I had a busy morning today. I observed a student teacher for her final observation, and I made it home in time to participate in the weekly noon #Edchat on Twitter. As I participated in the #Edchat I was struck by the fact that it had a great deal to do with a conversation I had with my student’s cooperating teacher in a high school that morning.
The conversation that I had with this high school teacher took place in the school’s computer lab. It was a very relaxed session, as all of the students were involved in a Web Quest in support of their recent reading of Inherit the Wind. They were now learning first-hand about the “Scopes Monkey Trial”. I observed that the computer Lab had an Interactive White Board installed on the wall. I remarked to the teacher that it struck me that this is not the most effective place for an IWB, since every student sat at a desktop computer. A simple, less-expensive digital projector could serve as well, and that would free up an IWB for a classroom. That started the conversation ball rolling.
The teacher told me that the school received a grant for the IWB’s and Boards were placed in many of the classroom’s two summers ago. There was little regard for where they were placed in the rooms, or what rooms were to receive them. Since, according to our discussion, it was not evident that teachers were consulted in the planning stage, or the implementation stage, so the teachers had little to say in what rooms or where in those rooms boards were to be installed. That is why the board in this teacher’s room is not at a focal point, but on the side of the room. No one ever asked! The teacher continues to be upset over this every time she uses the board. Students must be repositioned or redirected to use the IWB.
Of course, professional development always at the top of my list, I asked if the staff received adequate preparation before using the IWB’s in the class. The staff received an overview workshop was the answer. There was a second training workshop later in the year for those who attended. Obviously, someone must have thought that just the mere fact the district is installing technology in a classroom should be incentive enough for a teacher to self-teach him or herself in order to use that technology. Could you imagine the airline, or medical industries using the same strategies for their people to learn and be incented to use the technology in their respective industries? Here’s a 747 pilots. Aren’t you excited? The overview will be next week. Here is Robotic Laser, doctors. Be careful when you use it. You can sign up for a workshop at our next training day.
So, here is what seems to have happened. The district got a grant for IWB’s. It had to move quickly to install them, since they arrived in the summer. They put the IWB’s where they could be easily installed in classrooms that gave good visibility to the public. Professional development was either not part of the grant or too expensive to pay for in addition, so they settled for the overview provided by the manufacturer. There is little time during the year to provide Professional Development, so teachers had to wait for a conference day.
The result could have been predicted. Teachers were never on board or even consulted. Teachers begin to resent the entire effort. They use the IWB’s as projectors and cite this as another example of wasteful spending at the expense of larger classes. The administrators say that they are providing cutting edge Technology to the teachers, who refuse to use it. Of course the New York Times could pick up the story and say Schools are spending too much on technology that teachers fail to use with any positive outcome for student learning.
Of course, there must be more to this than I was able to get from a brief conversation. I do know that I have heard many similar stories from many educators from all over our country. I do not think this scenario falls too short of the mark even with my liberal use of poetic license. As you read this, I am sure many similar cases are speeding through your head. Of course, I will get comments from some IT people and administrators who just don’t get it. That is to be expected since they view things through a different lens.
When I participated in the afternoon #Edchat the topic was: What changes could be made to the present management structure of education to make it more effective for educators? Of course this topic had my head swimming with the ideas from the earlier conversation. Administrators need to lead not mandate, or dictate initiatives and policy. They need to engage their staff. Education has the highest percentage of educated people in its industry. They are education experts. They have degrees in education. Why not consult with them on affairs of education? The more that we involve teachers with the development of policies, the more they will buy into the success of those policies. The more teachers point out flaws and misconceptions, the stronger the policy becomes in consideration of those shortcomings. Administrators should not view teachers as a problem. They are not the enemy. Teachers have much to offer as education experts. Lead and work with them as consultants. Education administrators need more staff consultation and leadership and less control and reactive policy directives.
[…] Who is the Best EDU Consultant? […]
Thanks for rallying for educators once again, Tom. It’s a win-win if educators are part of the discussion and decision making. One reason I think they’re often left out is because during the work day they are not accessible. While leaders and others are making decisions for teachers, teachers are busy on task with students in classrooms, on playgrounds and managing other duties. That action can leave teachers feeling like chess pieces on someone’s playing board, not their own. Restructuring schedules, communication protocols and decision streams can impact schools positively and give leaders and teachers the chance to collaborate with students’ best interests in mind.
Here is another spin from someone entering teaching from technology: this is a fantastic opportunity for the IWB vendors to shine! They know their technology, how schools can best place the boards, and how to train future users. Vendors must make friends with people who use their products, as part and parcel of the product. And, if teachers are left in the lurch, I would suggest them discovering more supportive vendors. It’s a competitive world out there, and many companies want some inroads. I just happened to write a blog post on the issue of unusable equipment this morning: http://schoodl.com/blog/2011/12/06/equipment-vendors-beware/ In it, I blame the vendors for the inability to use their products.
You are right, climate is everything. A staff that is engaged and fully believes that their efforts will be supported will drive these implementations. An engaged and empowered teaching staff will push, they will not have to be pulled. I have been present, in my classroom, the day that any technology has been installed and was a key factor in identifying that technology. Our entire middle school team functions pretty much the same way and due to our aggressive implementation of technology and blended learning concepts often find ourselves in the front of the room during professional development, not in the back. The key to everything that we have done and continue to do has been the support from our administration.
It is interesting to read your post; given that I had a similar conversation with one of our technologists today. He approached me and asked if I would be interested in participating in some sort of cousulative body within our division to help advise or focus our efforts on teacher and student training with respect to the plethora of technology which is at our disposal. I jumped at the offer and am waiting to hear back if he gets the go ahead to create such a body. It would be comprised of divisional staff as well as classroom teachers who are active in using, adopting and trying to figure out technology to help guide the division with respect to PD for staff and the like. I will be forwarding this article to him as food for thought when putting our team together. As always thanks for such a timely topic.
This happens even among well-intentioned tech leaders and admin. I agree it has to be a team effort, including technology leaders, building administrators, teachers, and students. We can’t be quick to blame administrators, since they are often left out of the conversation as well. I’ve dealt with the installation of boards (the model of tech’s choice) in all grades 3-6 classrooms, replacement of Macs with PCs, adoption of WordPress without consideration for teacher training and/or procedures for student accounts, etc., without my thoughts being considered. In some instances they were heard- but ultimately, my pleas had little influence over what actually shook out. While our district has been privileged to have a variety of new technologies enter our buildings, there’s still a huge disconnect with the purpose of and visions for using these tools FOR LEARNING. The impact of these tools will be quite minimal unless the building principal and teacher needs are heard, considered, and allowed to influence purchasing and professional development decisions.
[…] Blog post from one of my favorites, Tom Whitby, that asks and answers the question: Who is the best EDU consultant? […]
[…] Who is the Best EDU Consultant? « My Island View–What changes could be made to the present management structure of education to make it more effective for educators? […]
you’re right, it’s not the teachers who are the enemy. It’s the students.