Technology | My Island View

Archive for the ‘Technology’ Category

Let’s Go To The Videotape

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Education, Leadership, Mentoring, Observation, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Teched, Technology, Tenure, Thought Provoking, Video taping on December 9, 2010| 20 Comments »

I recently read how Bill Gates is pushing for video-taping teachers as part of an assessment process during the observation of lessons. His goal is to include videotaping of all teachers in the process of their evaluations. On the surface this sounds workable and even helpful; after all it does work for athletes. For many years now, coaches and recruiters alike all said, ”Let’s go to the Video Tape” it will show us the way. Of course the media has changed and gone digital, so actual video tape is being replaced by other technologies, nevertheless we call it videotaping.

I have had myself videotaped at times during my career to objectively view what I looked like, and how I delivered a specific lesson to my students. It was my choice of class, my choice of lesson, and my choice to view and use. I knew what I was looking for in my lesson. I did find it to be helpful, but it was my choice to use it as a tool, and I chose how to do it. I have used videotaping with students doing oral presentations. It enabled them to see what the audience saw as the presentation unfolded. I think under the right conditions videotaping can be a useful tool to improve presentation skills.

I have also seen videotaping used to record the lessons of perspective teachers as they applied for positions. The video tape was then played back before the hiring committee. This was far better than the alternative of having the entire hiring committee sitting in the back of the class during the lesson. All in all I am not averse to using videotaping as a tool for assessment.

One problem with videotaping all teachers for assessment is that all lessons do not lend themselves to the videotaping process. Direct instruction or a lecture may be the best forms of lessons to be videotaped. We all love TED Talks. However, there are other types of lessons that may be considered “controlled chaos” that would not play well on the big screen, but they do promote learning. The teacher is not always the focal point of the lesson. Talking is not necessarily teaching. Some lessons like simulations, group work, or projects extend several days before yielding results. A single period videotape would not capture the results of the efforts of the teacher.

Another consideration is the introduction of the camera to the class. Once the discovery of the camera runs through the classroom, some students may exhibit different behavior. It also must be said, that not all teachers will be themselves when the camera starts rolling for the big production. With a room of thirty individuals in a classroom the introduction of a video camera must have an impact on behavior and performance of some. It has the potential of changing the dynamic of a class.

The idea to use this method for assessing all teachers may be well-intentioned, but that intention only works if it is to benefit the teacher. It is a great tool under the right conditions for specific lessons to assist the teacher in honing communication skills. However, here is the rub: some may see this video-taped observation not as an assessment tool to help the teacher, but a tool to remove the teacher from the class. Even if that is not the case, it will be the view of many teachers. With that view, teachers will begin to give to the camera what the camera views best. Lessons will be tailored for the camera, “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s”. Administrators will fill their video libraries with direct instruction lessons.

Teachers are not athletes who can adjust their physical skills to enhance performance. This is not to say that some things may not be improved by a videotaped intervention, as long as the teacher is open to it and the conditions are right. Their relationship with their classes is difficult to capture on a 40 minute video. How does the camera capture learning as it happens? It will certainly not be viewed on the face of the teacher. The focus of the camera might be more telling, if it was trained on the faces of the students. Video-taping as a tool for improvement with everyone’s cooperation and willingness to use it for that goal can work. Using it as a tool to bludgeon a teacher in a year-end review should not be the intent.

My real problem in this is that it would seem that education is being guided by the vision of the likes of Bill Gates. His view of education is to have all teachers lecturing like TED-Talk lecturers in five years. I do not agree with his vision, but what do I know? I am but a lowly educator.

Read Full Post »

To Be Better Teachers, We Need To Be Better Learners.

Posted in Administrator, Blog, conference, EdChat, Education, ISTE, Leadership, Literacy, Mentoring, Ning, PLN, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter, unconference on December 7, 2010| 22 Comments »

This past weekend I attended an unconference in New York City called EdcampNYC. For those unfamiliar with the term, an unconference is a very informal conference of volunteer speakers talking in small groups about areas in which that they may have some expertise. It enables the classroom teacher to be exposed to other educators who may be doing things differently or employing different tools to help kids learn. These unconferences are beginning to spring up all over the country. Participants in each group have the ability to leave any session at any time and join another. The speakers are volunteers and the conference is Free.

I attended this unconference to volunteer what I have learned about developing and maintaining a Personal Learning Network, a PLN. I was a bit hesitant at first thinking to myself that this is a subject which has been beaten to death on Twitter and in Blogs, so why would anyone have an interest. I have come to realize however, that it is my very involvement in Twitter, Linkedin, Delicious, Diigo, Ning, Skype, Webinars, and all of the other components of my PLN that set me apart from a majority of educators, who are not involved with learning through technology. My connection with like-minded educators has insulated me from the fact that most educators are not so involved. I think it is safe to say that when it comes to 21^st century skills, many educators don’t know what they don’t know. If technology skills for media literacy require more than just awareness, many of our educators would probably be considered illiterate.

Education, as an institution, seems, to me, to be quite conservative and not quickly accepting of change. The problem with that is that change today is profoundly affected by technology. Whereas, the institution of education limits change, technology turns it loose or even speeds it up exponentially. As a result, technology is creating tools for Information gathering, communication, collaboration, and creation at a much faster rate than the educators can absorb. The very skills educators strive to teach are not being utilized in ways that they were originally intended. Publishing is no longer a process of trying for acceptance from a publisher; it is instantaneous. Access to information is instantaneous and always at hand. Because of this fast paced media-frenzied society, we now have a greater need for reflection and critical thinking.

In this technologically based, information-driven society, how do educators keep pace with what they need to know? How do educators remain relevant? Do they even understand the need to do so? Is the professional development offered in schools meeting the need? Is it acceptable to teach using 19^th Century methods with 20^th Century tools to prepare kids for their 21^st Century even after we have gobbled up that Century’s first decade?

I earned a Master’s degree in Educational Technology back in the late 80’s. Back then, I was a state-of-the-art educator. I did not however, work in a state-of-the-art-School. I did not have access to state-of-the-art tools. I did not have state-of-the-art colleagues. I did however have a belief in the concept of teaching with technology, and I searched for ways to do it. Back then it was all a matter of money and training, both difficult to come by. Today WEB2.0 tools are readily available and most are free or inexpensive. Training now comes in the form of free tutorials, webinars, or conferences delivered to a computer in an environment of choice. Usually, I choose my Den.

In a society that now goes to the internet to search for products, restaurants, celebrity news, weather, news, companionship, or any of the other hundreds of things we use it for; why not use it for information about our profession? What is holding Educators back? It is not a generational thing. Many educators that I connect with every day are in their 60’s as am I. It is not an intellectual thing many people, as clueless as I, have learned from technology. It is not an access thing. Libraries offer tech access to anyone. It’s not a device thing. More and more smart phones, Ipods or Ipads are available each day. They are connected computers. As a matter of fact mobile devices are the primary source for accessing the internet, surpassing desktop computers.

Educators need to get over their fears and give up on this resistance to technology. We need to support more unconferences and the movement that drives them. We need to teach Educators how to know what they don’t know, and learn it. We need them to buy into the concepts and adapt to the tools, for the tools will continually change and develop. We need to connect teachers through their own Personal Learning Networks using social media for professional Development. Collaboration outside of our classrooms will take us beyond our personal limitations and allow us to learn continually and globally. As an added advantage, we will also be able to take our students with us.

Read Full Post »

Disservice to Pre-service Teaching

Posted in Administrator, cooperating Teacher, Education, Leadership, Mentoring, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Seniority, Student teaching, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking on November 26, 2010| 11 Comments »

I recently read in the Washington Post that the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education issued a report recommending that students preparing for a career in teaching should spend less time in course work and more time in real classrooms for clinical practice. According to the article, the report states that this would be more in the model used for medical Doctors. The report advocates less coursework and more practical experience for pre-service teachers. Of course the overriding theme of this article implies that the failure of our system is with the failure of the teachers, so it must be the failure of the way that teachers are prepared.

I see an additional problem in that the report in the recommendation for evaluating the student teacher on the performance of their assigned students on standardized tests.

“All programs held to same standards; data-driven accountability based on measures of candidate performance and student achievement, including gains in standardized test scores. Data drives reform and continuous improvement.”

This however, will require the attention of a second Post at another time.

Before any committee recommends less time in course work and expanding time in the classroom experience for teacher candidates, it should explore the in-school experience as it exists in today’s model. I do not know what other schools require for their student teacher programs. I do know what is required for my students. It is fair to say that my entire opinion on this subject is based on that background and may not necessarily apply to other student teacher programs or programs in other states.

Students seeking a career in education are not required to master one area of content, but two. They need to be experts in their subject area and they need to be experts in the area of education. To accomplish that, a reduction in course work might be counter-productive. The in-class experience might best be improved in quality as opposed to quantity. The way it is set up now is a “crap shoot” for student teachers, and the colleges have little control over the student-teacher experience.

The college controls the courses candidates are required to take. They are also responsible for holding candidates accountable for 100 hours of class observations of real classes as an eligibility requirement for student teaching. Once the student begins student-teaching the bulk of that experience is in the hands of the Cooperating teacher. That would be the teacher to whom the student is assigned for the student-teacher assignment. On the secondary level that would be half of their time in a middle school setting and half on the high school level with separate cooperating teachers. The college is connected to the student teacher through the weekly seminar class to deal with the reflection of experiences and guidance through day-to-day problems.

The weak link in the chain of the student-teacher’s experience often lies in the relationship with the cooperating teacher. Most cooperating teachers are well-intentioned and want to do their best in their role as a mentor for an aspiring teacher. However, this is not true of all cooperating teachers. The flaw in the system seems to be more in the selection process of the cooperating teacher as well as the training for cooperating teachers.

The idea of student-teaching is to place a student with a working teacher as an apprentice. The student teacher is expected to teach classes as a teacher from the onset of the assignment. This takes place over the length of a college semester. The student teacher is responsible for teaching and assessing students under the guidance of the cooperating teacher. This all works well, if: the student is prepared, the teacher is prepared, the student is receptive, the teacher is giving, the student is professional, the teacher is flexible. This is a short list of the many “ifs” required for a successful student teaching experience. Little of this is controllable by the college.

Teachers are not trained to be cooperating teachers and it is not an ability that one is born with. They are volunteers or in many cases they are volunteered. They are not compensated by the school district and the compensation from the college usually comes in the bartering of course credits or small monetary stipends. Cooperating teachers are required to turn over the duties of teaching to a student teacher while still having the responsibility for their own students’ success. In today’s climate that may impact their own assessment for maintaining their position (job), if the successful performance of their students is not indicated on standardized tests.

To further complicate the situation we must ask: Are the philosophies and experiences of the student teacher and cooperating teacher a match? Do they see eye to eye on the integration of technology in education? Do they agree the needs and use of formative and summative assessment? Has the cooperating teacher remained relevant in the world of education? Is the student teacher given respect from the cooperating teacher or viewed as a teaching assistant? Will the student teacher be allowed to create original lessons or will he/she be required to teach lessons of the cooperating teacher?

Colleges try to offer guidelines for cooperating teachers on most of these concerns, but the primary goal of a cooperating teacher does not lie in the interest of the student teacher, but rather with the students of their own classes. I do realize and I do explain to my students that it is how one handles the experience that benefits one’s education. I do believe that, but even I need to question things when students relate some of the experiences they endured under less enlightened cooperating teachers.

Now, I must address the recommendation of the enlightened committee. If I understand this, they are recommending fewer courses to master two areas of expertise. They are promoting placing students into a mentoring environment with cooperating teachers who are not trained, not screened, not adequately compensated, and being held personally responsible for the effect that student teacher has on the assessment outcomes of their students. Is this the model our medical profession trains physicians with? Maybe we should consider quality of the program instead of quantity. More hours of a flawed system of mentorship does not necessarily create better teachers or physicians.

Most Cooperating teachers do the best job they can to help and mentor their student teachers, but there are many improvements which would help them in this noble endeavor.

Read Full Post »

Who needs Relevance and Literacy?

Posted in Administrator, Blog, conference, EdChat, Education, ISTE, Literacy, Ning, PLN, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Twitter on November 11, 2010| 8 Comments »

Relevance enables professionals to rise above mediocrity. When I go to a professional for advice or service I have certain expectations. If I go to a Doctor I expect that person would be up to date on the latest procedures in their specific area of medicine. If I go to a lawyer, I expect that person is up to date on all of the recent laws that will affect my issue. If I go to an architect, I expect that person is up to date on all of the building codes, new materials and latest methods of construction. If I go to an accountant I expect that person to be up to date on the latest tax implications that will affect my investments.

There are several ways that professionals can keep up with the details of their professions. They may read journals; they may attend workshops; they may network at conferences; they may join and network in professional groups; they may attend lectures; they may give lectures; they may write articles, and some may even choose to write blogs. All of these efforts are taken and are continued long after a degree is earned and a license is secured for that professional’s position. Any profession that relies on ever-changing information must keep up with those changes in order to be effective. I think of this as professional relevance. However, not all professionals employ these methods to maintain relevance. Some professionals see the degree and the license as the means to secure a position and that becomes the final goal. All of the learning and work involved by some professionals was for the sole purpose of attaining that position, and now, with that position secured, the learning and work can ease-up. Taking the easy and comfortable path of non-involvement leads to being mediocre and irrelevant in competitive professions. Of course this is a generality, and there are exceptions.

Literacy has come to mean more than just the ability to read and write. Living on an island I often go to the ocean for metaphors. Watching the ocean every day, one learns how to read it. In order to engage the ocean in some way, one needs to read the conditions to determine how to participate. Body surfing is always a first option, but beyond that choice, there is boogey boarding, skim boarding, surf-boarding, kayaking, or just swimming. Each choice requires different conditions and success depends on the ability to correctly interpret that information. I guess this might be considered ocean literacy. Information about ocean conditions changes on a minute-to-minute basis, so an ocean-literate person must assess and reassess the conditions continually in order to maximize the experience, as well as avoid dangers.

Since Gutenberg evolved information from the scrolls and manuscripts of the dark ages to the media of mass-produced, printed text, the introduction of the digital age has taken us further in information delivery. Accessing, analyzing, understanding, creating and communicating information using the tools of our digital age has become the 21^st century literacy. A major drawback to this new literacy is that the tools, or apps (applications) that deliver the information keep evolving, or changing altogether. This requires that in order to stay literate people need to stay relevant.

Now, you may ask, when is he going to mention teachers or education? That takes me to a tweet that I sent out this week. During a recent #Edchat discussion on Twitter, we discussed if class blogs, student blogs, or even teacher blogs have a place in our education system. For those of you who are unaware, #Edchat is a weekly discussion on Twitter which spotlights different topics concerning education, or educators. The discussion was quite informative as many offered their opinions based on personal experiences with blogging in education. I tweeted out something to the effect that it was unfortunate that we could not share this discussion with more educators. When I consider the thousands of educators that I am in direct contact with through social media, I understand that it is only a tiny fractional percentage of all of the educators in the world today. Why are not more educators involved?

I am not saying that all educators need to involve themselves with #Edchat. It is not for everyone, and as all social media tools, its time will pass as it is replaced by some other digital delivery system. That is the nature of using technology. The bigger picture however, is educators’ involvement with any social media as a means to be relevant using the tools of 21^st Century, literacy tools.

More important than teaching content is the task of using content to teach learning. The content of those scrolls and manuscripts may still be relevant today, but we do not get that content by unrolling the fragile scrolls and allowing students to approach one at a time to read them. For year’s we counted on the Gutenberg method, using printed text in textbooks. Today and tomorrow however, the new literacy will depend on additional tools. Tools of a digital world will be used more and more to deliver content. Take note of all of the businesses and media programming tagging their ads with Social media icons of Facebook, google and Twitter to contact for added information. Take note of all of the print media icons that have gone away, Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report. Blogs are replacing printed media.

As professional educators we do not heal illnesses, advise on the laws, provide blueprints, or arrange investments. We teach others how to learn the very skills needed to accomplish those things in their chosen professions. Professional educators model and teach lifelong learning. How do we as educators stay relevant and literate? Are we reading Blogs, engaging in collaboration with other educators through Social Media,and teaching with tools that our students will need to use in order to be relevant in their world? Or,are we as educators saying to Gutenberg, I like the feel and smell of scrolls and manuscripts, it gives me comfort, so I will stick with them.

This Link from the Educator’s PLN provides a Prezi presentation by Joshua Coupal connecting Bloom’s Taxonomy in Digital terms to combine Relevance and media Literacy in Education: http://edupln.com/video/blooms-digital-taxonomy-prezi

Your comments are welcome.

Read Full Post »

Is Innovation a Destination?

Posted in Administrator, Education, Leadership, Skills, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking on November 4, 2010| 7 Comments »

Many years ago I attended an education Conference in upstate New York and saw, as I remember, a Keynote speaker who was a superintendent of an upstate district. He told the audience of an experience he had with a business owner in his region. The businessman told the superintendent that the students being graduated were not coming to him with the skills needed for his industry. He invited the superintendent to visit his plant and see the problem he faced matching the needed skills with the skills being taught. He then told the superintendent that he couldn’t even hire Lathe operators from the high school graduates.

The Superintendent visited the industrial arts teacher the next day, and asked if the proper use of the lathe was taught in his class. The superintendent even looked over the lathe that students used to do their work. It was an impressive piece of equipment and it all seemed in order. The students seemed to be doing a fine job with the lathe. This superintendent was ready to face the businessman in his plant assured that the school district’s students were certainly prepared with the skills to operate a lathe.

The next day after the social amenities were exchanged between the superintendent and the plant executives, they all took a walking tour of the plant ending up in the area of the plant where the lathes and the lathe operators did their work. To the superintendent’s surprise it looked nothing like the lathe area of the school’s shop. The touring group entered a closed-in, air-conditioned area. In that area the superintendent was introduced to a young woman in a white lab coat as she operated a computer that made all of the needed adjustments to operate the plant’s lathes. The superintendent was educated at that moment about relevance in education.

Now we are hearing from many of our leaders that in order for our country to recapture and secure its prominent position in our new global economy, we need to be innovative. Innovation will drive us to where we need to be. It was, after all, innovation that put our country in its position of prominence in the world initially.

When our public education system started out, we were way ahead of so many other countries with unlimited resources to work with; it is no wonder that we were successful. We may have conceived of the public education system to provide workers for the country’s workforce, but that, as a goal, was surpassed by many, as opportunity and innovation offered a path to security and wealth.

How do we now, in our present system, promote innovative thinking in order to produce innovation? When we look at the lathes that we are using in education, do they look like the lathes of today’s industry? Can we continue to use yesterday’s methodology to create today’s thinkers? Are we creating workers for industry, or are we creating leaders of industry?

If we continue to assess students who find no relevance in a mandatory education that they are not interested in, we should not be surprised at the failing results. Should we not consider other factors of poverty, race and language gaps as possible reasons for failure? Is the blame to be placed on the teachers who teach it, or should we look at the methodology and the goals of education? Could it be that the system is failing the teachers and not the other way around?

We need to assess what skills our children will need in their world, for it will be very different from ours. We need to provide them the opportunities to develop those skills. We need to promote innovative thinking in order to promote innovation. We need to be more innovative with education in order to move it from where it is, to where it should be going. We need not look back at what we had, but rather support teachers who are innovators and moving us forward. We need to support teachers with best practices, professional development, and encourage and support those teachers who do more than just ask students to be lifelong learners. The best teachers are learners themselves. They practice and model lifelong learning. They are education innovators, finding new ways to learn and teach in relevant terms, providing opportunities for their students to do the same. The successes of these educators can be more than models for others; they can be inspirational as the successes of the students are shared with teachers who have yet to become innovative.

Skills of acquiring information, communicating, critically thinking, and creating are the skills of innovation. To pull out an old chestnut, you don’t get that through osmosis, it must be taught. Our students need more than a lecture about the use of a lathe in a shop class. We need them to understand the world in which they will live.

Read Full Post »

Cool Tools.

Posted in Banning, EdChat, Education, Leadership, Reform, Skills, Technology, Thought Provoking on October 29, 2010| 22 Comments »

I was reminded in a recent #Edchat that there once was a time when calculators were not allowed to be brought to class. I remember math teachers in a building I worked in during the 70’s. Teachers said that, if for some reason all of the batteries in the world died at once, kids would need to be able to do math without calculators. Dead batteries means dead calculators. I was only an English teacher, so even though that scenario sounded a bit beyond reality, I did not question the Math people, who convincingly spun that tale, after all Math teachers are always so factual.

After years of continuous battery success, as well as outright battery evolution, we have taken a great chance with a dependence on calculators in education. Math teachers have developed curriculum around the use of calculators. Today, they are required for most math classes. Parents cringe at the cost as calculators appear on items to be purchased for class supplies lists. Many districts supply them to their students. In this instance this tool of technology was successfully integrated into education.

The obvious connection now would be for me to jump to the Mobile learning Device. You may know it as the Cell Phone or Smartphone; however, I am not yet ready to go there. Technology is developing at a pace faster than we are able to absorb into our education system. Teachers have a need to fully understand something before they incorporate it into what they teach. This requires professional Development. Districts provide PD, but it takes time to put it together. It then requires time to fit it into the busy schedule of teachers. Unfortunately, by the time the PD is put together and workshop sessions are worked into teachers’ schedules the technology may no longer be relevant. Since our students are more comfortable with technology and less encumbered for a need to fully understand technology before engaging it, they move forward with its use, leaving their teachers behind. At this point educators are being affected by the technology as opposed to controlling the technology to their advantage.

If we believe the goal of education is to prepare our students for future employment, then we need to ask what future employers are looking for. Many employers need their employees to be able to access technology to acquire information, collaborate with others, create projects to meet a need, and communicate that out to others, either locally or globally. All of this requires the use of technology. Many of the tools which enable people to do this are Web 2.0 tools. They are free for the most part, and they are continuing to be developed in vast numbers.

It would stand to reason, that if employers are looking for perspective employees to be able to acquire information, create content, communicate content, and have a global perspective, we as educators, should be teaching those skills. Of course this would necessitate the teacher’s awareness of the technological tools necessary for students to utilize these skills in a way that future employers would require. That would require utilizing whatever technology tools that are considered mainstream at that time. Since that may change year to year, or every six months, teachers need to teach the concepts that would apply to any tool of choice and not get hung up on specific applications. None of this requires an intricate knowledge of applications by the teacher. It does require knowledge of what applications have to offer in general terms. Students, with guidance, will be able to acquire knowledge of the application through exploration. This is a skill we need to develop with our students in the interest of Life-Long Learning.

And now I have arrived at a point in this post for the cell phone discussion. As the Calculator was once banned, so is the cell phone in many schools. We need to consider cell phones not as phones, but rather Mobile Learning Devices with phone and texting capabilities. These devices are more powerful than the devices used to send men to the moon. Why would we, as educators, not want to utilize this tool for education? I know students are distracted with texting and gaming. They don’t use this device for research. Students engage their phones and not the lesson.

Have kids ever been taught how this device should be used for learning? Mobile learning devices have surpassed the desktop computer as the number one device for accessing the internet. That fact should be meaningful to educators. This tool, however, is viewed by many educators as a distraction. I will not ask why a student would be more engaged with the cell phone than the lesson delivered by the teacher. I will say that the misuse or abuse of cell phones is a behavior problem. It need s to be addressed in a discipline policy and not a ban policy. If we are not teaching the proper use and protocols for these devices, where will these kids learn them? We are leaving them to “learn from the streets”.

We cannot hold kids responsible for the appropriate use of this tool, if we never teach it. Broadway theaters instruct audiences in the appropriate use of cell phones in a theater with every performance. Most people comply to those instructions. Technology tools whether devices, or applications need to be integrated into education. It has become our responsibility to teach appropriate use of technology tools, including cell phones. We as educators no longer have a choice in this. Our students will be required to use these tools in their lives. If we are not teaching the concepts of accessing information, collaboration, creation and communication utilizing the tools of technology, we are not preparing our students for their future.

Read Full Post »

The Educator’s PLN

Posted in Administrator, conference, EdChat, Education, Leadership, Ning, PLN, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Twitter on October 1, 2010| 5 Comments »

As the creator of the Educator’s PLN Ning site, I can admit on this post, that the EDU PLN was never a planned destination, but more of an afterthought. My original plan was a result of a need that I had for my undergraduate methods students. At the time, I was a novice in the world of social media. I understood the concept of a Personal Learning Network, but still had not found an efficient way to build it up. Linkedin was very rich with professionals, but it was a slow and cumbersome process. I spent a great deal of time cultivating connections with little return of real information for my efforts. I had created successful Education Groups in Linkedin which eventually led me to engaging people on Twitter.

My experience with Twitter was not unlike many others. I did not get it at first. When I finally got the concept, that who you follow is the driving force of Twitter as a tool for developing a PLN, I maximized that idea with Linkedin. I went to my contacts and Educational Groups and gathered the twitter names of any educators who then used Twitter. My follow list grew quickly and it was with all the right people, educators. There were now two components to my PLN Linkedin and Twitter.

My purpose in all of this was to be able to supply my methods students with the most relevant methods being used in education from people who actually practiced those methods. This was a simple plan with complex results. It worked too well, which became a problem. Twitter, with the right people being followed, is rich with sources. I began to get link upon link of great educational information ranging from tidbits to websites. For my own sanity I learned about digital bookmarking. I used an application called Delicious to begin bookmarking all of this information as I gathered it. This app, Delicious, became yet another element of my developing PLN.

My problem, as I assessed it, was clear yet complicated. I had great information in a multitude of forms. These were immediately usable links for any educator to apply to his or her class. There were solutions, applications, videos, discussions, webinars, podcasts, and websites for the taking. The problem was that my methods students were not yet prepared to even know what they were looking at, let alone have a place to apply it. I attempted to pass links along to them through emails sent almost daily. This was best compared to the old standby metaphor of filling a glass of water with a fire hose. It was too much too fast. I needed a depository to place all this great educational stuff until my students were equipped to handle it. I needed a place that they could access it on an individual basis whenever they had a need.

My college had Blackboard available to us, but I wanted to model something that my students could use in any place that they were hired. Most Public schools do not have Blackboard since it needs to be purchased. Ning seemed to be the best solution. At the time it was free, and, because it was an intuitive application, an introduction and tour was all the training needed to use it. I could make it a private site and provide a safety net for my students to train them before their foray into the big bad world of Social Media. I created the site and called it Methods Matters. It was slowly accepted by students skeptical of technology, and wondering what any of this had to do with teaching. In a short period of time they got it. It became a focal point for their PLN’s which I now began to require them to have. Yes, I require Twitter, Ning and Delicious as a minimum for Personal Learning Networks for my students. Most go beyond the minimum requirements.

With that as the Background I can now move on to the story of The Educator’s PLN. As I engaged more and more educators on my PLN, I discovered many similarities in attitudes and experiences of educators compared to my students. The light bulb lit the room. I could do the same for the people in Education. I could link up people who have a need for relevant educational information. Together, we could deposit information until people were ready to access it. Beyond the information it also provided access to educators worldwide for further and fuller connections. This site provides a rich connection using Social Media. The Educator’s PLN is not a PLN in itself, but rather a source for sources for any educator to access in building or improving his or her own Personal Learning Network. As of this post the Educator’s PLN has a global membership of 5,565 educators, 351 educational videos, 70 Groups, 219 discussions, and 257 blog posts.

I am a firm believer in using Social Media to advance professional development for educators. I also believe that social media will be a driving force in advocating and enabling much-needed educational reform. The details of the development of my PLN are described in a five-part post, The PLN Blueprint. I also quite often write about the PLN development on my Blog, MyIslandView.

This post first appeared as a guest blogger’s post for my friend Jason Bedell.

Read Full Post »

Twitter’s Achilles Heel

Posted in EdChat, Education, Reform, Social Media, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth on September 18, 2010| 41 Comments »

Although there are many who think I was an actual witness to the event, I was not there when Achilles’ mother, Thetis, tried to make him immortal by dipping him in the river Styx. In holding him by the heel she failed to make him totally immortal. The term Achilles Heel has come to mean a place where something or someone is vulnerable to attack of serious consequence.

Moving from the mythological world to the digital world of the 21^st Century, we may be able to link the two in regard to Twitter. Educators familiar with Twitter and who use it as a means of sources and collaboration may have personally experienced a similar act, as I cite this example to support my point.

For those of you less familiar with Twitter, it is a place where educators may make statements or pass on information in the form of short URL links to other educators. This is probably an oversimplified explanation, but it should establish an understanding. If a person Tweets out a thought (limited to 140 Characters) it travels out to anyone who is following that person. If a follower finds value in that tweet, they may pass it on to their followers in the form of a Re-Tweet (RT).

The RT credits the original sender for the idea or link. The person who RT’s the Tweet may need to abbreviate the original if it exceeds 140 characters. It is understood however, that the intent of the original idea is to be kept intact. Many tweeters comment on an RT, but it is usually clear that the comment is separated from the original tweet or idea. Usually, it is an acknowledgement of agreement to the idea. If there is strong disagreement then the tweeter will usually put out a new, original tweet expressing a different point of view. This has always been my understanding of the process and it is how I explain it to others when I am in the position to do so.

In that context I now offer my experience on Twitter yesterday. As I looked over my TweetDeck column of all of the tweets that mention me, I came across a tweet resembling one of mine that was RTed. It credited me with an idea that I supposedly tweeted. The problem that I had with it, and the thing that brought about a 20 second tirade of screen-screaming, was that I never tweeted what this person said I did. This person was rewording my original tweet with his/her viewpoint and crediting me as saying it. When I pointed out to this tweeter that I never said what he/she was crediting me with, I received a few replies. I was told that everyone comments on Tweets in RT’s and that there are no Rules on Twitter. I would imagine some other educators on Twitter may have had similar experiences.

It is true that there are no rules on Twitter. It is true that comments are made on RT’s. It is also true that people do not bastardize other’s tweets for their own purpose, or to serve their agenda. There are however, certain rules of civilized society that should govern conversation or discourse on Twitter. We have to assume that Twitter participants are people of integrity who do not distort the truth. We need to assume that we are respectful of others and their ideas, even if we disagree. We need to believe that people make every effort to be accurate in their attempt to share information. We need to believe that our passions for a topic or idea will not allow us to disrespect others with opposing points of view. Those same opposing points of view are what force our reflections to strengthen or change our views on that same subject.

If we are to expose ourselves as educators to the world on Social Media, we need to remember we are professionals dealing with ideas and learning. We need to model our respect for these things. Even in the passion of discourse, we cannot stoop to name-calling or petty bickering. We need to be truthful and honest. We can be passionate about the subject and still have integrity and show respect for others even in disagreement.

Yes it is true, Twitter has no rules. We, as educators however, have guidelines which we need to live by in order to model for others. I am sure that this person who distorted my tweet believed he/she had every right to do so, because Twitter has no rules. We must rise above that thinking however, if we are to trust others in what we have developed as our Personal Learning Network. Like the students who we teach, we need a safe and comfortable learning environment that we can trust. Let us not allow anyone’s lack of ethics be our Twitter Achilles Heel.

Read Full Post »

Short Term Learner

Posted in Administrator, EdChat, Education, Filtering, Leadership, Ning, PLN, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Twitter on September 8, 2010| 7 Comments »

Personal Learning Networks have taken up a great deal of my time of late, about the last two years. I have always had a PLN although it was never called that. The digital slant, of what before this, might have been called a group of study buddies, has caused a re-examination by educators on a global scale. Instead of being limited to a small group of educators comparing notes or lessons in a building, a PLN can now draw upon literally thousands of educators, worldwide, at any given time. Study buddies without the boundaries of time or space, very Star-Trekkie. Educators can even Skype anywhere in the world for the ultimate video connection. It is no flying car, but the video phone was predicted at the ’64 World’s Fair. I remember. I was there. Belgian Waffles were great.

The key to developing my Personal Learning Network had nothing to do with me being a digital Native, because I am not. My motivation to learn comes from somewhere within. I enjoy taking my own route to get to a goal that I set for myself. I think the term Lifelong Learner applies to me. The thing that makes the learning fun and easy for me is the technology. I am not always comfortable with it, but I do not fear it. I only say that because the reasons I am most often given by others for educators not embracing technology is that educators are fearful of it, or they are not comfortable with it.

Learning is not a passive activity. One cannot place a tape recorder (old tech term) under a pillow at night and wake up with the knowledge in the morning. I have personally researched this. Additionally, one can’t join a Personal Learning Network. If it is to be of value, it needs to be built by the individual who owns it. This requires a commitment of time, but not so much energy, except for the exercising of the mind. When one engages a Digital PLN, it will involve receiving a great deal of information in the form of links. Each link is a hot button. It is a click to: a website, a blog post, a video, an article, a webcast, a podcast, or a picture. I imagine without the technology, one would read books, Journals, articles, videotapes, DVR’s and talk to people face to face. That would be a very early 20^th century PLN, but still doable today for a while longer anyway.

It takes a lifelong learner’s commitment to a PLN to reap the benefits and apply it to teaching. This should be no problem for educators because they all teach kids to be Lifelong Learners. If you don’t believe me ask a teacher. Better yet, look at the school’s Mission Statement; it probably addresses the school’s dedication to lifelong learning. The problem is that too often that only applies to the kids and not the staff. Lifelong learning is too much a case of do as I say, and not as I do. Too many educators subscribe to the theory that once the degree is secured, and the teaching license in hand, the goal is reached, and now the coasting begins. Maybe some courses to meet requirements will be taken. Certainly, courses for pay raises would be needed, but those are but small bumps in the road. I know, not everyone is like this. However, we are in a profession that is in a fishbowl and under attack. We cannot afford to have any individuals representing us with this mindset. These folks are not the majority but this minority has an ability to influence others to the dark side. We cannot have this jeopardizing our profession.

Most educators are collaborative and nurturing individuals. That is their strength. We use those qualities with our students. We need to apply them to our colleagues. All information does not stop evolving once we get our teaching job. We need to stay relevant. In a world with a technology rich environment it is fool hearty for educators to think they still have a choice about using technology as a tool in education. We are teaching kids who will be affected by more technology than we have today. They will have jobs that are not yet in existence. Their skills will require the use of technology.

Educators teach skills and encourage children to learn. A good teacher can do that without technology, but why? Technology is but a tool for educators and students to use. The skills remain the same no matter what the tool. Teachers do not need to be technology experts to allow students to use it to retrieve information, collaborate, create, and communicate. That is what will be required of them in their world. While educators debate and control technology as a tool, business and industry are embracing it. Technology continues to advance and many educators are not even familiar with what possibilities are available. If technology requires a new form of literacy, many of our educators are illiterate.

A PLN allows people to explore and collaborate on whatever it is they determine as a need to know. A PLN is not exclusive to educators. They can have: Boat builders connected to boat builders, doctors connected to doctors, educators connected to educators, learners connected to learners. People can choose their direction and go down that road as far as they need to go. A PLN enables a person to control her or his learning. A PLN is a digital tool for learning. We can use it to model the very thing that we strive to teach our students. A PLN is not learned, as much as experienced. A PLN enables us to continue our path to Lifelong Learning.

Read Full Post »

Lack of Discipline

Posted in Administrator, Banning, Child Predator, EdChat, Education, Filtering, Leadership, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking on August 21, 2010| 11 Comments »

Based on my experience and observations I have learned one or two things about discipline policies in schools. First, an effective discipline policy is often not mentioned by staff members because it is a non-issue. An ineffective discipline policy can dominate the complaints and become a demoralizing factor with any staff. It also does not serve as a model for students to understand that there are consequences for poor decisions.

The effectiveness of any discipline policy will rely on the person in charge of enforcing it. This is often put down as the function of the principal or, on the secondary level, an assistant principal. The enforcement or interpretation of the policy by that person goes a long way in making the policy effective or not. For that reason many schools have spelled out the possible infractions, as well as the escalating consequences for repeat offenses. This limits interpretation making it fair for all offenders. It also limits the pleading parents pointing out the Johnny did the same thing and received no punishment, and asking,”Why are you persecuting my child and letting Johnny go Scott-free?”

Until recently, most offenses were familiar to administrators. There were enough repetitive offenses to examine, catalog, and even predict things that kids would do, which would require consequences. Armed with such a list the best course of action would be to: list them out, assign consequences, develop a repeat offense clause with escalating consequences, publish the Discipline Policy, read it to all students, and finally send a copy to the parents, getting a signature indicating their understanding of the policy. All of that being done, all is right with the world or at least the world of school.

The Fly in the ointment; Technology has now arrived on the scene. It brings unpredicted behavior. It is wrapped in myths and misconceptions. The reality for administrators is that perception is reality for teachers and parents. If teachers and parents buy the myths than the administrator often bases the discipline policy on those perceptions, or misconceptions. This accounts for the development of other policies: Internet safety, Cyber-bullying, Banning the Internet, and Banning cell phones.

I am in not in any way minimizing the dangers of the internet. There is danger in the lack of understanding and in the misuse and abuse of any technology. But these issues cannot be solely addressed in one discipline policy. They are as much a matter of teaching and learning as they are a matter of disciplinary action.

Cyber bullying is extremely devastating, but it is a modern form of Bullying. It does not have to be a separate policy. Bullying is something every district should be addressing as early as possible. Being a good citizen extends to the digital world. We need to teach kids to deal with those issues that they need to know for their world. When I was a kid the computers we had, took up a room and ordinary people had no access, but we had bullies. The way it was handled then was to teach self-defense and tell the kid to stand up to the bully and try to beat the crap out of him (bullies often thought to be males in those days).

The issue of Bullying was brought to the forefront of Education after the Columbine massacre. I do not know if it was Cyber bullying or the regular version that set that into motion. I do not know if the percentage of cyber bullying exceeds the percentage of everyday intimidation by non-digital bullies. My point is we need to address the concept of bullying in any form and not concentrate or address one form over another.

The new debate is the removal of the barriers of walls, time, and distance. Technology allows bullies to intimidate students in other buildings and after school hours. This is not an easy issue for many administrators to handle. For others it is as simple as any other bullying issue. The student’s safety and security in the learning environment are paramount. If a student is being bullied by someone face to face or digitally because of their contact within the learning environment it must be dealt with by the administrator. That is one of the many things they are suppose do.

Another issue is the banning of all cell phones because students text during class. To me it is another short-sighted policy which can easily be addressed in a discipline policy. First, I taught on the secondary level for 34 years and for every class during each of those years, I established rules for the classroom. If I was teaching that level today, I would address the proper use and etiquette of the Mobile Learning Devise in the classroom. I teach college now and the first question I would ask myself if I have a student texting during my class is “what am I not doing to engage this kid in learning? It would be on me initially. If it continues after my adjustments then a discipline policy should cover a continued infraction. I would never ask an administrator to enact a school-wide policy because I could not enforce rules in my class.

Finally, my soapbox issue, the banning of the internet because students may access inappropriate material is another knee-jerk policy. I have discussed this issue in many previous posts. In this post however, it is purely from a discipline point of view. It is my contention that we must educate our students about the internet from early on. They need to be taught what is appropriate and what is not. We need to teach them good digital citizenry and then we may hold them accountable. Appropriate use of technology should be a part of any discipline policy today. The rub comes in kids understanding of appropriate use. As it is now many kids get their internet experience “from the Streets” because we are not addressing it in the schools at age-appropriate times. We cannot hold them responsible for what we refuse to teach.

Of course there is also the perception that children will be lured from the schools and be molested by an internet lurking child predator. This has happened and there is no denying that. It is also probably one of the biggest fears parents have in regard to their children. When we look at the real numbers of child molestation however, we need to understand it is more likely (about 90% likely) that a child will be molested by a family member or a close family friend. Are we addressing this in schools? I think it is not possible to Ban families.

Without a safe and secure teaching environment we cannot expect the level of learning we need to happen the way we expect. It requires thought and consideration to address the real issues to protect and discipline kids. This is a topic close to the hearts of many educators, and as such I expect a great many comments. I also realize that one’s position in the system will affect the perspective on this issue. I expect administrators’ comments to be different from teachers’ comments. Have at it folks, or should I say, have at me!