Technology | My Island View

Archive for the ‘Technology’ Category

Why Change?

Posted in Administrator, Education, Leadership, Reform, Skills, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking on April 23, 2010| 12 Comments »

Technology in our society should be more than a topic for superintendents and principals to use in speeches in order to make them sound as if they are cutting-edge educators. These speeches are given to impress groups of parents by drawing great pictures of students, who will have the ability to create, collaborate, communicate and learn with the modern tools of technology. The picture drawn shows our children liberated to learn. They sell the sizzle, but nobody will ever get to see the steak.

Those same technology tools for education become problems to be controlled and limited. They become problems because they are yet another element of education that requires Professional Development. They become problems as added items on an ever-growing list of items for which administrators are to be held responsible to the public. They become problems because they challenge many of the methods of teaching ingrained in the hearts and minds of many, many educators. These problems are of: money, implementation, support, professional development, safety, morality, cyber-bullying, scheduling, and infrastructure. We now have education policy makers making policies about technology with a limited understanding of how it fits in education as a tool for learning, or even how it works, and viewing it as more of a hindrance than a help. It would be so much easier if Technology went away and we could get back to the “Three R’s”, good ole’ read’n, rite’n, and rithmetic.

What many do not get is that Technology in Education is no longer a topic of Should we? or Could we?, but rather, “ How do we make it happen?” It is not a question of “How do we control it? but rather “How do we educate kids to use it effectively and responsibly?” How do we develop today’s literacy, so that students can use these skills beyond the classroom and apply them to life? How do we enable them to use these skills to be productive and successful and safe?

There are no answers here. These same arguments were made when the first computers entered the system. People discussed the same issues then. While educators are stuck on the same questions as to whether or not technology has a place in education, technology keeps moving forward. It does not need permission to be used by kids. Educators cannot control it. The only place the “Use It, or Lose it” axiom applies, is to our own relevance. If we fail to understand and use the technology, our students will not need us at some point. Technology is a tool and not a teacher, but if teachers fail to grasp that concept and do not embrace the possibilities, the idea of self-education may grow stronger with the advancement of technology in the light of stagnation in education. Educators are smart people and they need to figure this stuff out.

We did not have the use of pencil debates. We did not say pencils can poke eyes out, so we need pencil safety courses. We did not create pencil labs for large group pencil use. We did not ban the use of pencils because students might be distracted by doodling. We did require a specific platform, the #2 Pencil. Yes, I understand that it is a much more complex issue than that, but a tool is a tool is a tool. We need our leaders to be more aware of the decisions they are making. We do not need 19^th century thinking controlling 21^st century problems.

These topics were discussed at the #140 Character Conference in New York City. There were six education discussions on the Agenda. This video was one. The Education Panel Video: Click Here

Another passionate presentation was done by Chris Lehmann. That video is linked Click here.

Feel free to pass the videos or Post along to anyone that you think might benefit from the information.

Read Full Post »

IWB’s Help or Hurt?

Posted in Administrator, EdChat, Education, Interactive White Board, IWB's, Leadership, Ning, PLN, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Skills, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Twitter on April 17, 2010| 41 Comments »

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 »

ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM

Posted in Education, Leadership, Reform, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking on March 13, 2010| 16 Comments »

The word “Passion” is often thrown around by educators when it comes to educational reform. It has also appeared in more and more tweets and Edchat comments. That is probably a result of it being so difficult to promote change within the Educational Community. Ordinary enthusiasm is often not enough to get it done. One reason for this is that, as educators, we have been conditioned to believe that once a movement for change comes banging at our door, if we wait long enough, it will go away. Sometimes, it depends on who has the most passion for their cause, in this world of winners and losers, to wait it out. Whoever has the most passion to hang in the longest wins. Unfortunately, this often takes us to a place where it is about what is best for us, and not what is best for our students.

Since I am passionate about education, and accessible to other educators in several social media venues, many people share with me their stories of wins and losses in the battle for educational reform. That is not a phrase I select without thought. There is passion amongst the 10 to 15 % of people who will always be satisfied with education as it remains today and also as it was yesterday. They are passionate for what some refer to as a comfort level, but it is in reality a call for the “Status Quo”. If it was good enough for me, it’s good enough for my kids!” They attempt to recruit as many to their cause, as do the reformers to theirs. This creates the “us and them” mentality that hurts collaboration. Need I mention the word “PARTISANSHIP”?

An experience shared with me recently, may serve as a good example of the problem faced by passionate reformers. It is a typical story like many told to me on a regular basis. This incident took place in the arena of Higher Education, but it could have taken place at any level. It occurred at a Professional Development workshop conducted by an educator who is interested in integrating technology and learning. The workshop addressed how to incorporate Web 2.0 tools into lessons. Everything seemed to be going well, until the end of the presentation when the participants were asked for questions or reflections.

One professor passionately motivated to share his views stood up before the group to respond. Since this came to me second-hand, I cannot be exact, but he said something to the effect that, if anyone needed to get information to him, they need not text, twitter, message, or email him. They should simply talk to him. It was good enough for him, so it is good enough for his students. Furthermore, what was the need for this tech stuff anyway? These kids know how to do this stuff when they come to us. (So much for formative assessment.) The workshop obviously was not working its magic with that Professor. But wait, there is more! If you believe in edtech reform, the part of the story which may cause you to start “screen-screaming”, is this; the audience of educators applauded the statement.

That might almost be enough for some to run from that room into the streets screaming “All is Lost, All is Lost!” But alas, we must remember these were the words of a “Ten-Percenter” and not necessarily the opinion of the majority. We all have the right to make personal decisions. The nature of these decisions however, is just that, personal. They should be decisions affecting us individually and our families. As educators our decisions have a ripple effect that goes out and touches the lives of many individuals. If we make a personal decision to live in a cave that is fine, it is our right. We do not have a right to make others live in a cave with us.

Tradition, however, falls on the side of the “ten-percenters” when it comes to Education. A majority of our society sat at desks in rows looking at the blackboard, or squinting at an overhead, or listening to scratchy records and tapes. They may have watched movies on film, film strips or video tapes. We were even used to filling out mimeographed worksheets. Those are all familiar tools which made a majority of us comfortable. These tools are also in the process of disappearing. We will no longer see them. Some are gone already. It may be the time to get out of the horse and buggy and ease into the car. YES, it is true a good teacher needs no tech to be good! It is also true that a good teacher with tech can be better!

I hope this is more than a re-hash of things I have said so many times before, but rather, a call to passionate change agents of educational reform, not to be discouraged. The “ten-Percenters” are the reason so many call for the tearing down of the system. The reason so many say we can’t wait for these people to die off. I believe passionately that is a radical approach. We need to keep plugging away at change. These people are dedicated and educated individuals who may need to be cajoled into a level of comfort with technology. To those who totally refuse the call to change, we may need to ignore. They will be revealed as time passes them by. To those who remain passionate in their pursuit of reform, I would say in my best dialect free Latin, ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM, which sounds much more intelligent than its English translation, “Don’t let the bastards grind you down”.

Read Full Post »

PLN’s, Parties, and Pajamas.

Posted in Blog, Education, Ning, PLN, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Twitter on February 26, 2010| 41 Comments »

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 21^st 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 »

The 3 R’s of Industry

Posted in Education, Homework, Reform, Technology, Thought Provoking on February 21, 2010| 9 Comments »

I know as I begin this post that there will be any number of readers who will run to their bookshelves to find references to nail me on some of the observations that I am about to put into print. Sorry, I should have used the term” text”. Additionally, those people are not running to bookshelves with hard copies of textbooks or encyclopedias. I forgot we are in the 21^st Century and we use computers and search engines. It is sometimes easy to forget. I would hope that comments of this post could bring some clarity to that which I often find confusing. This is the twenty-first Century.

As long as I can remember, I have always pictured the birth of our public education to have started in a conference room of factory building somewhere in the northeast. In my little vision I see captains of industry getting together and determining that if the United States was to move ahead as a manufacturing giant in a someday-to-be world economy, U.S. workers needed to come to work with skills that would be needed to support that industrial effort. We needed them to have a work ethic and a culture that would lend itself to the needs of industry. Of course someone pointed out that not all of America was industrial, so some concessions would be made. To placate Agriculture, they allowed farmers to have their child laborers from June until after the Harvest in August. Of course we needed uniformity, so they extended those dates to be common to all schools.

The idea was to set up the schools just like industry. They started the school day in the A.M. and the shift would then go to the afternoon. An eight-hour day would be great, but these are young people, so they shortened the shift by an hour. They could always get that hour back by giving kids work to take home. They set up little groups to train the needed skills, Reading, Riting, and Rithmetic. That was a cute way to name the needed skills, the 3 R’s. This is the Job for kids. If the kids show that they get it, they would get a promotion in their job as long as their manager approved. Each of the factories would be managed by a small group of managers under one overall lead manager. That manager, called the principal, would develop the schedules and make sure everyone puts the hours in.

This is how I pictured it in my mind. The facts do not really matter, so do not run to Google to download a firsthand account of who was where, and who said what back on the day as they thought all this up. None of that is important, because the reality is that this industrial model of Public Education is what we deal with as part of our culture. It matters not where it came from. Over the centuries, research has not changed this model. We still have our 8-3 shift. We still send our kids home for the summer to work the crops. We still group kids together and give promotions. We still focus on the 3 R’s. This is all despite the fact that research has supported doing things in a much different way in most, if not all, of those areas.

To take this industrial model a step further our society has come to believe that educators are manufacturing a product. People are paying taxes to support education and they need to know what their Return on Investment is. Hence, the Standardized tests were introduced. They provide an easy explanation, and a way to measure the needed skills of Reading, Riting, and, Rithmetic. It would seem that this is the product people expect to be manufactured. This is what is needed by our labor force to get and maintain job. That must be the goal of education, a job.

Now, I wonder is there a need to change what everyone chooses to believe. Centuries of time couldn’t do it. Research couldn’t do it. An economic downturn couldn’t do it. Huge unemployment numbers do not seem to be doing it. Even the collective common sense some educational leaders seem to have at times has had no effect. It would seem that people are demanding change to get a better Return on their Investment, but they want this without allowing any change to take place. I think that may for me be the most confusing part.

If we are to keep this industrial model, can we agree on what the product is? Can we restructure our workforce? Can we fairly hold managers accountable? Can we update our manufacturing tools with technology? Can we improve our work schedules?

If we cannot do all of that, an alternative might be to examine if this industrial model of educations is still the way to go. Is it serving us the way it should. If the safety, security and continuation of our society and democracy is dependent on the product of Education, it is incumbent upon us to get it right. It is a growing concern that I have, while I watch the 6:30 P.M. News each evening. It is my twentieth Century habit that increases my Twenty-First Century concerns.

Read Full Post »

Learning Olympics

Posted in Education, Ning, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking on February 15, 2010| 8 Comments »

I was somewhat stumped as to how to engage my Methods students after two snow days and the Presidents’ Day Holiday. My worries were short-lived, since I developed a Ning site for my Methods’ students, so that they could continue learning even without the use of college grounds or a classroom. I am not a tech geek, but a practical educator. I know that I need to engage my students beyond the classroom in time and space.

I have several educational videos on the site, but two served my purpose well. One was an interview with Howard Gardner on Multiple Intelligences and the other was Myths and Opportunities: Technology in the Classroom by Alan November. I asked my students to view both videos and discuss the merging of ideas of these educators. To add another dimension, I also said that they may want to consider Bloom’s Taxonomy in their positions. I sat back and asked, How good am I? (Totally Rhetorical)

After the first few responses I began to question my teaching methods. The early student responses were saying that technology was an encumbrance to education. I had one student argue that cashiers could not make proper change unless the cash register told them how much change to give. The argument was blaming the technology for the cashier’s inability to make change in his or her head without the aid of the register. I did not point out that the cashier probably would not have had that job if the technology was not compensating for what the cashier did not learn in school. We sometimes view the same things, but perceive them differently.

Of course, I was upset with the initial responses. I wanted these students to learn what I know and take it further. Based on the initial responses, that was not going to happen. I felt that I had gone wrong in my presentations of technology as a tool in education. How could these students move education forward, if they fail to understand the technology component as clearly as I do? Yes that is totally arrogant on my part, but it is important to me to have my students be relevant. Technology, to me, makes them relevant educators.

This was a little too much to deal with. After all, the Olympic games were going on. I was upset, but I decided to put it aside to watch and enjoy the Olympics. Of course that did not work out. The initial discussions from my students were turning over in my mind. Why didn’t they get it? I know that I taught that technology is only a tool and not the education.

As I watched the Olympics I was thinking of how I could get a redo on this topic of technology as a tool for educators? That was the very moment that NBC, trying to fill a period of time when nothing was going on, did a piece on the garments created for the skiers to keep them warm and dry, as well as massage the athlete’s muscles. It was technology at its best. From that point forward, I honed in on all of the technological advances that helped the Olympic athletes. Clothing, sleds, skis, gloves, skates and anything else that an athlete needed was being tweaked by technology. Technology was the tool to help the athlete complete the event.

That is when I saw it. If learning was the event and students were the athletes what would they need to get to the end of the event? What technology could we provide to get them to achieve the goal. We did not need suits, gloves, or skis, but tools for collaboration, exploration, and communication. If athletes in the Olympics use tools of technological advancement to succeed at their events, then students in schools may use tools of technological advancement to succeed at learning. Teachers are not replaced by the tools, they become the coaches. Much like today’s athletes who participate in various events in the Olympics, students participate in learning. To succeed in attaining that goal, technology is a tool to get the student there. It enables him or her to get there faster and with richer experience then in the years past.

After I came to this realization and what I considered a great analogy, I went back to the discussion page of my class Ning site. I was happy to see a large number of contributions to the discussion. Many of the new entries exhibited a clear understanding of technology as a tool for learning and not the end result.I may have been to quick in my early assessment. Many students were smart enough to quote not only my words from classes, but also many of the wise words from my Blog posts. They were using technology to pump up the professor’s Ego. After all of my reflection and assessment, I may have accomplished my objective with a number of my students without going over it again and beating their knuckles with a ruler. That was the old school method.

Read Full Post »

The Little Red Schoolhouse

Posted in Education, Ning, PLN, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Twitter on February 11, 2010| 15 Comments »

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 »

We Are #EdChat!

Posted in EdChat, Education, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking on February 3, 2010| 33 Comments »

I was attending college in West Virginia when Marshall University’s football team went down in a devastating plane crash. The Movie We are Marshall has always had a special meaning for me as a result of that geographical and emotional connection. I was always moved by the community rallying to the support of the team and the University. As I remember, 40 years ago, the sense of community was as true in life, as it was portrayed in the movie.

The sense of community has a great deal to do with social media as I see it. There are no rules in social media. There are pockets of groups that are governed by a sense of purpose for a specific interest or a specific topic. This can be by an occupation, an industry, a family, a common disease, a hobby, a heritage, or any common experience of those who formed that community. What governs the group is its common purpose to advance its cause in a collaborative effort by the members.

There are some social media sites that establish rules for their site. They can also establish them to be private or public. There is but one final consequence for those who ignore the rules on a site. They are banned from the group. It is a setting on the site that group managers have.

Twitter is totally public. One may determine who to follow and even, to an extent, who will follow back. There is a setting for blocking followers from contact. These determinations are made by whom an individual wants to include in their personal network. Each tweeter sets his or her own standards for acceptance of his or her network members.

I, along with many other educators, have set up Professional or Personal Learning Networks, PLN’s. Our common interest is Education. Some educators narrow that down to specific subject areas, and some are generalists. Having taught in the K-12 world for 34 years and now Higher Education for the last three years, I consider myself a generalist with a leaning toward increasing technology as a tool for education. I have found technology to be a common interest of many educators on my PLN since that is what brings us together in this medium.

That is the backdrop for the facts about the formation of #EdChat. I think this needs to be recorded somewhere, so that those who join today understand what it is and not be confused by what others say it is. I along with Steve Anderson and Shelly Terrell are the founders of #EdChat. It grew from our experiences with Twitter and our PLN.

I often engage members of my PLN in discussions about education. The topic of choice is usually reforming Education to get it more involved with Technology tools for learning. For my PLN, this is the topic that binds us. Since some meaningful and substantive discussions were only visible to members of my PLN who were online at that time, I wanted more. Collaborative learning works best when you can collaborate. We had the subject, but we needed the people. Shelly suggested that we post out a discussion topic and we hashtag it so that anyone could follow. #EdChat was an unused hashtag so we put it in place. We soon found that others had ideas for topics. Steve Anderson contributed the #EdChat Poll.

Each week we place 5 topics on a poll for people to select a topic for discussion. Topics are suggested, or they are developed by popular discussions on the PLN that week, or they are topics that are being discussed by educators at various Educational conferences. Again, I remind you, many of our PLN members have technology in common, and it is a concern that comes to the surface often. This is how we started and developed #EdChat. These are the facts and not the myth. I believe we started in August of 2009.We have now grown beyond or own PLN. Our topics, however, have remained true to our objective. They are: general educational concerns, often Technology-in-Education concerns, reform topics, and general Pedagogical concerns.

We originally had one EdChat discussion on Tuesdays, at 7 PM EST. This was not meeting the needs of many of European members in consideration of the different Time Zones. We added a 12 noon EST EdChat to include them. This allowed more coverage of several topics and avoided duplication. We use the first topic choice for our largest group at 7 and the second most popular topic for the noon session. We try to recycle Topics not selected and we add new Topics from suggestions and discussions on the PLN or the EdChat discussion. We have archived most of our EdChats, but we did not do this at the beginning. Our EdChat archives reside on The Educator’s PLN Ning site, http://edupln.ning.com.

#EdChat has now become more than when we started. We have received national attention in more than one educational journal. We have been represented at a number of Educational Conferences. The hashtag #edchat is now tagged on to many educational tweets making it a 24/7 depository of educational tweets. That takes it beyond the 7 and noon use of the hashtag.

The community that is Edchat, determines the membership. Anyone interested in the discussion of the topic chosen by the community is welcomed to join. The value of members’ tweets is determined by participating members. If they want to engage another member they will. Often there are satellite discussions going on within an EdChat. It is like a great party where members can travel from one group to another and engage in a discussion that was prompted by the original Topic. We have hundreds of participants and over a thousand tweets in a one hour period.

EdChat is about an exchange of ideas. It has had an impact on the educational community based on references in Blogs, journals , and conferences. As one of the founders of Edchat I have laid out the facts as I know them. I hope that this dispels any misinformation that people may have about Edchat. It is a community of collaborative Educators whose only agenda is to improve education from their perspective of understanding. Often, but not always that is a perspective in the use of Technology.

It should be noted that this is a formula that was successful for us. It is also being duplicated by others who had specific topics that concerned their communities. We do not own the formula anyone can use it. There is a parent group chat and a gifted and talented chat there was even a Portuguese Edchat. Social media affords many ways that individuals may address their community needs. If Edchat is not meeting your specific needs please use the same strategies and tools as #EdChat to meet your needs.

That is EdChat as I understand it. That is as a founder, and a participant in all but a few of many EdChats conducted since August. You are free to comment here. I would hope that you will try to respond to what Edchat is, and not what others with far less EdChat experience say it is.

Read Full Post »

The Old West.

Posted in Education, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on February 1, 2010| 10 Comments »

Back in the late 50’s one of my favorite shows was Wyatt Earp, starring Hugh O’Brien. Wyatt Earp carried a gun called the “Buntline Special”. It was a gun designed by Ned Buntline a journalist, who designed a pistol with an extra long barrel. As an adult, I realized that it must have been barrel envy that prompted so many gunfights with Wyatt.

The one Law that Wyatt insisted on in the old west town of Tombstone Arizona, was “No Guns Allowed”. Firearm technology had advanced so much that the Colt .45 was a weapon that had to be restricted. There were laws to protect citizens, but Wyatt thought it to be easier to collect all firearms as the men (women played no significant part in TV westerns) entered the town. It was a pain in the neck but way easier than dealing with those cowpokes using their guns. As the song went on Wyatt Earp, Wyatt Earp, Brave, Courageous, and Bold. Wyatt Earp, Wyatt Earp, long may his story be told.Fifty years later I am still telling the story.

Moving ahead in the space-time continuum I found myself visiting the 1964 world’s fair in Flushing, New York. You may remember the site of the Fair as it was imortalized in the movie Men in Black. That fair was about the Future. Most of the pavilions hosted exhibits telling of what life would be like in the 21st Century. They promised Flying Cars, my favorite prediction. Many of the exhibits talked about the Technology of the future and how kids would learn using Technology. I do not remember the specifics since that was so many years ago, but I loved future predictions like: Someday kids will have powerful computers the size of a deck of cards. These computers will be able to seek out and deliver information in various forms to these kids. They would be able to exchange ideas and collaborate globally. Back in 1964 that would have been a radical concept way beyond anything in existence.

Shortly after that World’s Fair, we landed men on the Moon. Amazingly, many of those World’s Fair predictions have come true. I am still waiting for those Flying cars. Now we move closer to the 21st Century. No more of the Old West is left. Technology has moved at a rapid pace since that Fair. Kids carry in their pockets computers that are more powerful than those used to place men on the moon. Students may use these computers for all that was predicted. For an educator it is beyond imagination to have students equipped with the ability to access information pertinent to learning at any time. These tools of technology go way beyond anything really imagined from the 60’s.

Now I need to tie things together so that this all makes sense. In many districts across the land we have educational leaders who see themselves as Wyatt Earp. They have discipline policies in place. Every class has rules generated by the teacher, or collaboratively agreed upon by the class itself. There are established consequences for inappropriate actions. With all of this in place educators are not inclined to enforce their own discipline policies. NO CELLPHONES ALLOWED. This is not the wild west. Whatever happened to Brave , Courageous and Bold?

If a kid is using a cellphone in class, a teacher needs to do two things. First enforce the rule addressing inappropriate behavior in class. Second, reflect on why a student finds more engagement in cellphone use than engagement in the lesson for the day! As educators we are the adults in the room. We need to Guide our students to appropriate behavior. In addition we need to model appropriate behavior. There are many teachers using their cellphones at inappropriate times.

We are dealing with many issues that did not exist even a few years ago. We need to proceed using common sense and focus on what is needed to promote and support Learning. Our students are not indentured servants. We have to guide them with the same respect we expect from them. I can only hope that a short time from now we will look back on these wild west policies of leaving cellphones at the door and ask, “What the hell were we thinking?’ Let us strive to harness the power of these very personal computers and have our students use them to engage in learning, and save its other functions for more appropriate times. While we are at it let’s direct students to use technology for speeding along the invention and implementation of flying cars. My selfish request.

Read Full Post »

Research Questions.

Posted in Education, Reform, Teched, Technology on January 29, 2010| 10 Comments »

My big concern in starting to write a Blog was if I could post with consistency and frequency. I feared that I would run out of things to say, or I wouldn’t be able to produce posts quickly enough to hold an audience. I have discovered that Twitter, and all that becomes associated with it, keeps that from happening. I often recollect the only memorable line from Godfather III. ”Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!” , Thanks Al Pacino.

I had such a moment this week as I observed a live-streamed meeting in a land far away. I added to the backchannel stream with Twitter as I watched the action (I felt very techie). Backchanneling is tweeting comments about the meeting as it is in progress. Often the Twitterstream is projected on a screen in the room for all to see. The topic was Tech in ed . I was stopped in my tracks by one committee member, identified as a Professor, who asked a question about the research supporting the use of Tech in Education. Honestly, I don’t even remember the exact words, because to me the exact words did not really matter. I was already too busy screen-screaming at my computer.

This is not 1975. Technology is here. Technology is a tool to retrieve and transmit information. Information is what we need for learning. We retrieve information. We analyze information. We interpret information. We restructure information. We exchange information with others. We respond to information from others. We create with information. We even create original information.(notice small direct sentences and easy, understandable vocabulary)

With all of that clearly and simply stated, an educator should be asking a different question. What does the research tell me about the best tool to use with my lesson? Research should help determine the best way to use technology in relation to information needed. We may find that, for a specific lesson, the pencil technology serves us best. For other lessons word processing technology is needed. As educators we should know the difference and how we want to use the tools.I am keeping the examples simple for the purpose of common experiences. Some web 2.0 applications have no meaning to some educators, so they would not serve as good examples. That is telling in itself.

It is my opinion that a question from any educator in 2010 about research in technology and learning is only code for something else. To me it says” I am happy with what I am doing and you can’t make me do it any differently, because science is not on your side!” That is my view, so do not run to the comment box, since that is my perception which makes it my reality. It does not have to be yours.

Unfortunately, over my long career I have seen research cause trends which are the rage for a while, but then fade away. It has conditioned educators not to pay so much attention to whatever is happening now, because next year it may be gone. Educators should now be aware however, that technology is not such an educational fad. It no longer needs justification with research. It is here to stay and it is moving forward. It is the educational system that is becoming stagnant.

I believe in research in Education. Research in learning and how we learn is valuable. The tools that we use are also important, but they are not the end all in learning. Think of technology as informational delivery systems. Information In! Information Out! If one tool is better than another for a teacher to accomplish the goal, then select the best tool.

If all Educators believed in research as well, especially those who ask about tech and learning research, we might be looking at a different education system. Bloom’s Taxonomy would direct us to creative learning instead of lecturing facts. So, educators, be careful of what you wish, for it may yet require you to change. There is so much research that is ignored by educators in their day-to-day teaching , that it seems somewhat hypocritical to call upon research to fend off the use of technology.

The next time you are in a meeting which is discussing Technology and Education, be wary of those who ask if research supports the use of technology in Education. That person may be asking a question, but stating something completely different. That was my take-away from that educational meeting in a land far away that I attended and participated in and learned. That would not have been done without the tools of technology. Come to think of it the tools of technology have you here with me now. Does the research matter to you?