Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘PLN’ Category

This post needs a bit of a disclaimer in the beginning. For several years I was a member of the Board of Directors of the New York State Association for Computers and Technologies in Education, NYSCATE an ISTE affiliate. Like many Educational Technology organizations its mission is to promote the use of technology in education. This organization is similar to many other State wide organizations of other states with the same basic purpose. The leaders of these organizations are volunteers, some paid, most unpaid. These are people who work hard for long hours in support of these organizations and the mission.

That being said, and this being my post, I am going to openly reflect on technology organization stuff. These are my reflections as an educator and a former director of an educational technology group. If it were a lesson, I would assess, reflect and then change things as needed to become more effective. Since I don’t lead any of these organizations, I guess I stop at reflection. I have no ability to change things.

Technology in Education has always been a sticky subject. It requires understanding, training, modeling and innovation in order to be successful in the system. Some districts have recognized this and have had great successes. It is still a lesson to be learned in many other places. The mission of the Educational Technology organizations however, goes beyond a few forward-thinking districts. That term “forward-thinking” itself implies that technology is the future in education and not the now. My question to start would be: If the purpose of Educational Technology Organizations is to achieve ubiquitous use of technology in education, how do we do a formative assessment of that mission? Technology is always evolving, but many of these organizations were formed in the 70’s and 80’s. After over 30 years of striving to promote Technology use in Education, how close are we to ubiquitous use. Yes, we are using more Tech than ever before, but many places are still debating its value in education. We may also be using more technology because there is so much more to use, which has little to do with the influence of these organizations.

“Top Down” and “Bottom up” are two of the ways Technology is adopted in schools. As a classroom teacher, I was always partial to bottom up stuff, because it came from other teachers who used it successfully with kids. Top down to me meant it was a product that an administrator was sold on, with limited knowledge of how it worked, or what was involved for the teacher to make it work. Mandates are rarely successful. My experience has taught me that people need to be lead and not directed. Leaders cannot demonstrate a product and overwhelm folks with bells and whistles and tell them that they will use it from now on. We lose the required understanding, training, modeling and innovation in order to be successful. If you doubt that, look at the Interactive Whiteboards placed in schools all over the country. What percentage of these expensive boards are being used as Video, or PowerPoint projectors.

Now we need to consider the leadership of these organizations, as well as, who participates in their conferences. Being a leader in any of these organizations requires a huge amount of time. Time to a teacher is not negotiable. The flexibility of time is more in the domain of the administrators. It stands to reason that it is easier to provide release time to an administrator than to a classroom teacher. Therefore, it stands to reason that more administrators than classroom teachers run these groups.

The perspective of the teachers in the organization is; “how do I get kids to use this technology to learn?” The Perspective of the Administrator is; “how do I get my teachers to use this Technology?” both of these perspectives must be considered, but it must be in balance. As Administrators monopolize the leadership, that balance seems to be lost. There is almost an elitist air about these organizations. Classroom teachers are the very people we need to attend these conferences. If you ask a classroom teacher if they would attend an ISTE Conference and you then explained what ISTE was, the response would be simple. “I don’t teach Technology, why would I attend that conference?” It is my observation that some of the leadership of these organizations shift focus. The focus shifts from the success of the mission to the success of running the group. To some that comes down to the success of the conference in attendance and buzz. Attendance is measurable, Buzz is not.

A goal should be to involve as many classroom teachers in the synergy that is evident at any of these conferences. It would be hoped that while they were pumped up with the conference high, they would advocate for tech with their fellow teachers. That would be “bottom up”. Who really attends these conferences anyway? I do not even know if that data is tracked. I do know from personal experience I saw a great many administrators repeatedly attending the conferences year after year. Not that anything is wrong with that, but if a majority of the attendees each year are the same administrators who deal with technology as part of their job, where does that leave the classroom teacher and the group’s mission? It should not be an elite club for technology administrators.

Before everyone starts to run to the comment box to blast me on the elite club comment consider this. If these organizations were not being perceived this way by a large group of educators, why are Tech camps springing up all over? Teachers have been filling the void. They are doing their own mini conferences. They are providing sessions on the Internet. They are involving educators in technology in greater and greater numbers. PLN’s for teachers are providing information and collaboration that these organizations have not provided to the classroom teacher.

Educators are striving everyday to be relevant. That is why Professional Learning Networks are expanding by the minute. When we talk about education Reform, relevance is a big part of it. We need relevant Educators. The same can be said of Educational Technology Organizations. They are needed and necessary. They need to focus on their mission and not their organization. If they put the mission first the organization will succeed. Again this is not an attack, but a reflection. If we cannot see where we are going wrong we cannot adjust to correct it.

Now you can run to the comment box and blast away!

Read Full Post »

An assumption is a proposition that is taken for granted, as if it were true based upon presupposition without preponderance of the facts. There are many assumptions in education that are common in many schools from many districts. Some assumptions can be a hindrance to education reforms. Because these assumptions are believed by many educators to be true, they plan and make decisions based on these assumptions as if they were facts. Assumptions are not facts, but people continue to believe that they are. By the way I have no way of proving these statements that I am about to explore before you. I am making the assumption that my observations over the length of my career are proof enough for me to make generalizations.

First Assumption: Kids know more about technology than the teachers. We do not have to deal with technology since they know all about it.

Kids; are cell phone masters, can program DVR’s (VCR’s before that), text, use social media, download mp3 files, download videos, and use search engines. All of these abilities, however, are not a mastery of technology, although it might seem so to those who are even less technologically skilled.

Second Assumption: As an educator, if I can do PowerPoint presentations, I am effectively integrating technology into education.

With the introduction of a vast array of Web2.0 tools technology is cheap and abundant with applications to search, analyze, collaborate, create, communicate, and present. PowerPoint as good as it is, has become a digital Overhead projector. It is still useful, but limited compared to combinations of applications available.

Third Assumption: Colleges will turn out students to become teachers with a complete understanding of technology and education integration.

Many Colleges are using more and more Adjuncts. Many of these Adjuncts come from the ranks of secondary teachers, often older and many are retired. These are the very same educators who failed to integrate technology into education to begin with. They are believers of the first two assumptions.

Fourth Assumption: Senior teachers will never change; they are burnouts and will never take the time to learn new things.

As the founder of The Educator’s PLN Ning I accept members to that site every day. Many if not most of over 4,000 members are over 45 years of age. Veteran teachers are becoming targets and victims of assumptions. They are the highest salaried teachers, so the reason for targeting should be obvious. The fuel for this might be those senior teachers who do burn out, or refuse to professionally develop, but we are talking about a few and applying it to the whole.

Fifth Assumption:  Administrators do not need to go through Professional Development. It is geared to teachers and not Administrators.

Administrators are our educational leaders. They need to model that which they expect their teachers to do. It goes without saying that they need to understand pedagogy to assess teachers’ lessons. Why should we not expect them to have a working knowledge of the newest tools of education as well?

Sixth Assumption:  If we teach every bell and whistle in an application, teachers will see its worth and make it work in their class.

IT people need to understand that teachers need to fit the tool to the lesson not learn the application just to create a lesson. Professional development is very important for educators to stay relevant. I received a Masters degree in Educational Technology and none of the software or hardware that I learned on even exists today. Without Updating with PD I could not enable my students to effectively use the tools that they will need to be effective educators in our digital world.

I have offered a feast of assumptions which I have observed. I assume that you have your own favorites from you own experiences. The point of this post however, is not to swap war stories. We need to question and reflect on assumptions that are stalling change in our education system.

The biggest assumption: If I teach the way I learned, they will get it. We don’t need this technology stuff. If it was good enough for me it will be good enough for them.

I could continue the assumption list, but unless you have been living in a cave you should get the point and see some comparison of my examples to your own experiences. Feel free to comment here on assumptions that you are aware of and expose them. The sooner we dispel this stuff the sooner we can focus on what is real and get on with change. By the way I believe that my assumptions about these assumptions are factual.

Read Full Post »

In an effort to simplify reasons for change not happening fast enough in regard to technology in education, we often point fingers at the obvious and go no further in our exploration of the problem. Assigning blame and not solutions is counterproductive. In as far as Technology not being used ubiquitously in schools, this certainly is the case. It is easy to point the finger at educators and say that they are not a welcoming audience for this 21st Century, way-of-the-world medium. It is true that educators make the final decision as to how involved they, or their students, will be in engaging technology in both teaching and learning. I would hope that these decisions are not made without some due consideration.

To say that educators refuse to accept or learn technology is too simple a statement and in most cases misleading. The argument that really gets me is that many educators are too old to get it. We need to replace the old guard with new blood. Educators by nature are sharing and nurturing individuals regardless of their age. Teaching and learning are central to everything they do. If educators are not embracing technology there must be reasons. If we can identify the reasons, and address them, we may take a major step in the right direction to improve education. Yes, I did say improve. At this point in time, the deficiency has been established by the sheer numbers of people who have voiced their concern that our education system is not producing what it is that society expects. Of course that expectation is another topic. What is that expectation that society demands as THE educational outcome, or goal?

In the past, lack of time, and lack of funds were the major excuses for educators not to engage technology. That was a topic of one of my past posts, “No Time, No Funds” http://bit.ly/87G63j. (Thanks to Shelly Terrell for inviting me to post.)  Putting those aside we should discuss the other major deterrents for technology use in education.

My personal choice of leading deterrents and where we might first point a finger would be the lack of leadership on the part of the local educational leaders. The leaders would include: Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, Directors, Principals, Assistant Principals, and Department Chairs. These are the people who determine the direction of a school or District.  There are some examples of leaders who have embraced technology for their districts and often they are Keynote speakers at education conferences. I guess that supports the point that they are unique among educational leaders.

Teachers would be more accepting of technology if their leaders understood, used, and modeled technology use in their everyday leading tasks. Additionally, supporting and encouraging those educators who use it successfully would also make a big difference. Many leaders are quick to cite the wonders of technology when making public speeches, but that is lip-service support. When those same leaders return to their offices, many (not all) have no clue. How many IT Directors have to research, develop, and construct the PowerPoint presentations for their Superintendent to deliver at school board meetings?

Many educators see PowerPoint and email as the pinnacle of technological mastery. The attitude seems to be that, if we use e-mail and our teachers give PowerPoint presentations, our school is employing technology in education. The other extreme, acting as a deterrent, would be the district’s IT staff. I cannot say this happens in every district, but I can say that this is often the complaint that many educators express. They point the finger to the IT people as a problem. The tech people are big tech fans. Their life is tech. They know it. They love it. They can’t live without it. Some are viewed as being more of a techie than teacher, yet they need to teach tech to teachers to teach. (ya gotta love alliteration) The problem is the damned bells and whistles. Some IT people teach their PD classes as if these teachers are being trained to teach tech. They are NOT tech teachers! They have no need to know all the bells and whistles. They need to determine what tech, if any, can help them to teach their students. Can a specific tech application enable their students to learn more meaningfully? Sometimes the answer is no, it can’t. They need to be taught the ability to view tech in the context of their course. Here is the point. If they don’t get it, they won’t use it. Once they do get it, it sells itself.

If the use of technology works its way into the culture of the schools, we will not need to demand tech training for teachers. In a technology rich culture the teachers and students should be engaging technology and each other as a further step to deeper learning. Schools should develop their own tech support groups using best practices and mentoring programs for professional development. Leaders and teachers will model learning for students. Students will engage learning in the digital world in which they have grown up with the help of educators who have had to learn and adapt to that world.

I would hope that, if we can identify our problems and go beyond the finger-pointing to apply solutions, there is a chance for positive change. Without an approach to solutions however, the finger-pointing can disintegrate into a far less helpful finger display. Comments are welcomed, either thumbs up, or thumbs down.

Here is a cartoon series done in response to this blog from my friend Jeff Branzburg: http://edudemic.com/2010/06/the-7-reasons-technology-isnt-in-your-school-comic/

Read Full Post »

As a supervisor of Pre-service teachers, I start my first meeting with my students with a list of do’s and Don’ts, High up on the Don’t list is a very important rule for all new teachers: Stay out of the Faculty Lounge. Although it is a gathering place for educators, it is in reality not a place to professionally develop.

The teacher’s lounge or faculty room is one of the most important rooms in a school building for some teachers. It is an oasis from the stress, a place to blow off steam. Back in the day it was a smoke-filled room. (That is a great example of “what the hell were we thinking” items.) It is a social room for faculty. It is the virtual water cooler where those types of conversations take place. It is a place where teachers can voice opinions about education with colleagues. Some schools offer Department offices providing a mini-experience of the same things for department members only, an exclusive lounge.

Then there is the “Dark Side” of the lounge. It is a place for student bashing, teacher bashing, administrator bashing, and finally a place for parent bashing. It is a place where careers can be torpedoed by individuals publicly ridiculing colleagues. It is a place that can be very intimidating to new teachers. It is a bastion of traditional ideas and stories of those who got away with things that could not be done today.

The reality is that, it is not a place for Professional Development. It is not thought of as the place where one goes to discuss the latest methods or research in education. It is not thought of as the place where one would see the latest best practices in a lesson for professional development, or videos of the latest speakers on educational topics. Marzano, Kohn, November, Gardner, Rheingold, and Heidi Hayes Jacobs are not names bandied about in the Lounge. Most people are not listening to podcasts, or viewing webinars, or exchanging links. The discussion of which apps are best for which outcomes is a rare bird indeed. As a matter of fact, many of these terms, or at least the experience of use of these things would be foreign to many, if not most, in the room.

If you did not recognize this description, because your school has no such room, or nothing negative happens in your faculty lounge it can mean only one thing. After four decades of teaching, supervising, and observing in hundreds of schools, I never visited your school. I guess that I should only say that this is a description of a lounge in many schools I have visited. Of course the names will be withheld to protect the innocent.

If the exchange of educational ideas is not taking place in the areas where teachers gather, it must take place somewhere else. Perhaps the district is supplying a time and place for the exchange of ideas to happen. There is always the monthly or bi-weekly Department meeting that occurs at the end of the school day when teachers are always open to new challenging ideas.

If educators are to be relevant and literate in this digital age, these are the types of things that need to be discussed and planned for. If we as educators are not discussing this now, we will soon reach a point where it will not matter.

We are in an environment of people being fed up with status quo. We are in an environment where expenditures of money are demanding higher accountability. We are in an environment where people want more bang for less bucks, more effort from fewer people, more education with less time to do it, more testing for better outcomes with less time to teach, because of more time required for test preparation. No matter how fast that mouse runs there is always more of that spinning wheel.

As I discussed this with my friend, Dr. Joe Pisano, he pointed out that maybe the walls we need to knock down with technology are the walls of the Faculty Room and the Myth of educators exchanging ideas for Professional Development. The box that we need to think outside of is the school building itself. We need to involve educators to engage others on a global network of educators. We cannot count on Districts supplying the time and place for needed discussions to happen. They are not leading us to the needed reform to maintain our relevance and ultimately our jobs.

We need to share our digital collaborative efforts that have educators involved in Twitter, Ning, Delicious, Diigo, Wikis, and any of the web tools out there now or yet to come. We navigate an information-rich environment. We are collaborating daily. We are using Blog posts for reflection and deep discussions. As Educators on the Professional Learning Network we do all of this and benefit by it daily, yet we are a minority of educators. We represent the smallest of fractions of the Millions of teachers who still rely on the Teachers Lounge for relevant Professional Development.

]

Read Full Post »

I teach pre-service teachers to prepare them for the classroom, but I also try to steer them in directions that will make them more marketable as they look for jobs in an extremely competitive job market. In addition to trying to make them web 2.0 tech-aware, I also require that they do at least one interactive whiteboard lesson. I like to require that the lesson deal with some aspect of Grammar. This tackles two of the biggest hurdles for English Teachers, Tech and Grammar.

Although I require that my students achieve a comfort level with the Interactive White Board, I needed to update my personal knowledge of the subject in order to keep up. At my own expense I signed up for a workshop/conference on the Interactive Whiteboard sponsored by one of the leading Interactive Whiteboard companies. I had limited expectations, expecting maybe 50 educators and a few trainers.

This conference was held at one of the many Long Island high schools which have embraced the IWB technology. There were more than several classrooms with IWB Technology in them. Hence, this was the perfect choice of locations for an IWB conference. There were nine hands-on workshops repeated over four sessions and there were Science, Math, Social Studies and ELA Training classes conducted on both the elementary and secondary levels. There was a product demonstration area set up in the Gym. There had to be 500 educators in attendance. This was a pleasant surprise, a real conference. My adrenaline was pumping away. I was truly excited as I often am at statewide or national educational conferences.

My enthusiasm was somewhat dampened as I engaged educators in conversation and asked two simple questions. Are you on Twitter? Do you use The Educator’s PLN Ning site? The first question elicited not verbal responses, but stimulated what can best be described as facial contortions. The second question was answered by one or two questions: What’s a PLN? or What’s a Ning? I digress however. This is a topic for another post, so, back to the IWB’s.

Two things that I strongly advocate in my class would be creative thinking for students through authentic learning, and the use of technology as a tool for learning. It is no coincidence that it also takes up much of the discussion time in our #edchat discussions. These are major common concerns of many educators today.

Now, I need to address the point of this post. I must admit that I believe that IWB’s are an asset to the classroom. They can seamlessly use web 2.0 applications to engage students in creative and constructive lessons for learning. The important element in this however is the training of the teacher using the IWB. Without training the user, the IWB becomes an expensive video projector or an expensive PowerPoint presentation tool or a very expensive hat rack.

What I believed one of the added pluses to this product was, is the vast library of lessons which are available to qualified users, but, therein lies the rub. We teach that according to Bloom’s Taxonomy, the highest form of learning is creative. A lesser form of learning, although necessary, is remembering. As I attended each of the workshops, which unveiled several very thoughtful and creative examples of previously recorded and now archived lessons, I began to notice a distressingly common thread. Each of the archived lessons addressed the remembering learning described by Bloom and not the creative learning for which we, as educators, should strive. As I watched the trainer of one of the sessions showcase another remembering lesson. I remarked that the creative learning was not on the part of the students partaking in the lesson, but rather on the part of the educator creating the lesson. It would then stand to reason, for the students to get the full benefit of an IWB, they should each be creating lessons to present to fellow students.

I am not saying that remembering lessons have no place in education. They are necessary and must be taught. This is content. However, it is the use of that content for more creative efforts which affords students learning. Remembering lessons should not be the focus of education, that focus should be on the creative.

The danger in the use of IWB’s is the lack of training. If districts place IWB’s in a classroom without training the teacher in its use, that teacher will seek from the library, lessons which have already been developed, most of which are remembering focused. This is a case of doing the right thing with the wrong result. I have been told that there are districts which place these IWB’s in classrooms as incentives for teachers to be motivated. They do not attach it to proper training. Would any of us fly with a pilot who had a 747 placed in his driveway as an incentive to fly a bigger plane without training?

Now here is what set me off today. I was in a workshop using clickers to respond to questions from a lesson. As a formative assessment it was great. They were multiple choice questions which could be instantly analyzed. It is not to be confused with a tool for learning, but rather a tool for assessment in the multiple choice genre of tests. It was in this workshop that the trainer revealed to the group that the company had filed a number of standardized tests which could be used for practice with the use of the clickers. This would offer the data to be aggregated in any way needed for analysis. Some might use the word manipulated. A teacher in the group immediately came to life. He was excited to see that this would provide him material to use for the month of May. That was the month that his district administrators designated as THE MONTH FOR TEST PREPARATION. In my mind that was squandering a month of learning for the sake of test preparation. Then the same administrators ask, why are we failing our students.

I believe in Technology. I believe in support for that Technology. We need to teach our students to be prepared for their world and not one that which we might prefer. We do not get to make that choice. IWB’s with training and support can move our students forward. Kids understand IWB’s and want to use them. It’s the adults who need to be brought along. Creativity should be the focus and remembering should be the support.

Read Full Post »

A big problem with getting the word out to educators about the incredible collaboration that is growing and improving among educators globally is the means that we use to communicate this. If you found this post on your own, you probably have an understanding of everything that I will now talk about. The people who most need to see posts like this however, will never see it, unless you, or I, print it out and hand it to them. You may check this on your own with a little informal survey. Randomly select 10 of your colleagues and ask each of them two questions. Do you read Educational Blogs? Could you name two that you read on more than two separate occasions? A simpler question might just be  “Do you use Twitter as part of your Personal Learning Network?”

This is a guess on my part, but here goes. What’s a Blog? Twitter, you have to be kidding, right?  Who has time for that? I don’t use a computer for that stuff. I read the real stuff from printed sources. I don’t get that “Techy” stuff. I need things to help with my teaching, not  technology. I spend too much time grading work, I have no time to play on the computer. I read books not screens, I like the feel of books. I don’t use a computer. I have heard these very words or some variation of these answers even before I began talking about Social Media in education. In your quick little survey I would bet that, if the respondents are truthful, probably 4 out of 10 will be able to name some blogs that they have read. Maybe, some might use Twitter. Well, maybe 2 out of 10.

Recently, I was asked by a very progressive and highly respected District Administrator to speak to some Higher Ed educators to explain the idea behind teachers developing a Personal Learning Networks as a professional tool for teachers. These Higher Ed people were working with Pre-service teachers who would be working in this administrator’s district. He was looking to provide pre-service teachers with the tools that they would need to fit into the vision for which he had for his district.  He sees his district as a progressive environment using the tools of the 21st century for not only authentic learning, but also relevance. This would be a great district for any school of education to have their students placed as teachers. However, as future teachers, they need to be prepared to contribute in that environment.

We decided that since I could not fly from New York to Iowa for a brief meeting,  Skype would be the next best thing. I prepared for the conference call by putting on a shirt and tie. I looked great in my Skype screen, the epitome of a higher Education professional. They actually commented how professional I looked on the Skype screen in my shirt and tie. Of course my retort was,” Thank you, but I must admit I am not wearing Pants”. I was actually wearing pajama pants. Of course, they failed to appreciate my humor, and I knew I was in trouble. My impression was that they may not have had much Skype experience.  When I asked if they understood what a PLN was, my question was answered with silence. I knew that I was in trouble. I was working my way uphill in my pajama bottoms.

This drove home the very words I have said on several occasions. These are words with a meaning that I often stray from. We tend to lose perspective, as we engage with educators within our Personal Learning Networks. We tend to think all educators are participating with us in this network. The truth is that we represent only a small portion of all educators.

The PLN has often been described as a huge cocktail party. Participants can move from group to group within that party and take what they want or need from a group and then move on to the next group. This is a really clever analogy. The problem is that even though a large number of people are attending the party, the larger percentage of educators never even dressed for it. They are still in their houses sitting around in their pajamas. This does not mean that they are not doing their job. It means that they are not interacting with others at a party.

We see the party as very helpful. We move from group to group gleaning useful information, exchanging ideas, and collaborating with other party goers. The question is how do we get all of those others, the vast majority of educators, to the party? These other educators do not live in our neighborhood. How do we connect with them, since they do not communicate as we do. If we did get them to our party would they benefit from it? Would we benefit from it? Do we have time to wait for them? How do we change the culture?

My frustration is that Personal Learning Networks are treasure troves of educational sources, great ideas, and collaborative educators, and I have no way of getting this concept  to the great majority of those who could most benefit by its discovery. Social Media is what we can use today, to link up those people who need to link up, but social media is not yet socially accepted by the masses.

We need to deal with PLN’s in Professional Development workshops. We need to Email links to colleagues who do not use Twitter, Nings, or Wikis. We need to have students develop PLN’s as a source of learning. We need to connect those who need to be connected and then we can all learn as professionals in our pajamas.

Read Full Post »

If I had to name one educational author who sets educators off, it would be Alfie Kohn. The Educator’s PLN.  http://edupln.ning.com. was fortunate enough to convince Alfie Kohn to talk with well over 250 educators about his views in a live Chat. Alfie is outspoken on a number of educational topics not the least of which is his stance on homework. No matter how Kohn positions it, and irrespective of the research used to support his position, all that some educators ever hear is that teachers should not give homework because it doesn’t improve or in any way positively affect learning. This flies in the face of a traditional tenet of education, “Thou shalt Give Homework”.

Kohn’s positions bring out the best and the worst in some people. One great example of academic debate at its best has been on-going over a period of several days. Two members of The Educator’s PLN, George Haines and Tim Furman have continued the most scholarly, thoughtful, and respectful discussion on the subject of Alfie Kohn that one could hope for. The vocabulary is inspiring. You have to love all those big educational words. All kidding aside, I have great respect for both men and their positions.  It is a refreshing change from some of the name calling and disagreeable discourse that I have witnessed in the recent past.

Now that the Alfie Kohn video has been placed on my class’s Ning site and my students have been assigned its viewing, I need to strategize what they should take away from the experience. I am not creating Minnie me’s. I do not want to impose my will and a homework policy on them to guide them through their careers without them understanding or buying into it. After all, I am not an administrator.

Many of my views on homework were not my views through much of my career. Having my own children in school gave me a perspective that I never had in the first half of my career. I have come to appreciate that a student’s day in school begins at about approximately 8 and ends at 3. Many, but not all, are often involved with extra-curricular events for an additional two hours. This puts kids home between 5:30 and 6PM. Work in a little downtime and dinner and it is 8 pm. Of course the student is now ready to work, because it’s homework time. Each teacher has only assigned about 20 to 30 minutes of work, so each teacher feels that the assignment is not too much. That would be okay if the kid did not have five teachers all thinking the same thing. That could be on a given day two to three hours of homework. It is now 11 PM. I understand that does not happen every night, but I must wonder how often does it happen? I do not know an adult who would work those hours for any number of days in a week for no pay. There are actually departments, schools, and districts that enforce homework policies requiring teachers to give homework each and every night.

I am an English teacher. I know that I sometimes have no choice about homework, if I am to get things read. However, if I assign anything more than 10 pages, it probably will not be read by  the class. How successful will my lesson be the next day when only half the students read the assignment? If I were to do a formative assessment, I should not be surprised that half the class does not get it.  So much for the homework strategy. Another consideration: If I put no value on the homework, kids will recognize it as worthless. I must check it and provide feedback to give it value. Homework without value is more than worthless. It is punishment. Students will view it as working for nothing. How often do we hear “Why should I do that work? He doesn’t check it anyway.”

Skills and drills are important to some teachers and rarely important to kids. Some students might benefit by doing them. What about those who do not need those drills because they have a thorough understanding? How do those students, who do not need the drills, view them? If they clearly understand and can do the work, why are they drilling? Might they feel as if it is punishment? Can we assign the drills to those who need them and not to those who need them not? Is that a question of fairness? How can we say that only some of the students will get homework because they need to drill their skills? Are we calling some of our students dumb (their perspective) ?

I would love for my Methods students to realize that, if homework is important for the teacher to give, it should be important for the students to do. It should be creative and reasonable, because we are requiring overtime without compensation. We would resent that as adults, so why do we expect kids to buy into that concept without pushback? I love the fact That Alfie Kohn, George Haines, Tim Furman and my Methods students all challenge me to think, and reflect in order to amend, or change many of the traditions of education I followed so stringently for so many years in teaching. I only regret that I did not have the ability to do this earlier. That is what motivates me to work with pre-service Teachers. I think I will assign the reading and responding to this post as a homework assignment.

http://www.Twitter.com/@tomwhitby

  http://vimeo.com/9511857

Read Full Post »

Everybody loves snow days. If you teach in an area where it does not snow, you are really missing out. It is a day that causes students and teachers look forward to each winter. With my immersion into the world of social media I used this snow day as a day to engage and learn from other educators. To me snow days have become Twitter Days. My other choice was to shovel the driveway. Since I would need clearance from a cadre of doctors, I opted for Twitter.

I require my college students to be involved with a private Ning site that I created for the class. A Ning site is similar to a Private Facebook site. It was actually the model for The Educator’s PLN, http://edupln.ning.com/. Since we had two snow days in a row and next week contains a holiday, I will not see my students in their seats at schoolhouse for awhile. This means that I must be a little more creative and use the ning site to engage them, so that we may continue to grow and learn.

I shared this endevour with my Personal Learning Network on Twitter. I love the ability that I have to connect with my students 24/7 without regard to walls or distance. I acknowledge that I am working with college students who all have technology access. This is a big plus for me and not a factor enjoyed by all elementary, or secondary teachers. It should however, be a direction for education to take. Getting the technology to students might be less of a problem than trying to change the culture for this to be successful.

Two members of my PLN forced me to consider a few things on this snow day of twitter exchange. Jennifer Ansbach, @jenansbach, a secondary English teacher from New Jersey and Brian Nichols, @bjnichols, a forward thinking Elementary Principal in Virginia are two respected educators who add value to my PLN by thoughtfully and respectfully exchanging and challenging ideas.

After reading my tweet about using a ning, because I had no access to the schoolhouse, Jen tweeted about her plan to engage her students at home with a Webinar delivered by a Ustream feed. This is another great way to deliver material to kids outside the schoolhouse. Jen’s students balked at the proposal stating that they felt it would be “creepy” for their teacher to see them in their homes. It doesn’t matter that it doesn’t work that way. Thank god. But it does point out the need to change the perception that learning can only take place in the Schoolhouse.

Brian was asked by someone to give his perspective on some educational topic and Brian was questioning what impact or value an elementary principal’s perspective would be in a discussion. This is a principal who supports teachers who have third graders blogging. His perspective could very well enlighten people about things that they do not yet know about.

As educators we read about education and its history quite often. We have come to understand that American towns were centered and built around the Schoolhouse, library, and Church. I would suspect a saloon or two was also in the mix. The idea being that people needed to get access to the information held within those places. Saloons were a different need.

Today schoolhouses are often a source of pride or tradition for communities. People pay a big price for them, so people feel that they should be showcased. There is a history in many communities of generations attending school in the schoolhouse. The schoolhouses are getting bigger with more bells and whistles, but there are question that need to be answered. Are schoolhouses getting better? Do bigger and more elaborate schoolhouses provide better learning? How far have we come from the little red schoolhouse with the rows of chairs and the chalkboard at the front of the room. The teacher’s desk was always up front to maintain order. Take out the Franklin stove for heat and the Little Red Schoolhouse looks almost familiar when compared to many schoolhouses today.

Now, I need to assemble all of the pieces of this jigsaw of a post.  Although schoolhouses are considered institutions of learning, in the course of a person’s lifetime much of the learning for that individual will take place outside the schoolhouse. Learning is not confined to the schoolhouse. That concept flies in the face of our priorities, since we spend so much money building bigger, and better schoolhouses in the hope of bigger and better educations for our kids. This has been imprinted on our culture. How do we change these perceptions, for perception is reality?

We need supportive educational leaders like Brian to continue encouraging teachers to engage their students in learning anytime and in any place. Encouraging and teaching kids at an early age gives them the tools and skills to go further on the secondary level. Secondary teachers like Jennifer will not be met with resistance from students or parents when proposing learning outside the schoolhouse. I am not proposing technology driven homework assignments, but a shift in an approach to learning.It will come to be expected by students and parents As these students get to the big red schoolhouse of college, they will be learning on their own with the guidance of their teacher without a need for the chalkboard, rows, teacher’s desk, or the Franklin stove of the old model.

There are so many other obstacles to overcome before this can change. Equal access to technology, professional development for teachers, professional development for administrators, and professional development for parents are all necessary to begin to change the culture. We need to look at our schools as schoolhouses that may be limiting learning and not encouraging it. We need to understand that we do not have to travel to the schoolhouse to get the information. The information now comes to us anytime, anywhere. We may however, want to now consider where to place those saloons.

Read Full Post »

Did you ever give any thought to doors? Right now you are probably thinking, “Why would I ever give a thought to doors?” Hold that thought for later. We never question doors. They come with every house. There are inside doors and outside doors. We build entrance ways to enhance doors. We adorn them with brass kick plates and fancy handles and elaborate locking systems. We never question their value. We never even have to think about how they work. We do not stand in front of them to contemplate their hinges, or handles. We use them without thought. It becomes almost instinctive. They are everywhere, on closets, on cabinets, on furniture, on cars, even on shower stalls. We accept and use them everywhere and the most thought given is probably the thought traveling through your brain right now.

In order to give this post a little more to write about, I would add a few more household necessities: the refrigerator, stove, television, and telephone. Can you imagine an average American home without these tools or a door to offer protection for them? Yes, there are people who choose not to make these tools part of their life, but that is a rare choice. It does not mean that these people have no understanding of these tools. I would be safe in saying that they represent a very small portion of our population. By this point you should have an inkling of where I am taking you with this.

I am a post WWII child. David Letterman and I are the same age.  In the old days we were the Baby Boomers, or The Boomer generation. Now, as a group we are affectionately referred to as the Old Fart Generation. Even at my age however, there was never a time when I did not have a refrigerator, stove, television, or a telephone. They look very different from the 1940’s, but they still are useful tools for the purpose each serves. We have little choice in their use. They are similar to the door in that we no longer need to think about their use or purpose. It is a given.

We often think that we have choices in life and we do, but not everything is a choice. There are some things that our society, or culture, or government chooses for us. As Educators we once had a choice to use technology as a tool for teaching and learning. It was an expensive tool and there was a big gap between haves and have-nots. It was financially beneficial to schools if teachers chose not to use Tech as a teaching tool. Training, time and money were the obstacles of choice for change.

Now let us consider the objective of our teaching. I always thought I was preparing my students to be able to think and learn in their world, for that is where and when they will live. I am not teaching them to live in the 1940’s, 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, 00’s as I did. God I am getting old. The choice of technology as a teaching tool is no longer mine to make. My choice is how best to use it. Look around! Computers are everywhere. Computers that run our cars are probably more functional than those which were used to send men to the moon. I am not so arrogant to think that I can offer a student all he/she needs to know based on what I know.

For the generations to come technology is going to be like doors. It will be everywhere and people will not even have to consider its use. As educators why would we fight that evolution? Why are we not using that power to promote creative thought? Why do we have educators resistant to something that will continue to grow and improve the way we access, analyze, consume and communicate information?

The dumbest argument I remember from Math teachers in the 60’s about the use of calculators in Math class was;” What would happen if there were no more batteries. They need to know how to work without calculators for that reason.”We believed that back then. We were not stupid, but maybe a little unaware. It was a knee jerk reaction to technology. I guess math teachers had a fear of being replaced by calculators. That was a fear shared by many educators back in the day-being replaced by a computer.

We all look at something the same way, but many of us see it differently. I would like us to get to the point where we only have to think about how to best use technology and not whether we should use it. Yes, I agree, a good teacher can teach without technology and that will always be true. Yes, I agree, Technology does not have to be in every lesson. Yes, I agree, technology is not the answer to everything. Technology, however, is with us to stay and it is evolving. As educators we need to evolve too. These kids need to be educated for their world not ours. In their world Technology may be as ubiquitous as doors are.

Read Full Post »

Does every Blogger give a reason for writing his/her blog on the first post? I don’t know the answer to that, but I do feel a need to put something on the screen to form a Mission Statement or at least offer some type of focus for this path I am about to take. After 34 years as a secondary English teacher and now adding three  more years as an Adjunct Professor of Education there is one thing that I have enough life experience in to talk about. That would be Snow Days. If there is one thing I look forward to as a New York Educator, it is a good snow storm. A good Snow Day enables us to sleep in late while everyone else goes to work. That is one of the benefits unique to the teaching profession. However, this probably will not offer enough topics for consistent delivery to a blog. Seasonal topics have a limited time to retain interest of the reader. Most people  would not have an interest in reading about snow days in July?

That would leave my other education experiences to serve as the stuff  of topics. These experiences are not all those of a polished and perfect professional. My career began when education was less of a science and more of a tradition. New teachers were mentored by veterans, many of whom had less training in the latest educational research. I am also not saying that I always did the right thing. It was just the opposite in many cases I did the wrong thing. It was through reflection and research that I began to change. The uncommon commodity of common sense led the way to that wisdom I would seek. There was no internet, so aside from written material in the library, and what were called in- service courses, the only other source was any good teacher willing to share or collaborate. That was the environment in which I began developing my own face-to-face, real-time Personal Learning Network. The skills I needed were simple; Identify the value of a lesson,acknowledge the value of a person with an ability to collaborate. This continued for years. That is the way it was in the day.

Thank God Al Gore came along for then we had the Internet. I don’t know if he invented it, but they both showed up at around the same time. Coincidence? I think not. The Internet added a new dimension to my PLN. I could now use a search engine to search topics for helpful websites. One search could bring 50,000 sites, so with three searches I could clearly spend four weeks reading websites. The internet may have been cooking, but it wasn’t done yet.

After 34 years of teaching I made the decision to retire. I traveled down other paths after teaching, but none served me as well. On a chance meeting with a helpful Nun on a ferry trip to my Fire Island home, I learned of a position teaching Methods classes in a local College. It was perfect. I jumped at the opportunity and soon found myself in need of a great deal of help.I could only hope the Internet became more user-friendly, because ready or not I was going to need it.

As I started out using my computer to explore the internet for material to use in my Methods classes, I discovered a great deal of material, but there was no person to talk to about it. I had email contacts, but that was a slow procedure to exchange ideas. The other problem was that my contact list was very limited. I guess you might say I had no friends or at least professional colleagues. My ability to use search engines exceeded my greatest expectations. I saw myself as a master of information searches, but it was not enough. I needed to talk to somebody about some of this stuff.

I discovered Linkedin after my wife, Joyce, showed me how she posted her resumé and made a number of professional connections. I recognized this as a way to develop professional contacts and share ideas. I found no help in all the existing educational groups, so I decided to start my own, the Technology-Using Professors group. This led to a discovery of Twitter and Four more educational Groups on Linkedin.

I still needed folks to talk to. I found myself throwing out questions and engaging several twitter members in heated educational discussions on a daily basis.Two people who I met through Twitter volunteered to help with an idea to get folks talking about education and archiving the results.Shelly Terrell, Steve Anderson and I have run that idea as #Edchat ever since. Still needing more people to talk to and a place the deposit these links from all of these sources there was one more addition. a Ning site, The Educator’s PLN.

Now I find that I need another outlet for further expression, and more connections. It was a quest for answers that started me on this journey. It is also what drives me to continue further down this path. I have more questions than answers as do most educators. What I have to offer is a wide range experiences of mistakes and successes in education that people can use or not. I plan to ask more questions than offer answers, but I hope to promote thought and discussion. It is my intention to do this on an as needed schedule. I hope to help frame the discussion for improvement of education with a blend of research, collaboration and a little common sense.

Another choice would have been to Blog my way through Julia Child’s cookbook, but that was already overdone, or using the vernacular, well done.

Thanks

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts