent workshop at MICDS in St. Louis, referred to those elements of a system as the “yeah, buts.“ His willingness that day to confront potential snags head-on is one of the marks of any successful project manager.
That said, negativity used as a strategy to push back from the table (whether conscious or unconscious) in order to avoid change or conflict is a very toxic thing. Life is too short and too difficult as it is. Stirring up extra negativity in such a challenging career field is more than a waste of time. In my 18 years as an educator I have had the benefit of working in environments that were so positive and supportive that I was constantly inspired. I have also had my years where “clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right” is about the most polite way I can put it. Negative Nelsons. Thanks, Jennifer. That one is elegantly simple. It made me laugh, and it made me reflect. So obviously, I haven’t been able to get in here to write very much as of late. Please excuse the rapid-fire unloading of thought here. I’ll get back to succinct when I get more time.
“I would have written a shorter letter if I had more time.”
~Blaise Pascal
Why the “2.0?”
Now that I think of it, I probably could have just entitled this one “2.0″ because this is now what this phrase means to me. I’m not going to go off into the history of the quirk of using “2.0″ to signify the newest iteration of….. something. Heck it is now used for pretty much anything: Web 2.0, School 2.0, Library 2.0, Government 2.0, and on and on and on. Tack a two at the end and instantly whatever you are talking about, planning, or selling becomes better, newer, shinier. From my personal perspective, what at one point meant something to those pushing the envelope of using the Internet in education, now means means less. The more you use something, right? I get it. I know. After a while of having “2.0’s” ping-ponged about in the echo chamber of online communications… the meaning does tend to get stale. If you subscribe to the tweets of some of the more connected edtechers out there, you’ll find more than a few who are just plain ol’ sick of the term.
Why it doesn’t bother me
Let’s just get this out of the way first: According to Global language Monitor, “Web 2.0″ is the 1,000,000th word added into the English language. So there. It means something. For the “How’d they figure that?“, click here.
I’ll be honest. I hate it too by now. It is the height of cliche’ in my head. However, I think I am just sick of it considering how much I actually feel the need to use the term in my current job as an instructional coach in the middle of a constructivist reformation/technology integration pilot. I try to use a ton of helper phrases to describe this entity as well: read/write web, social web, participatory web, and other. Those are great, and do help, but I still need two-oh.
In a recent technology summit in our school district, an administrator actually started out one of the segments declaring that in terms of education, Web 2.0 “doesn’t really mean anything,” and that people really can’t agree on whether it will have an impact or not. This is one statement I had to disagree with point blank that day. Really, I get why it might seem less-than-concrete on the surface. With utmost respect, to an educator not using the participatory web in the classroom (or anywhere else professionally) “Web 2.0″ must look a bit like the wild west compared to the pricey and packaged comfort of a content management system like Blackboard, WebCT or E-Companion. But think about it- a constructivist classroom probably does look like Dodge City to the vast majority of people who were educated in the neat and tidy rows of desks in the American schools of our past.
What it means for me is that frankly… I don’t have to wait for anyone any longer. When I want to go, I go. When my students are ready for something better (that fits good pedagogy) we go. With a robust and lightly filtered network- no longer did I have to wait for more software to be decided upon, purchased, server space to be allocated, or passwords to be doled out. With Web2, I was able to immediately make a go at what I, my administrators, my students, and my parents thought was the right path to follow. I could hone a web tool to my liking in a weekend. I didn’t need to wait for a comprehensive plan filled with multiple opportunities for job-embedded professional development and one-on-one coaching. I was ready, and I rolled on.
All of a sudden, more than at any time previously in my career, I was able to model myself as a learner in the classroom right alongside my students. I was able to show them what it looked like to be a connected learner in the digital world of current information and communications technology. Now I am ready to go back and help build that comprehensive implementation plan for our teachers and students. I hope I am continually able to model those experiences in the other direction as well… still as a learner modeling the navigation of our newly-digital terrain, though not only for our students but also for those who make far-reaching decisions for each of the students in our town.
Positivity and possibility
I need positivity. My engine thrives upon it. I need open potential. I need new possibilities. Here’s why I decided today to “re-like” the terminology of 2.0: It is just so full of possibility. School 2.0? Seriously, who isn’t interested in reforming the future for the largest open-schooling system in the world? Don’t answer that. Good point. I’m sure there are plenty who aren’t. But look how many really are. Because of Web 2.0, the folks who want to step up and have a hand in the remaking of our outmoded schools, libraries and governmental participation models… can.
Web 2.0 is still a novel and effective tool for democracy. It is still a new way to interact via the Internet. Why not let it remind you of the shiny possibility of doing something better the next time you try? Sticking a two at the end of something doesn’t automatically make it better. However, possibility is as contagious as negativity. Spread some love, will ya’?
This post begins with a bigfat pointyfinger toward a recent post on Dean Shareski’s blog: “Ideas and Thoughts.“ The title was so fitting that I couldn’t bring the idea without it somewhat as well.
Nuts & bolts
Though I took the post pretty lightly through the first paragraph, I then started seeing the relevance of this in my world. The post rants away at the fact that so many people take technological tools at face value- rarely digging down beyond default settings to see what all the tool might actually be able to do. By actually changing each potential setting to fit the needs of the user, the device becomes a much better tool in the hands of the owner. Always seemed pretty simple to me. In fact, at one point in the post he describes working with students who were all using smartphones. He noted that the students in that setting who were familiar with the customization of the device were much more satisfied users.
“I told them to start thinking like hackers. I asked them to think of their devices in terms of what it should be able to do rather than only what it does.” ~Dean Shareski
These stories made my brain go in two directions, really. One was a nuts & bolts connection where I realized how purposefully I take teachers new to the MacBook Pro (our weapon of choice) almost directly to the System Preferences pane before beginning any real work. In my comment on Dean’s blog I spoke of this in a bit more detail. Towards the end of my rather lengthy comment, I took the idea of defeating default settings (much as Dean vaguely suggested at the end) to its other destination in my brain. That is, when we as teachers immediately jump purposefully and directly into a new world with new possibilities that we truly feel control over, then we can move into new dimensions.
And beyond
The next pointyfinger goes here. By the time I read this post, Will Richardson had just dropped a post that seemed to take the seeds of that idea into full-blown question. Entitled “If We Could Start Over, What Could We Build?“, the piece references a 2000 CITE article and looks at how nearly true reform is when it is retrofitted over the top of what we are currently doing. To me, the difficulties of this are immediately apparent. In fact, a book I am reading right now speaks, at least metaphorically, to the problems with building cumbersome entities on top of existing ones as a quick fix for the immediate moment. While the book, (Kluge by Gary Marcus) speaks about the human brain’s construction and modification throughout evolution, school leaders at any level will likely be able to draw parallels with their situation.
Again, repeating my deeper connections to some of these ideas here seems silly when reading the referenced post/commentary in context makes better sense. So therefore, I won’t do a repeat here. But suffice it to say, I state my quite practical belief in finding ways to make this sort of “system redo” possible. To me, the only practical way to hit reset and start anew within your own complex system today, is to build a pilot. Pilot programs that are allowed the charge of innovation can truly create a fishbowl of study in your neck of the woods. Do it differently. Do it now. Think hard, set something up… then set about doing it. Don’t just talk about what it would be like if you followed another approach, actually find out. In science, we call this a controlled experimental setup. In the rest of the world, we just call this smart practice.
“Pilot programs that are allowed the charge of innovation can truly create a fishbowl of study in your neck of the woods.”
Read both posts/comments. And if you’re really adventurous, get the book. Think of starting from scratch. Think of rebuilding your system. Think of rewiring your brain. Hey… if that all seems a bit much to you, at the very least think of changing the settings on your iPhone. You might be surprised what all it can do!
Whenever I find myself in a reflective mood anymore this is where I find myself. Tonight is certainly one of those times. Earlier I spent some time tuning up my bike for an early morning ride. Big deal, right? Normally I would agree. The difference here is the fact that I haven’t pointed my bike down a single-track trail for over two years.
The past two years have been full of a ton of changes for me- the vast majority all good- read: finally being a dad, leading a successful edtech pilot, etc. However, at that time I also had a pretty gruesome neck surgery stemming from an old wrestling injury about fifteen years prior. From that time I fought with my neck going out several times a year. Anyone who knows me close knows that I spent weeks each year in pretty good pain when it would “go out.” That summer (2006) I finally had two cervical disks blow out completely and started rapidly losing pretty much everything in my right arm, including size.
All of that paled in comparison to the pain. For a solid month it felt like a a dump truck had backed itself up onto my right arm and parked. I didn’t sleep more than about 40 minutes solid at any time during that month. After the surgeon very deftly put my spine back together with bone marrow from my hip and a solid bit of titanium, I was painless pretty much instantly for the first time in years. My neck still feels like a million bucks today. That surgery really is a rather raw and unsophisticated thing in some respects. The guy put me back together with what must have been similar to wood tools. If you don’t believe that, just look at the screws that are embedded in my vertebrae. Awesome images. You know me -the sciencegeek- if there is data to be had, I want it. I got all of those images on CD not long after the surgery. Hopefully you aren’t too freaked out by the ghastly pics…
Since that time I have completely removed myself from coaching wrestling after 18 years of doing what I grew up with and loved doing. That has been a tough transition for me. I wormed my way out gracefully though by contacting a smart guy to step in a take the reins at my school with my brother while I stayed on one last year as an assistant coach. The deal is this: wrestling is just not a “lifetime sport.” I always despised those coaches who led by words alone. The sport is far too technical nowadays to not roll up your sleeves and get into the mix. learning wrestling is true athletic apprenticeship. For me it was just too painful to stand and talk when I was used to actually doing for so many years of my life. So today I remain fan #1 for our athletes and coaches, but I just wanted better for our guys.
So how does that relate to riding a mountain bike down uneven trails? It is pretty simple really. I have just never done “halfway” very well when it comes to anything. Teaching- full blast. Instructional coaching- full blast. Educational technology leadership- full blast. Mountain biking- full blast. Writing- full blast. You name it- full blast. My fear (or intelligence, we’ll see) has kept me off of my bike since that time. I could have chilled down the concrete of the local trails or roads, but to me… that felt too much like coaching wrestling from the edge of the mat. It just felt too “halfway” to me.
So tomorrow, with a clean, toned bike and tight tires I will glide down the trails of our river bluffs for the first time in a long long while. I can assure that the views I take in on that ride will be absorbed in a much different way. At the speed I will be traveling I will likely take in more sights than I have ever seen even in some very familiar places. But I think I am finally OK with that. Though I’ll never really be able to coach wrestling the way I always did, the risk of a bike ride is a fair trade for the thrill. It’s high time to kick off the second forty years of my life with the intent of returning to some semblance of the fitness I was used to.
Hey- I might not being going full blast, but at least I will be back on the horse… Wish me luck.
This strategic look at comparisons is an adaptation of an academic paper I wrote this past year. I dampened it a bit, but I didn’t do a full rewrite. Sorry in advance for the impersonal tone. I had strong enough positive feedback on this one that I thought it might have justified a wider audience. So here it is… we’ll see I suppose. Also, this is a pretty straight-up look at a direct strategic approach to instruction. That is certainly something, as you know, I don’t spend much time on here. The focus here tends to be more on big picture items. However, certain skills are worth careful and detailed guidance. I would argue that this is one of those.
Similarities and Differences
No reference to specific teaching and learning strategies would be complete without a reasonable outline of the act of identifying similarities and differences. Perhaps most notable in this category is the best-selling instructional text; Classroom Instruction that Works by Marzano, Pickering and Pollock in 2001. Marzano later even put the practice of identifying similarities and differences -commonly referred to by practitioners as simply comparing and contrasting- on a still higher pedestal by referring to it as the single most effective strategy to increase student achievement. In What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action, Marzano lists similarities/differences at the top of a chart which boasts a 45 percentile gain for this strategy alone. This notation served to boost this strategy to the single most effective of the nine referred to in the text. To provide some perspective, the second most effective strategy according to Marzano’s work is summarizing and note-taking, which is associated with an overall 34 percentile gain when utilized effectively (82-83).
Wait a second -trust me, I get it- meta analysis certainly can be a skewed way to quantitatively look at instructional strategies. But for this examination, let’s get past that and look at this as a foundational book that has found its way into millions of classrooms across the country. These numbers for comparing make the potential value of this teaching and learning process undeniable even in a broad statistical generalization. However, in my experience as a biology instructor and a generalist instructional coach, one key element is often absent from the delivery of strategic comparison. While students are nearly always guided through the identification of similarities and differences between two concepts, the specifics of the relationship of these differences to one another is too often neglected. In short, this relationship is often referred to as the “criteria” from which to differentiate, or what I will refer to as the “with regard to what?” element.
The strategy of comparison, “takes advantage of the natural human capacity to make comparisons.”
According to Chapter Five in The Strategic Teacher by Silver, Strong and Perini, the strategy of academic comparison “takes advantage of the natural human capacity to make comparisons” (71). I actually like this book. I think it deserves a bit more attention. The dashboard-like feature at the start of each chapter ties things together in an interesting way. The text contains several interesting ideas about the ways that these thought processes play out in the mind of the student. Comparison allows us to increase memory by the simple fact that two linked ideas last longer than any two ideas left alone. Comparison allows the use of prior knowledge to help make sense of new ideas. Help in making connections and creation of new and unique ideas certainly can be facilitated by this strategy, and finally it helps to make abstract thought visible and easily-overlooked content unavoidable (74). Solid use of the technique is ultimately made more effective through a process that involves:
Describing each item separately
Identifying similarities and differences using a comparison organizer
Forming and discussing conclusions
Synthesizing learning by completing a task (71)
The Silver and Strong text continues by solidifying proper use of the strategy by including a step by step approach which early on includes providing students with criteria for analyzing the two items. This is essentially the basis for drawing a comparison between any two things. Examples listed in the text include: What do they eat? What do they look like? How do they behave? (75). In my own instruction, this is the point where I might ask students for example; “How does the wing of a bird and the flipper of a whale differ with regard to structure?” This crucial cognitive element requires students to think about why they are drawing the distinction as well as directing them toward differences described in the curriculum that students may not directly discover on their own. However, much as I have noted in my own practice, Silver and Strong ultimately speak to the importance of moving students toward independence by teaching them how to formulate their own criteria for comparison (75).
Convergent or divergent?
In Classroom Instruction That Works, Marzano differentiates between teacher-directed comparison tasks as opposed to student-directed tasks. Both have their place in the repertoire of the instructor, but both tend to give differing results. It stands to reason that if a teacher wishes to have student thoughts and responses revolve around a tighter, more homogenous standard- then teacher-directed activities would be selected. In this case, the students would be given the criteria from which to draw their distinctions. However, if the teacher wishes to encourage divergent and creative thought, student-directed activities would be prescribed. In student-directed work, the criteria or characteristics from which to differentiate come directly from the student (16-17).
Though Marzano begins with descriptions of simple comparison tasks like the Venn diagram, he ultimately moves on to the far more complex Comparison Matrix (19). The Matrices are very structured tables that tend to require a close adherence to the given criteria. In my experience with similar comparison matrices, student responses and discussions tend to be more tightly wound around a few criteria and rarely stray into more creative or original territory. To me, there also seems to be something about the structure of the matrix that requires a more careful gradual release of responsibility to the students, even though it is more prescribed. In my opinion, the treatment of comparison strategies by Marzano, Silver, and Strong is reasonably thorough and informative. Not all authors give this process the weight it is due. The way I see it, this is perhaps the most effective instructional strategy simply because of the sophistication of thought processing required. Put more simply- comparison of rigorous content is just plain harder to do than it might at first seem. Ultimately getting it right in the classroom tends to score big points in academic achievement. I see little disconnect in these two realities.
Not enough respect?
Like many attempts to portray teaching and learning as simplistic tasks one can write the classic “how to” manual for, treatment of comparison strategies often falls shy of the mark. The very popular text by Stephanie Harvey & Anne Goudvis on comprehension and understanding, Strategies That Work, makes very little mention of comparison strategies. The one solid mention of a single comparison strategy is found within a “strategy lesson” vignette within a chapter devoted to “Synthesizing Thought.” In it, a seventh-grade science teacher is highlighted for teaching students the differences between coral and kelp, two marine organisms. The vignette briefly explains how the teacher utilizes a “three-column form that is similar to a Venn diagram, since they both report similarities in the middle” (149). No mention of ever going deeper with this strategy is mentioned in the text. My biggest criticism of simplistic organizers like the Venn diagram is the fact that there is little to no opportunity nor suggestion that students should categorize their differentiation along the lines of criteria or characteristics. This tends to allow more potential disconnects in the process. Subsequent examination of student work of this kind often reveals differences without a counterpart in the opposing concept. This is oftentimes the pitfall of simplistic organizers found throughout the Web for easy download from many websites. Teachers may tend to jump to implementation of such tasks without careful forethought into the type of thinking they ultimately want to elicit from their students.
Another crucial aspect of this strategy that is worth mention is the tendency of teachers to hug too tightly to graphic organizers throughout their plan of action with students. Compare/contrast is one skill that tends to be very tied to a few typical graphic organizer forms. While the help these forms provide with organizing complex thought is valuable in the beginning, students should be released from the printed forms as quickly as is feasible. There is little to gain from releasing students too early in the implementation of a sophisticated strategy. However, staying too long on the crutch of any graphic organizer tends to leave students ill-equipped when faced with situations where there is no pre-existing organizer. I find that after many scaffolded lessons with organizers of increasing complexity, it is valuable for students to begin practicing this strategy on a blank page. Only then will they be forced to see this type of organization of thought in their head. Though I release kids from teacher-printed forms as quickly as possible, I do find that my Zoology students tend to gravitate toward one or two basic versions of comparison diagram. Perhaps this has more to do with the nature of the information they work with in this course…
A zoological example
In a recent example from my classroom (see image above), students were asked to participate in a hands-on examination and dissection of two preserved animal specimens for anatomical comparison. This strategy is not only useful for the study of comparative anatomy; it is imperative for a deep understanding of the structure and function of animal life. This year, instead of two separate dissection & anatomy lab investigations of Arthropods (invertebrate animals including insects and crustaceans), I decided to do both analyses together.
In one regard, I felt like this lesson might lead to students experiencing a more shallow analysis of both organisms in one lab setting. However, I ended up being very pleasantly surprised. Students spent time analyzing the detailed structures of each organism (grasshopper and crayfish) and recording general and specific observations (image directly above). They then were allowed to graphically chart similarities and differences in the way they saw best fit for the task at hand. All but one group utilized a format very similar to the one we landed on previously in a large group discussion/debrief as being the best for examination of our content (image directly below). It is important to note when looking at the student artifacts in this case, that even though this was a fairly teacher-directed strategy, enough freedom was allowed so that student responses went beyond mere structural differences that were directly observed. Many of the comments were inferential toward the supposed physiology of the animals. Several of these comments were likely a result of prior knowledge. However, many took structural differences and used these to also infer behavioral differences that would be observed in live specimens. This is an important leap from the stated task and one that is carefully facilitated in scaffolded steps.
Stepping into the hypothetical
Even though students were given little direction by this stage of the course, it is interesting to note that nearly all graphic depictions followed that which was decided to be most beneficial to students by students. This somewhat rigid form was then used to organize thought and in no way seemed to limit responses to the concrete things observable in specimens and on the printed page. An examination of some of the characteristics recorded, including the “with regard to” element of the chart, shows a solid grasp of directly-observable concrete structures. You also can notice a few attempts to take these structures into the abstract of how they might influence the performance or behavior of the specimens.
Regardless of application, it is clear that attempts to have students identify similarities and differences in an academic setting is effective in elevating student understanding. From the research summarized by Marzano and the careful work done by Silver & Strong, to the few small examples of student work from my classroom, there is more support for this strategy than can be ignored. From early attempts with Venn diagrams to complex exercises in determining and developing criteria for distinction, academic comparison requires a sophisticated set of thought processes. Engaging students in such rigorous tasks ultimately sets them up to develop a deep understanding of complex content.
Cited
*Harvey, Stephanie and Goudvis, Anne. Strategies That Work. Canada: Pembroke PublishersLimited, 2000.
*Marzano, Robert et al. Classroom Instruction that Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001.
*Marzano, Robert. What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2003.
*Silver, Harry et al. The Strategic Teacher: Selecting the Right Research-Based Strategy for Every Lesson. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2007.
*Compare And Contrast by an untrained eye on Flickr
*Two trains took divergent paths… by Kevin Dooley on Flickr
*Remaining images… just me.
.
Modeling fluent reading. Introduction of outside text every period of every day in every class. The opportunity to bring relevance to adolescents. With whole-school immersion in text and reading, ideas and concepts naturally follow. The teacher reads, the student follow along a copy of the text. Content-area literacy expert, Janet Allen calls it “eyes past print with voice support.” At my school, we call it a requirement… one element of a building-wide literacy plan.
Two years ago, after our sit-down session with Janet Allen in Orlando, Florida, our leadership team decided on a school-wide implementation of this strategy as an element of our focus on literacy skills. Co-Principal in charge of instruction, Dr. Jeanette Westfall, was a former elementary teacher, high school communication arts teacher and instructional coach. There is no doubt that her background helped her decide that a non-negotiable approach to reading improvement across content areas was a valuable thing given our situation.
Why we went there
Data analysis in our school improvement planning sessions clearly indicated the need for a systemic effort to improve reading. However, witnessing and characterizing the problem is only the beginning. The ability to design concrete, strategic approaches to solving such a problem is a crucial next step. Bringing the teeth of accountability into the picture is the final piece of the puzzle in comprehensively addressing a systemic educational issue.
The accountability piece tied to EPP is a direct requirement from our building administration to employ this “read aloud” strategy for an absolute minimum of five minutes per class per day. For students this translates to a daily minimum of twenty minutes of engagement with rigorous text with a fluent reader. The next logical step of a strategic teacher is to quickly adjust planning to take advantage of this requirement to bring rigorous and relevant content-specific text into the beginning (or end) of each period.
For a teacher with traditional style, this also forces at least one transition within the daily lesson. In the hands of an effective teacher, these transitions help to keep kids actively engaged and using their brains in varied ways. Data showed that not only was there a need, but that our kids simply weren’t reading enough. You can make strong suggestions about what goes on outside of the classroom. Inside the four walls of a classroom is a different story. You can guarantee immersion within the walls of a school building.
Lit2Go
In other posts this year, I have suggested online services that might add to our implementation of EPP. In this post, I would like to introduce another interesting online resource from Florida’s Educational Technology Clearinghouse. Lit2Go is a website I remember running across a year or so ago on Apple’s iTunes. On the USF site within iTunes you will find audio files for K-12 education organized by grade level.
However, in my opinion, the organizational website for Lit2Go is what makes it useful for the strategy described above as well as others. The main page allows many typical content searches for literature. Author, Title, Keyword, and Reading Level are all available search functions as well as a direct link to the files on the iTunes service for slipping smoothly into your iPod.
My first try was an author search- I pretty randomly chose Lewis Carroll. I ran down the list of ten offerings for the author and clicked to select The Two Clocks. The contents page for any selection has a nice set of overview information such as an abstract, word count, reading level, origin, genre, lexile level, theme, suggested educational strategy, Sunshine State Standards (of more use if you are actually IN Florida), and more. On this page, it is the collection of not only the .mp3 audio file of the work, but also the text in both .html and .pdf format that makes this a valuable resource. It also looks as if some pieces contain other “support material,” though the attached document for this particular story seems pretty useless.
Overall, the fact that this site provides both audio and clearly-printed text of a good number of classic pieces makes it valuable for efficiently selecting and managing EPP within a literature or communication arts class.
An easy win
The “clock that doesn’t go” in Lewis Carroll’s story is right two times per day. The other clock which loses a minute a day is only right twice per year. Surely, implementing EPP in a setting where reading immersion strategies are warranted is a way to be “right” at least four times per day. If this form of “being right” seems worthwhile to you in your own educational setting, then give Lit2Go a try and come back and tell us what you thought. Did it work quickly and easily for the described strategy? Even better… do you have another innovative use of Lit2Go to share? Bring it here, and help us all to be right more than two times per day.
What I have found particularly true in the past year is that even the fanciest website on the Internet doesn’t produce a solid educational event outside of the carefully-created framework of a skilled instructor. Compared to many of the applications/websites I have talked about on this blog in the past year, this one could be seen as one of the less “sophisticated.” However, any good teacher knows that what happens when you plug a device into the wall… pales in comparison to what happens inside the mind of a child.
Happy anniversary to “nashworld.“ This post is the 65th of the year, and it comes exactly one year after my first post on April 21st, 2008. Wow. Looking back at that post, it was quite clear I was full of questions for the coming year of study and reflection, but very shy of answers. In fact, this blog was initially titled “virtual southside” that first month. My first plan was for this space to be a group blog to facilitate PD for our brand-spanking-new tech cohort starting in June.
Forming a purpose
Then I found Ning. In one weekend, it was clear to me that this platform would be a far better, and more flexible, match for our school’s edtech PD mission. It also served to bring some comfort for our staff in the world of social media. Though we control membership to the site, it is certainly a more free-wheeling place than a simple group blog. It was the decentralized nature of a Ning network that I loved. I didn’t want to drive “virtual southside.” I didn’t want anyone to drive. I wanted to be merely another loud voice on a very enthusiastic and speedy bus.
So after a quick rename, nashworld became more of a personal place for reflection, sharing, and synthesis of thought. I do drive this bus. However, I had my first guest move up from the passenger section just this month. Though I certainly do have an amazing passenger list here, this is where the metaphor breaks down, for the readers of this blog certainly help steer my thoughts and words with their comments. To those of you who have put in your two cents here, I thank you greatly. You have helped to develop many of the thoughts and beliefs I currently own.
Year One Archive
A couple of months ago, when I started to really reflect on what blogging has meant to me over the past year, I decided to create a different type of archive for the blog. If you look up, you’ll notice that just to the right of the “About” page is a link to a new page entitled: “Year One Archive.” This page lists every post I have written over the course of the year by month- with somewhat of an abstract-like summary. I hope this provides yet another way to navigate the site. It certainly isn’t a quick and efficient way, but it does provide a bit of a different approach. The archive page also serves as an interesting chronological history of the past year.
Archaeo-blogology
In fact, after that first post in April… I didn’t write another that month. I didn’t even write one in May. During that month I was working hard on both Virtual Southside as well as my first shot at social media for an actual course I teach. June, my most prolific month, was the result of using the blog to fulfill the requirements of a really lame online grad course on “educational technology.” Truly the worst course I have ever experienced. You can easily tell this by the lame posts and lame books and movies and edtech articles from five and ten years ago. Jeeeez. I wish I hadn’t looked back over those just now.
Things got much better when school started and I began to feel a true mission for the blog. When November began, I followed along with Steve Dembo in his 30 Days to Being a Better Blogger adventure. That experienced helped tremendously. Also in November, I was actually even nominated for a 2008 Edublogs Award. You can imagine my surprise as such a green little blogger, but that was no doubt extrinsically empowering. I am certain to post several more reflective pieces on things I have experienced, learned and accomplished over the past year. Stay tuned for those. As soon as my grad program is completed in May… I have a lot of things to explore yet. Grad school, a new baby girl… it’s a wonder I could pull off any of this at all.
To community
Most of all- thank you. Thanks for coming here. Thanks for reading. Thanks for commenting. Thanks for joining in the discussion. Thank you for helping to steer my personal learning mission over the past year. I cannot thank each and every one of you enough. The thinking I do about the things you say… is worth a graduate course in something each time. In reflection over this past year, I can for certain that the biggest thing I have gained from blogging is people. I now have current and future collaborators on from all over the country. We have and will collaborate on projects that will no doubt extend not only my learning, but that of my friends and colleagues in Saint Joseph. I am humbled by the professionalism, creativity, and generosity of people in this newly-generated community. Thanks isn’t enough.
Not long ago, the MS Office suite comprised the bulk of computer applications in the world of mainstream business. I have to admit that as a career biology educator and instructional coach, I have precious little knowledge of the “real” business world. That said, this past year I have found my work overlapping many trends in business as I explore the efficacy of collaborative online applications in education. I am deeply interested in them as a framework for professional development as well as for classroom utilization.
“Yeah, but mainstream businesses aren’t using the Web 2.0 stuff… those are mostly a few cutting edge companies with money to burn.”
How much more “mainstream” can you get than Best Buy? Will Richardson pointed to the above video a couple of days back on Twitter, and I have held that browser window open since that time. I really enjoy some of the language found within. For example, one gentleman interviewed said that Web 2.0 applications allow the workforce to “…try a lot of different things, fail really fast, and then try things again.“ I dig that attitude in almost any endeavor. To me it is pretty clear that being fearless and willing to innovate is a big plus in much of the business world as well as in education. I also like the fact that another interviewee listed the following things as benefits to social media applications being implemented within the company structure:
better loyalty
less office politics
ability to meet other individuals passionate about the same things
ability to stretch an idea across an entire organization
Shifting schools
Now which of those things is not good as well for a school faculty? Of course blind loyalty leads often to the Abilene Paradox, and this is never a good thing. However, other than that, I’m betting that this list of four things is something all school administrators and staff would value in their world as well.
Those four items, as well as a few others, are a target of our school’s shiny new social network- Virtual Southside. This site was piloted by a cohort of 20 teachers and administrators at Benton High this year in the midst of an academic technology integration program. Starting next year, with our entire staff online in the program, this site will be a major part of how we conduct asynchronous staff professional development. Today I interviewed several cohort members about the benefits of working within our social network this past school year. A short list of their replies about our foray into social media is as follows:
develop general comfort with social media
ability to collaborate asynchronously
differentiated professional development
makes all staff a “professional developer”
makes professional work transparent
allows feedback from a wider dynamic of personalities
provides an archival record
creates an avenue for extrinsic motivation
Nearing the end of our first year employing social media in our school and in our classrooms, I am excited to see some of the benefits rolling in. In my opinion, the featured video showing similar strategies in a mainstream business model provides another interesting nod to the value of utilizing these strategies with our teachers and students as well. Are collaborative social tools being used currently where you work? What role do you see for social media in our schools and with our students?
Artwork thanks:
*Thanks to Stephen Collins for the “fail gloriously” slide image.
Hi, this is Punya Mishra from Michigan State, guest blogging for Sean while he is away doing cool things. I would be lying if I said that I don’t feel some pressure to come up with a particularly interesting posting. It is one thing to write on my own blog, that’s my space and I can do what I want there. Writing for someone else (with as august an audience such as you, dear Reader) is a different matter altogether. When Sean asked me to guest blog he suggested that I write about the TPACK framework, a topic I seem to have some expertise about, so I will do that, but with a slightly different tack. I would like to talk about what technology can do for us as educators.
We need to approach this with some humility since technologies have often been hyped as leading to fundamental educational change. I wrote about this earlier on my blog, taking quotes from books written back in the 1930s!!
More immediately, this line of thought was prompted when I received a series of emails from people about a video that was making the rounds. It was a commercial created by an unnamed organization (you will see the video below, so the organization is not much of a secret) that spoke to how the educational system has failed us and suggested that technology could be a solution to finding talent and creativity. I saw the video and was impressed by its production qualities and overall tone, but something bothered me about it. This led to some musings that I place below AND a mashup of the video that I created. You can see both the original and my mashup towards the end of this post. You are of course free to scroll down and see the videos, just make sure to see them in the order they are presented (the commercial followed by my mashup) for full effect, but it would be good to read through what I have written below before seeing the videos, just out of the kindness of your heart
There is one fundamental problem with thinking about what new technologies can do for teaching. It has to do with the fact that we often look at new media to do things the old fashioned way. This leads to questions such as, is an eBook as good as a regular book? Is online learning as good as face to face learning? These discussions often seem pointless and futile to me, and I am reminded of a joke that I had once read, about two goats who come across a box of film in the Nevada desert, and as goats are wont to, they eat the film. At the end of the meal, one goat asks the other, “So what do you think of the film?” The other responded, “The book was better.”
What this, somewhat weak, joke hits on is what we often see when a popular book is turned into a movie. There are people who hate the new version, feeling that it fails to capture what it was that they had liked about the book. This to me is an aversion to change and an expectation that things that work one way would work the same way forever.
Similar to the goats in Nevada, I am often asked to compare between learning with and without technology. For instance speaking of online learning, I am often asked whether online can be as good as face to face learning. I often answer this question by flipping it around and asking “can face to face learning be as good as online learning?” The point here is that this question may be the wrong one to ask. Just as it seems futile to compare the film and print version of the same story, it is futile to compare one technology to another because the criteria for evaluation are (or should be) different. At the end, it depends on what the purposes are and which technology is appropriate for which of them. What we need to look at are the differing potentials and possibilities of each of these technologies - and develop strategies that utilize the best of both rather than set up these rather tiresome black and white contrasts. This sensitivity to affordances and constraints of different technologies is at the heart of the TPACK framework.
It was in this context that I saw the commercial and which prompted me to write this post and create my mashed-up version. But then again the more I thought about it the more I felt that a video demanded a video response, so an hour or so of work later, here it is. I should also provide a hat-tip to Leigh Wolf, my colleague, for her feedback on a draft version of this movie.
First, though let us watch the original video:
And follow that with my response:
In conclusion, we often approach technologies with our own biases and predilections related to appropriate and inappropriate ways of using them. Cognitive scientists use the phrase “functional fixedness” to describe the manner in which the ideas we hold about an object’s function can inhibit our ability to use the object for a different function. Functional fixedness often stands in the way of creative uses of technologies. Overcoming this is essential for the intelligent and creative application of technology for learning. So thinking of technology merely to supplant a lecture (which was my concern with the original video) is doing a disservice to the possibilities that technology provides us.
For example, a whiteboard has certain constraints and affordances: it is heavy and difficult to move, yet it is easy to write on and erase, and it can function as a public “writing space” to share ideas with others. These constraints and affordances, however, do not necessarily determine how a whiteboard can be used. The manner in which a whiteboard is used in a classroom as opposed to a science lab clearly indicates that the function of a whiteboard is determined very much by the context in which it is used. Similarly, one can use a digital camera to see the world in new ways, and PowerPoint, a presentation tool, can be used as a medium for artistic creativity. And Audacity, an open source audio editing program, can be use to compute the distance to the moon!
It is only with looking at technologies for what they can do, rather than merely replicate existing practices that we can hope to achieve their potential. At the end of my mashup I use three words to capture what I would most like to see happen: Explore, Create, Share. That is the only way I believe that we can achieve the potentials of these new technologies.
I hope you enjoyed the guest post as much as I enjoyed writing it. I look forward to hearing your comments and thoughts. You can post them here, or on my blog or write to be directly at punya [at] msu [dot] edu. Thanks also to Sean for giving me this opportunity. Take care.
We are less than a day away from our Marine Biology class field study on Andros Island in the Bahamas. I am still waiting for students to come in to weigh their gear. I still need to pick up a few last-minute items. I still need to prepare to be perfectly (and wonderfully) off the grid for an entire week. As hurried as I have been lately, I have done some fun preparation for this blog. Since I cannot write for at least a week, two of my electronic pals have agreed to make a guest appearance in my absence! Dr. Punya Mishra (of TPACK fame) and Stacy Baker (of Edublog Awards fame) will be taking the wheel.
I don’t exactly know what they will be bringing to nashworld other than the typical insight and wit they spill forth in their own projects on a regular basis. Stacy’s class blog was the 2008 Edublogs Award winner for “best class blog.” Her insight on how to pull off this type of framework will certainly be valuable. Along with Dr. Matt Koehler, Dr. Mishra is one of the co-developers of the TPACK framework. Our school has begun to embrace the simplicity of the framework as well as the deep commitment it takes to move toward the “center” of the model. I am convinced this framework will be more valuable as more of America realizes the need for true integration of technology into our current and future models of education reform.
We have a ton to learn from these two. I am already excited to read what they bring to the site while I am away. Did I mention that I still haven’t left yet?
Andros Island?
Without going into too much detail in my frazzled state, I will say that the reason for our choice of field station locale is simple. Andros Island boasts what is said to be the third longest barrier coral reef in the world. We will be on 45′ sailboats for seven days, snorkeling the reef, mangroves, sandflats, blue holes, etc. Just a few hundred miles off the coast of Florida, Andros is an amazing and surprisingly remote place.
At nearly one hundred miles long, Andros is overwhelmingly the largest land mass in the Bahamas. Nassau, the capital city, sits on New Providence island with over 250,000 inhabitants and is the bulk of the tourism target. Andros, on the other hand, is large, flat and green with just around 8000 inhabitants. This island is wonderfully and yet very strangely “backwoods” considering its proximity to the United States.
Until we return with our many fish tales, take a second to visit our class network or perhaps some of the images from our 2008 field study. The Ning site is less than a year old. It will be exciting to spill the journals, images, and videos of eighteen students onto that space when we return. We stopped updating our crusty old static “Web 1.0″ page back around 2003 or 2004.
Protecting living coral
That said, our crusty old static presence was still quite functional a few years back when I was contacted by a member of the Center for Biological Diversity about using some images from our site for an historic petition to list the first coral species under the Endangered Species Act. Apparently, our images of the Andros reef chronicled the state of two threatened species of Caribbean-region corals quite nicely. And of course, being a marine biology teacher, I have images that tell the entire “natural history” of the ecosystem as opposed to merely pretty pictures.
The petition that was prepared (by no means a typical “petition,” but instead a 111 page formal manuscript that takes patience to load) not only features one of my images on the cover, but is illustrated using mostly our images from the Andros reef. Hey- whoever said “Web 1.0″ wasn’t much for education? My students get a kick out of all of the international communication that happens as a result of our network, blogs, etc. However, this one event in 2005/2006 stuck out like crazy at the time to my students of Saint Joseph, Missouri.
I suggest checking this document out. If for no other reason than to see what something like this entails. Well, that and… the photos! If you do check out the petition, slide all the way back to the “acknowledgments” on page 111. It was pretty cool to see our little school district listed there so prominently on such a landmark document. The real bottom line here: this petition succeeded in getting both Elkhorn and Staghorn coral listed as threatened species under the ESA. These are some of the only invertebrate species ever gaining protection under the Endangered Species Act.
So stay tuned for Punya & Stacy… and a ton of news from the reef!
![\](http://nashworld.edublogs.org/files/2009/06/2605328927_73dff61c69_o.jpg "\")
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=19b2caf7-4a97-4ece-8842-267e8fec5081)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=fd91c0d6-7a3c-4003-830a-6abb9c705019)
