These images were created as part of an “appropriate use” campaign concerning mobile devices at my school. Truth: It’s not much of a campaign at this point. In fact, I’ve just been throwing these things out there in hopes that something will stick to someone who cares. I mean, I’d like to see these posted in key spots around our school, but this isn’t my battle to win or lose. Frankly, if our staff decides to go back and ban all student cell phone access during the school day, then so be it.
Really, can my students grasp the structure and function of carbohydrates? How many “F’s” do my advisement students have this week? Can I skillfully facilitate a debrief of Monday afternoon’s collegial visit with two of my colleagues to a classroom across town? Really… those are the pressing issues for me. Someone else can decide whether or not we go back on an experiment within our building.
History
Our school allows limited use of cell phones during the school day. Students may use phone before school, after school, at lunch… even between passing periods. Instructional time, however, is considered sacred. Instructors may also allow access during a lesson if the use of mobile devices is instructional in nature. otherwise, phones must be kept off and out of sight during time in class.
That said- for some reason, a debate rages anew this school year where many faculty members want an outright ban on all mobile devices: cell phones, smartphones, iPods and other .mp3 devices, etc. A current bogeyman seems to be the threat of drugs being hidden in cellphone cases. Really? As if those particular hidden spaces were somehow more magical than boots or bras.
Just perhaps
I would argue that giving away all legal access to phones will only push cell phone use into the hands of the “criminals.”* I believe chasing down cell phones is a costly battle to fight in terms of teacher and administrator resources. I would suggest that our administrators and teachers have far better things to spend their time on… things that directly impact instruction, content learning and the overall management of a school. Turning our staff into the “cell phone police” will only turn the focus of our building away from improving instruction.
Inappropriate use of cell phones in schools is not a technology, nor a safety issue. Inappropriate use of cell phones is a management issue… much like passing notes or catching a nap during a lecture.
In my opinion, throwing out cell phone access during the day is to throw out one of the more powerful and relevant tools for teaching responsibility and appropriate use. If you want your city populated by rude people who possess zero cell phone etiquette- put a complete ban on phones in schools. School is a formal educational setting. Therefore, school is a perfect place to learn and practice appropriate adult use of these tools. It’s not rocket science… to me.
Contrary to what some folks have mentioned, I don’t actually see this as an instructional issue. I think very little instructional use of mobile devices is actually going on. Sure, I use Polleverywhere in class. Sure, I advocate whipping out a smartphone pretty frequently to run down a piece of trivia I can’t answer myself. But really… this isn’t about whether or not our classroom uses of mobile devices are instructional or not. Do many teachers use cellphones in an instructional manner? The answer is no. However, to me, a ban will make certain that we never hone the skills to help students utilize mobile devices in education. Among other things, I think it is an issue of vision. I actually think too much time connected to digits will melt your brain in some way. I’m forty years old. But does this mean we should further alienate ourselves from a new generation? If I’m not mistaken, I think we’re going to need them.
These posters were made as friendly reminders to be put up around the school. We could all use a reminder now and again, right? I guess the only thing that would bother me with regard to an about-face in policy is that we’ve never provided any solid instruction. We’ve never really said: “this is what it looks like when done correctly.” We’ve assigned “appropriate use” (with consequences for not doing so) … as opposed to taught “appropriate use.” We’ve never made an attempt to educate our students. We just hoped they’d comply with our ethereal wishes. Wait- aren’t we the professionals in the area of education? Can’t we do better than this if we try?
What is “fair?”
In my classroom, I’ve always tried to follow an idea I remember taking away from a Todd Whitaker talk from a few years back. In Whitaker’s book, What Great Teachers Do Differently, he asks administrators to consider the question, “What will the best people think?” prior to making any decision. He also advocates doing the same with regard to our students in the classroom. He makes the case that if we constantly make decisions via the lowest common denominator, we ultimately risk alienating the best of those around us.
Do we really want students who display model behavior and etiquette to suffer at the hands of those who do not? Wherever you are, ask yourself who runs the place.
In related news
Have you seen Wifitti? This is a pretty cool little web service that allows a digital bulletin board of sorts. Participants can either send a text message to add a thought (or image!) or reply by typing directly via the web link. I recently added one to our school’s wrestling network. This app certainly won’t make photosynthesis any simpler… but it is fun. That’s all I’ve got on this one. I’m battleworn.
Thank you, drive through………..
*I think that marks the first and only time I’ve personally used an NRA mantra in an argument. I feel the need to shower.
Artwork
All posters were created by me using CC artwork from Flickr. The original images are explicitly credited on each page of the set. Printable sizes are available for each.
A friend gives you free tickets to an upcoming concert. Although the group is fairly popular, you are not familiar with the artist’s body of work. Assuming you elect to go, what do you do next?
Between now and the day of the concert, here’s betting that your old pal Google comes into play at some point.
What is the artist’s body of work? For me, iTunes previews would quickly come into the picture. I might even scan the reviews. Then perhaps a dive into YouTube in a quest to actually see the band in action. Maybe even an interview with the lead singer? Does the band have a website? What else have they done? What does the bio tell me about where they are from and perhaps why they do what they do?
This approach works. We know it does. We’ve done it ourselves a thousand times before in similar situations.
Building schema
Here- you are building schema. It is what you do. In this particular scenario… it is what our students do as well. Schema. In terms of learning theory, the word was first used by Piaget as early as 1926. Apparently, R.C. Anderson, a respected educational psychologist, expanded these notions into a more solid theory.
My wife and I just recently scored tickets to see Mason Jennings at a small club in Lawrence, Kansas. I have listened to his music for years. Erin however, has only known him from his appearance in the many playlists and mixes heard in the car and throughout the house. His latest release wholeheartedly scored a new fan in my wife. She had heard my favorite tracks many times over, but she wasn’t really privy to his larger body of work.
So what did she do? Much as you might expect, she trolled the web finding as much as she could. Given such a rich opportunity to experience an artist doing what they do best… live and in person… she was going to make the most of it. It was while watching these actions unfold that it hit me how similar this very behavior is to one I strive to honor as a classroom teacher.
We’re more attuned to a musical performance when we can identify with the art as it is unfolding. This is not “rocket science,” folks. I doubt anyone reading this far believes so. Therefore, a quick transfer into the classroom should be a fairly easy proposition, right?
So what is it then that prevents us from a similar approach to concepts within our core content areas? Why would we not make an attempt to harness this simple passion for constructing knowledge in other areas? What do we know about the flow of learning?
Learner-based learning
“But I don’t get to take my kids to something as cool as a concert.” I get it. I understand that external holdup. However, aren’t we the content experts our community pays to deliver lifelong learning for our children? Can we not impart at least a sense of excitement about some future learning goal in order to generate student engagement toward that end? Here’s me thinking that if we are to swallow the goals of problem (or better “challenge-based”) learning as our instructional model… we had first better devour the concept of establishing an environment that honors the learner first and foremost.
A purely constructivist learning environment is one that we are not remotely able to deliver given the rigid accountability brought on by NCLB in the last ten years. Design, yes… deliver, no. And yet, that does not in any way stop us from building in the essential constructs of student-centered pedagogy. We simply have to set students up to win when it comes to grasping the core concepts of our curriculum.
Aquatic example
A few weeks ago, I knew that I would be taking my Dual-Credit Biology students to the MWSU campus to conduct a couple of field studies concerning species diversity. One of these prescribed lab events required that students sample organism populations within a gorgeous little freshwater pond found on site.
If I hadn’t started with what students know… their current schema… I would have driven them down a path that many were quite unfamiliar with. Who would guess that Midwestern students weren’t intimately acquainted with the life found in a freshwater pond? I wouldn’t exactly call my school an “urban” school. And yet, three or four out of our group had almost zero familiarity with pond life at all. Yes, these students had never been to a pond. Sure, I could have asked a question to elicit this data. However, this realization would do little good toward building student knowledge for each of my twenty students individually. Diversity, schmercity. That knowledge would help me, not we.
One of the main uses of our online network is rich reflection. This reflection is found throughout all phases of learning from engagement to evaluation. In this case, we did what we normally do. Prior to embarking on a well-worn lab design… we explored what we already knew about ponds. This was done first on real tables with real chart paper, real markers, and real student conversation. Our work then proceeded to the digital realm to find anything and everything we could about the inhabitants and structures of freshwater pond ecosystems. Our biology textbook can only deliver generalities. Students gathered this information and presented it to one another and the world on a forum thread at Principles of Biology.
Students with a rich schema in this area were allowed to demonstrate that reality as well as search for more in-depth knowledge. Students for whom the pond was a mystery… and likely wrapped in misconception… were also allowed to explore and share. The difference is found within the reflections posted at the site. In this arena, at this point, student knowledge isn’t judged for its breadth and depth. Instead, it is valued for its inherent honesty and the deep reflections that follow.
After the hands-on field study at the pond, students were invited to return to the site and post direct replies to their previous posts… highlighting the learning that took place and the knowledge they had constructed throughout the process. What we end up with is a digital record of these experiences unfolded transparently in digital space for all to see. And they do see. Our site analytics show a flurry of activity surrounding this post as well as others. Principles of Biology is full of similar cycles surrounding many topics embedded within our curriculum.
As students and teacher, we know we enter any given concept at different places. We also know that through loosely-structured (but structured nonetheless) classroom experiences we will all push our knowledge far beyond what it was prior to engaging in the topic. We also know that this will be done not only for ourselves, but for those who live vicariously through us via the web.
Or, I could line up the curriculum goals and objectives and march forward to hit each one in step whether or not the students “get there” with the rest of us or not. They should have studied harder. They should have paid attention as these ideas were skillfully presented in turn… right?
So really… when we wonder why the next course-level expectation or state-level curriculum objective doesn’t immediately resonate with glee… take a step back. Marching forward down the lineup of objectives does little for deep student learning if we are the ones doing the driving. Instead, let your students take the wheel. Step aside. Plug in enough structure to encourage constructive discourse and let students learn. Learn with them. Seriously. You already know it all? Don’t assume anything. Dive in yourself. Learn with them. Assess your learning every step of the way. Ask questions. Push students to ask even more. Build schema to the point that you can all communicate as you move forward as learners.
What are the key elements required for a transformation of teaching and learning through the use of technology? There are obviously many reasonable ways to look at this. From what position do you view this issue? Are you a teacher, instructional coach, building principal, technology facilitator, director of technology, chief administrative officer of some flavor, superintendent, parent, or student? For you, this issue will likely run through the filter of your current position.
It will also run through the filter of your experience. Are you an eighteen year old student who lives a life that is highly digitally integrated, or are you a teacher of 20 years or more who is just now trying to become familiar with the Internet as it relates to teaching and learning? Are you a superintendent or head of school who is beginning to open to the importance of a smart approach to technology integration, or are you a technology facilitator who has been a digital evangelist for the past five to ten years?
Those filters should all be applied to the problem of how to retool schools along the lines of technological transformation. (Though I didn’t think it worked in the title of this post, you will see below that I would rather use the term transformation as opposed to integration.) At this point, the vast majority of school systems are behind the curve in this area. Being this far behind might just have one distinct advantage. If there is no way to see any of the individual trees in a forest, you are likely going to be forced to start your mission with a whole-forest view to begin with. This is not a bad thing. It allows you to realize two important things:
1) You don’t need a flashlight. It’s not that dark in there anymore. Trust that there are others who have proceeded down this path before you, and they have learned many important lessons. Collaborate. Learn from their successes and failures. Do not go it alone. Resist the temptation to slap a digital device in the hands of each student and call it success. Have a plan.
2) Rarely do we get to make decisions with the clarity that a little distance provides. Take your time (but hurry). Ask yourself: what can we do with these new tools available today that we couldn’t do before? If we could remake our curriculum any way we wanted, how would we do it? Think transformation of the way teaching and learning is done in your district, as opposed to integration into it as it exists.
Allow me to run this challenge through my own filter for the next several paragraphs. For more on my filter for these ideas, consult the About page. Also- I certainly do not profess to know all of the answers. I am currently sitting on top of a nice little foothill of educational technology leadership… and staring up at some pretty massive peaks ahead. Allow me to talk about a few things that make these peaks seem climbable from where I stand.
It is my belief that all schools (and/or school systems) need the following four pillars below any technology “integration” effort…
An Innovation engine
All systems need what I will call an “innovation engine.” Whatever the system, whatever the setup, schools and school systems need pockets of sponsored innovation. Without some folks directly charged with instructional innovation with digital tools, we will always be just trying to fit technology into what we do on a day to day basis. It is far better to build innovation directly into the system, and to foster it purposefully. I know this may seem somewhat fringe in the world of public education, but it can’t afford to be much longer.
“At enlightened, forward-thinking companies, managers understand the connection between learning, innovation, and higher productivity — in fact, employees at these companies may even be encouraged to spend time learning and experimenting with new technologies.”
~Joe McKendrick, FASTforward
So who will drive this engine of innovation in your school? Will this be a technology facilitator? Will it be a technology coach? Perhaps an instructional coach. A ad-hoc committee of teachers? A requirement of your leadership team or department heads? If you are thinking of this from a district perspective, where does this responsibility land? Will you just hope for it, or will you truly sponsor innovation in new approaches to teaching and learning afforded by digital technologies?
Administrative support
An innovative technology leader will be of little use beyond their immediate world without direct, purposeful and inspired administrative support. Administrators: join forces with your innovation team. Learn what they learn. Push them to new heights. Allow them to bring innovative approaches to the classrooms and teachers of your school. Support your teachers every step of the way as they slowly transform the classroom environments they create toward new and better approaches to learning…
…and then hold them to it. Hold staff accountable for bringing their skills up to the present realities of the 21st Century. We’ve been living passively in this century for almost ten years now. It is time for all of us to sit up and take a direct and active role in the changes happening within the learning profession. Without strong administrative support, advocacy, and supervision, no real and lasting changes of the magnitude are possible. Guidelines for such leadership aren’t exactly guesswork. Grab a copy of the NETS and familiarize yourself with these standards today if you have yet to. They come in three fine flavors: for students, teachers and administrators.
Unfiltered ubiquitous access
So now you have innovation closely coupled with administrative support. With those two things, you can get a pretty immediate return for your buck, provided one more terribly important thing: that you don’t filter the very usefulness out of the web. A school can have instructional innovation and local administrative support and still fail with regard to technology integration. How do you kill innovation quickly? Tie it down. Even today, many schools filter all of the good, interactive raw materials right out of the web. Figure it out, people. Ask a school who only lightly filters. Ask. Don’t assume there isn’t another way.
Our school system does currently block Facebook and MySpace. However, our general approach is to put the filters in place required by law, and then keep the real Internet open for education. Yes, that means we have open access to YouTube, Flickr, UStream, Ning, Twitter, Blogs, Wikis, etc… We have our hands on far too much fuel for innovation to even worry about looking at Facebook and MySpace at this moment. They are where our students already are. But for now, we are luckier than 95% of school districts I encounter. This fact has allowed us to move quickly toward figuring out the advantages and disadvantages of these powerful new tools in an educational setting.
Oh, and ubiquity. Access to these tools must be easy and everywhere. Soon after access is all around you, it doesn’t even feel like “technology,” it just feels like the way things are done. This is a good thing, for when technology becomes invisible, we can finally focus on the value added from new uses of these tools. The world is moving quickly toward wireless access in all corners. If your school isn’t wireless, then only your students have wireless access. That’s right- via their phones. You have a cell phone policy in your school? Don’t kid yourself. Your students are on the raw, unfiltered Internet via the 3G connection of their cellphone more often in the classroom than you care to admit. Why ignore this… or worse yet, why punish it? Embracing might just be the answer. Try it.
If your school isn’t at a 1:1 ratio of students to laptop computers… and the students don’t take them home with them night by night, all year long… then you don’t yet have an ideal learning environment for 2009 in my opinion. However, there are other ways until that time to assure ubiquitous access. Our school currently employs MacBook carts at a ratio of 2.5 students to one computer. 60 of these machines will be available for checkout from our Media Center in the fall. Our Media Center/Library will also be open well beyond school hours. It isn’t perfect, but it is allowing us to move ahead intelligently. We are moving quickly toward the 1:1 environment everyone knows is inevitable in schools.
Instructional model
So now you have innovation on the ground level, administrative support, and unfiltered access. Be proud. If you can honestly say this characterizes your school or school system, then you are in a very small but fortunate minority. You work with smart, visionary people who know how to plan and have been doing so for some time now. If your lone goal is to have students, teachers and administrators all gleefully pushing buttons and gazing at computer screens… then your work here is done. Congratulations. However, if what you were wanting out of this nationwide technology push was something a bit more… substantial, then you had better finish reading.
The fourth pillar of “instructional model” is more than a quick soundbyte allows. I see three levels of this notion with increasing value as follows: 1) You have thought about and encouraged good instructional practices in your building/district. 2) You have a well-articulated plan for effective instructional practice that is building or districtwide. 3) You have a true learner-centered instructional model in place in grades K-12 that credits the constructivist nature of human learning.
I am fortunate to say that though our district has awakened late to the call of real and purposeful transformation via educational technology, the toughest of our four pillars has already been built. The final pillar of a student-centered constructivist model for instruction that is carefully stated, professionally-developed, supported, and supervised… is in place.
As I stated earlier, we are looking up at some pretty tall challenges ahead of us. Locally, we have unfiltered access to all of the content and interactivity the web affords. We have pedagogical experts in district leadership positions who have put in place an ideal instructional model for the future. We have a quickly multiplying group of administrators at both the district and building levels who are responding to the call of the digital world, and we are making plans to foster innovation and creativity in our classrooms.
I feel like I am at the foot of a mountain that a handful of good people have climbed… 20,000 feet below the summit, yet armed with the best climbing gear and support I can get my hands on. Our immediate future should be interesting indeed.
Where are you?
So where does all of this leave you? How many of these pillars have been already constructed around you? What have you done to help in that construction? What do you see as the greatest challenges in this mission? What can I or others do to help? Are there other pillars that you believe I have missed here?
This post was initially intended to be a part of “Leadership Day 2009“ as conceived by Scott McLeod. I am posting it at 1:30am on July 13th instead of on July 12th. This is not to shabby considering my two baby girls thought that since it is technically summer here… it should feel like it today.
This rather dull snapshot was taken with my phone at the recent NECC 2009 conference in Washington, DC. Funny. Sometimes it’s the non-conference things that really push my thinking forward. EduBloggerCon was one of those, “sit around with smart folks and discuss and debate self-selected topics of interest in education” kind of days. What, you don’t have those every day? Ok, I’ll admit it- sadly neither do I. One of the sessions in particular, led by Jonathan Becker was entitled: “Where School Reform Meets Madonna: Can public schools fundamentally reinvent themselves?“ The rule in this one was that if a “tech tool” was even mentioned that the violator would have to stand on the table and sing. EduBloggerCon is certainly an “unconference” about more than edtech tools. Good conversations do more than stimulate your brain during the immediate time in which they are occurring. Good conversations are those that change the way you see the world in some small way from that point on.
The building above is found in Mt. Vernon Square and has an interesting history. A much better close-up view from Wikimedia shows that this was one of Carnegie’s libraries. The building was also recently a City Museum and still serves the Historical Society of Washington, DC.
While walking the city with Jeanette and Luke (Principal and Asst. Principal at BHS) during lunch at EduBloggerCon, we ran across this building. Initially, I was interested in the architecture. However, upon closer inspection I became much more interested in the three bold words embedded into the marble front of the building:
SCIENCE : POETRY : HISTORY
These three words, especially appearing below the phrase: “DEDICATED TO THE DIFFUSION OF KNOWLEDGE” were enough to haunt me the next couple of days. By the way, I had probably better let you know that if you came to this post looking for answers… prepare for a 10:1 question vs. answer ratio from this point. Sorry about that.
A light word study
Let’s talk about those three little words. Do you have thoughts on this triplet as it was laid out so many years ago? Truly any three words could have been chosen, yet these are the three that were cut into rock. For one, I am a pretty big fan of all three of those words. If you dig through the “poetry” tag here on the blog, you’ll certainly find a thing or two that relates over the past year. Science is the obvious one. I have been a science teacher since 1992. Further… for me, history so often provides not only context to the world in which we live, but also connections in and amongst all fields of study.
But I live out my days in an American high school. Where are the other two great core areas of study? Where lies Communication Arts, or English, or Language Arts, or…? Where do we fit Mathematics? Perhaps the folks who laid out this building saw those as modes of communicating the ideas of science and history. And poetry? Perhaps this is the art that takes human communication to creative and innovative heights.
Step outside a moment
Imagine a school where the base subjects are those three: science, poetry, and history. What would that look like? Now of course I’m not suggesting we look away from all of the other myriad courses in our world such as practical arts, physical education, etc. My friend and Principal, Jeanette Westfall, would be quick to remind anyone discounting the importance of the “non-core” subjects, that these courses (and their teachers) represent about 60% of our school today. Anyone pushing this part of high school life aside would be someone with a rather narrow view of the American high school scene of 2009.
But instead of seeing a focus on science, history, and poetry as narrow… what if we saw it as something much larger? What if we found a way to teach all of the subjects we care about today within this framework? Could that be done? What if we dissolved our hallowed curricular walls and found a way to deliver all of those wonderful bits of learning through very broad lenses such as these three?
I can see a million problems. Where does engineering fit? Engineering isn’t really science. It is most usually an outgrowth of science. Engineering is science applied to life. However, aren’t the best examples of engineering a marriage of art and science? There are others of course. I welcome the discussion following this post. Writing online is great like that, right?
Insurmountable?
Perhaps the largest thorn in the side of such an experimental approach is our compartmentalized teacher certification system. Not only that, but with most of us as products of such a linear, territorial system- could we even create a small number of schools that could do this at a high level? I understand why this is different in secondary vs. the elementary world. The content knowledge required in the higher grades in 2009 is daunting for sure. I get it that most folks couldn’t deliver calculus. Most of us couldn’t prepare teenagers for college-level physics or a journalism program either. And yet, what percent of your student body did I just include by mentioning those two courses? More importantly, perhaps restructuring schools toward a more integrated nature seems more daunting to the “closed four walls” of the typical classroom. Perhaps those who have opened up the walls of their classroom to colleagues near and far can more easily imagine a new and innovative structure for schools.
Of course this couldn’t really fly in a public school today, could it? But then again, how is what are are doing right now working for us? Many universities have “honors” programs within the normal school. These programs are often about collaboration and integration of subject matter to create a more relevant and rigorous environment. The same goes for gifted ed classes. It seems that we continue to create opportunities for both our most talented kids as well as those who display “buy-in” to the system of schooling as it is today. Of course I think this is a great thing. But, what about the massive chunk of the teenage populace who see school as not immediately relevant to their lives? What needs to happen for us to imagine a learning environment that is chunked up in some way different than we have already tried? The huge numbers of disaffected or otherwise uninterested teens can’t wait much longer. I wonder if their vision could be any more comprehensive.
As is often the case… far more questions than answers here today. Once again, I’m appreciative for the ability to think aloud in a loose forum full of smart and enthusiastic people. What about those three overarching “subjects” mentioned above? Are there three you’d propose alternatively? Hopefully an idea or two will be left stirring in your head. Feel free to share below if so.
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!
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.
I’m asking for your help. If you could pick anyone, anything, or anyplace, What books would you read? What conferences, workshops, or meetings would you attend? Who would you travel to meet with? Who would you fly in to sit at the table with you? Who would you pick to help you in your strategic brainstorming or planning? Who could help inject progressive, innovative ideas about the future of education and the technologies that will drive it? Anyone. Yes, I am serious.
This post is a straightforward attempt to leverage the power of my PLN. It is my goal to get some fresh input about that very thing… fresh input. As a generalist instructional coach on what could realistically be called a “21st Century upgrade” mission in my building, I have spent countless hours in research this past year. In fact, this blog originated from some of my earliest explorations into how a school can systematically raise the tech literacy of its staff ahead of a larger edtech implementation with students.
Here’s the deal
I am pleased to say that I work in a district with some success in incubating innovation. We locally help to fund innovation with a fantastic “Apple Seed” grant program for creative projects. We also celebrate ingenuity with an “Innovator of the Year” award- presented alongside the T.O.Y. award each year. On a district wide level, our administrators in charge of curriculum & instruction are working hard to implement constructivist-leaning instruction and content-specific best practices.
In my opinion, we have long lacked such a mandated, district level approach to educational technology integration. We invested early in a robust and speedy system-wide fiber optic network. We have always succeeded in putting current, state of the art technological tools in the hands of our children. What we now recognize the need for, is an innovative and comprehensive plan to elevate the technological savvy of all SJSD faculty members. 21st Century literacy skills (whatever you think those might be) cannot be developed in our children by skipping over our staff to do so. We are ready to do the staff development required in readying our own workforce… to ready those of the future.
Our crew
A district task force was assembled to study the situation. Our group consists of three instructional coaches, one social studies teacher, a library/media specialist, our district’s technology curriculum specialist, and our chief operating officer. We have been told that we are “taking one year to study.” One year to learn everything we can about what the future of learning will look like- at least with regard to information and communication technologies. Experimentation with free online technologies has been spawned and is growing in a grassroots way in a few places already. My home high school actually has a building-wide implementation plan that was put into play this past summer.
The goal is to get just enough perspective about what we are currently doing… and what we still need to do… before making any more large scale technology purchases. The idea is to put the “buy it and they will come” -approach to edtech integration to bed for good. This task force is headed by our C.O.O. He is a direct sitting member of our superintendent’s council. This level of buy-in is aligned what I had in mind when I wrote a post entitled “Increasing Our Level of Vitamin A” last November. We are really to the point in our little corner of the world where we need to think long and hard about our mission and vision prior to buying even one more laptop. Smart move, methinks. And this mission had better be flexible. Life moves pretty fast in these circles.
Why should you care?
I don’t know if I can say why you should care about a project in Missouri. However, I do believe I know why you will. Because you are a bunch of committed, forward-thinking educators. Folks like us know the power of buy-in at all levels of implementation. Here’s betting that the readers of this blog realize the power potential of solid know-how combined with administrative support.
Please help. I could submit my own recommendations. I essentially do that quite regularly behind the driver’s seat of this blog. The articles I write examine interesting avenues and advocate passionate positions. My blogroll is a list of folks I rely on for new learning. I have a set of books on my shelf that were important to me, but really… the elements of my learning network allow it to be a dynamic, hyper-responsive, thing. There is even a pretty good chance you came here from the Twitterverse- and that has become a frighteningly good resources as of late.
We are locked and loaded for NECC 2009. We are set for a sit-down at 1 Infinite Loop in Cupertino this March. We recently sent a small contingent to METC 2009 for a last minute look at a few of the presenters. We are ready to grab a few keystone texts for the group to dive into. We are ready to visit the top workshops available where our learning/time ratio will be strongest.
We are going to take a slow, smart, focused look at this issue. I can make informed suggestions as it is. Yet- this post marks one of the ways I am increasingly gaining input. Here’s betting that an emerging best practice in “informed decision making” includes surveying your PLN as an crucial step. What do you say… will you make a suggestion for our study?
Just what does the “21st Century classroom” actually look like? Do you even know? What do you actually picture when you close your eyes and imagine? Does your classroom reflect this ideal? What is the divide between the ideal and the reality in your school or district?
Here’s betting that these two classroom images are far from your vision. Allow me to set these up for you a bit…
Ever so slightly more green
My district has an interesting embedded program known as Crayons to Computers. A significant chunk of space is devoted to warehousing and categorizing materials donated from businesses and individuals that might have otherwise ended up in a local landfill. While seemingly little more than a room of junk to the uninitiated visitor, in the hands and mind of a creative teacher, this program can be a godsend. From notebooks, pencils, and crayons to beakers, books, and computers, this nifty little depot often has just what the resourceful teacher needs to complete a classroom project. And perhaps even more importantly, every single instructional use of these items helps to turn a portion of the community’s refuse into educational treasures.
This past August, in the midst of our “New Teacher Institute” in the days before school started, the district’s instructional coaches took our bright eyed new hires on a tour of some of the more crucial components of daily operation in our world. Sandwiched between mini-seminars on best practices, practical tours and nuts & bolts introductions done to help acclimatize our new blood to their new surroundings. One stop along the way was C2C.
That day, while new teachers perused the bins, boxes, and shelves of our depository of donated items, I decided to play along. Longtime teachers have had years to collect resources and to craft an environment for learning to their liking. However, to early service teachers -with far less time under their belt- this storeroom is a place to stock up on consumables among other things. In a town that battles significant socioeconomic stressors, this storeroom is celebrated by many.
I picked up one item to keep that morning. While rifling through a poster bin with one of my former students -now a biology teacher- I found a… what might be the opposite of gem? Turd, you say? Ok- fine by me, let’s go with that.
This poster, entitled: “Millennium 2000,” reads:
Gone are the days of the one-room schoolhouse. During the second half of the 19th Century, kindergarten was established and school criteria were changed to educate children as individuals. The superhighway now passes through most classrooms, allowing children of the 21st Century access to the entire world.
Now there’s a sentiment worth repeating… reform. Change in what we do. Change in the tools, the access and thus the mission of our schools. Access to a potential global perspective. Who doesn’t believe in this as a good thing? In fact, such a change in access, coupled with reform, should produce profound differences within the classroom. Right?
Poster study
Now study the poster. What exactly are the differences depicted here? The inset image should show the shift in reality in our schools. Does it? What is really different here? Where is evidence of a change in curriculum? Where is the evidence of the “superhighway?” Which classroom is more inspiring? Which is warmer? Which is more engaging? Which is more teacher directed? Which is………..
Funny stuff, huh? I thank those who have come before me in our district. We have been blessed with a robust pipeline of digital data since before we knew what to do with it. Though we are still mere babes in the woods of the read/write web, we are beginning to establish a long-range study and planning group. We recognize the realities of a world that is changing faster than we can even measure.
Real plans
I am excited for the future of schools in our little Midwestern outpost where the Pony Express began. I’d like to think that we could recreate our vision and purpose along the same lines as this historical entity. I would love to think that we could envision our local schools as the starting point for an epic journey of learning through rigorous, and often unknown challenges.
We might smirk at the poster mentioned above today, but are we planning to become the “Pony Express” of learning for the future -both locally as well as nationally? I certainly hope so.
![\](http://nashworld.edublogs.org/files/2009/06/2605328927_73dff61c69_o.jpg "\")
![\](http://nashworld.edublogs.org/files/2009/02/old-classroom1.jpg "\")
![\](http://nashworld.edublogs.org/files/2009/02/old-classroom2.jpg "\")
