Truth | My Island View

Archive for the ‘Truth’ Category

What’s Our Stake in High Stakes Testing?

Posted in Administrator, Assessment, EdChat, Education, Leadership, Mentoring, PLN, Reform, Seniority, Skills, Social Media, Student teaching, Teacher, Teacher assessment, Teched, Technology, Tenure, Thought Provoking, Truth on January 7, 2011| 15 Comments »

If you are not familiar with #Edchat, it is a Twitter discussion on specific topics held every Tuesday at Noon and 7 PM EST. A full explanation may be found at this Link: https://tomwhitby.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/edchat-revisited/. I am revealing in this post that I am the one who makes up a bulk of the #Edchat Topic choices. We do get some outside contributions, but each week I try to lift relevant topics from the Twitterstream and current Educational Blogs to explore further in an #Edchat discussion. It has been a successful formula thus far. My dilemma however, is always when is it a good time to revisit a topic. I recently received a comment from an educator that stated he always found the topic choices very interesting, but eventually we would need to discuss Standardized Testing or High Stakes Testing as a topic. Actually, #Edchat has discussed this topic in the past. The problem I have however is that in trying to keep the pulse of education concerns, Standardized Testing is the one topic that has an overwhelming majority of educators mentioning their opposition on a daily basis. Educators seem to be in agreement that Standardized Testing is a major roadblock to Education Reform. One growing opinion seems to be that the emphasis has become the tests and not the education.

Assessment has been and always will be part of education. A simple explanation: As educators we use Formative assessment to make sure we are succeeding with our students as we go. Do they get it? This allows for adjustments along the way. The Summative assessment tells educators how successful the complete endeavor was. After all is said and done, have the students gotten it? Educators do this to determine the next step, so they may continue to build on this education. This is the teacher’s assessment of learning for the purpose of the determining of what comes next. The curriculum is the roadmap of where to go. The assessments tell the teacher if the students are there yet. Teachers can always take students beyond the original destination.

Now we should look at High stakes testing. Its purpose is to accumulate data on education. Data requires simple, objective answers that are easily converted to numbers for analysis. As a former English teacher, I often envied Math teachers whose test answers were either right or wrong. As an English teacher I was always trying to figure out shades of right or wrong with essays. That oversimplification of math testing is less true of Math today with the changes that have been made requiring more of an explanation of reasoning. I hope no math teachers were offended.

The purpose of High Stakes testing seems to be changing. If it was originally intended to assess where we were with student learning in order to offer directions for places to improve, we may have strayed from that goal. It is now used to: determine funding, determine remediation, determine school closings, determine careers, and as a stretch, determine elections. These reasons have little to do with what educators use testing for.

Of course there is a simple solution; Teach to the test. That would give everyone what was needed. A problem with this however is that it will not work. It will not work because it does not consider all of the other factors involved in a student’s education; poverty, environment, culture, and even family relationships. How do we ask questions for the purpose of converting these factors into data in order to take all of this into account? Of course a more obvious reason teaching to the test won’t work is that it is not educating any one. Teaching to the test is preparing kids for a Jeopardy round, not life.

Now here is where I begin to sound like a conspiracy theorist. I, along with almost everyone in America, recognize that we are in a dire economic period. I understand we need to cut costs and increase revenue, and we will all need to sacrifice. One of our greatest expenses is education. Education has been highlighted as a political concern. It is apparent to some of us that the call for education Reform is code for cut taxes. The high stakes tests are not being used to examine and address changes in methods and curriculum as much as to vilify teachers. This call for reform by some is not a call for education reform, but rather a call for labor reform. It is a call to do away with Unions and due process for teachers. These tests are not being used to free teachers to innovate, but rather to begin to dismantle public education for the purpose of privatization for profit.

How can so many educators on every level be so opposed to high stakes testing and still it thrives? How can the mixed to dismal results of a Charter School movement still allow politicians to call for more Charter Schools? How can the influence on education by Poverty, Race, Environment, and Family go unrecognized as factors in need of reform?

We do need to reform education, but we need a better understanding of what changes will have a meaningful effect. There are many things that unions and teachers can do to affect change, but the greater changes however need to be made in methods and focus of curriculum. The emphasis of needed skills for a growing technology-driven society will be another game changer.

Assessment is needed and has a purpose in education. We need to focus assessments on the learning and not the Labor. The vast majority of educators are intelligent, dedicated, people-oriented, sharers. They may need to be given guidance and professional development in the latest methods and technologies, but they are the best source we have to support our education system. Firing teachers, closing schools, busting unions, and dismantling Public Education may be Reform to some, but to many others this is a destructive path. We need educational leaders to stand up and be heard on this. Voices of education need to be heard over those voices of business and politics and vocal disgruntled taxpayers. ( We are probably all disgruntled about taxes.)

Now I have to put up an #Edchat Topic dealing with High Stakes Testing. Your comments are welcomed here.

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 »

Tenure’s Tenure

Posted in Administrator, conference, Education, Leadership, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Seniority, Teacher, Tenure, Thought Provoking, Truth on September 28, 2010| 28 Comments »

It was only two days ago that I attended the Education Nation Town Hall meeting in New York City that was hosted by NBC and sponsored by a bunch of businesses. The entire event took place in what amounted to an elaborate Tent. There were several hundred educators there of all ages and from many schools, representing both Public and Charter School educators. I commented on the shortcomings of this meeting in my last post, so I will not cover that ground again. There was one striking comment however, from one young educator that sent chills down my spine, only to have them go up my spine by the applause that followed her statement. As an educator of 40 years, I was truly awed and upset. Her statement was that she did not need Tenure. She only wanted to be evaluated on her teaching and she was confident she would have a job the next year. She saw no need for Tenure (down the spine). TEACHERS then applauded (back up the spine).

The sound of fingernails on the blackboard for that statement ripped into me. What she was asking for is what Tenure IS. It is a guarantee of due process. It guarantees that the only thing you can be fired for is that which you are responsible for in your teaching duties. What you CAN be fired for under the Tenure law is: Misconduct, Incompetence, Insubordination, Physical or Mental Disability, Neglect of Duty, or a Lack of Teaching Certificate. Additionally, it cannot be a blind accusation, it must be documented. It is also presented at a hearing with all parties under oath. This guarantees fairness in firing people. Why would any teacher say they don’t need that? If the world were as this young teacher assumes it is, having all teachers judged on the merits of their teaching, it would be a wonderful world. History shows us that it has not always been so. Forty years of experience gives me a firsthand account of history.

If it were not for Tenure, I know I would not have survived 34 years in the Public School System. I would have been fired, not for a lack of teaching skills, but for being a vocal advocate for learning and fairness. I stood up publicly and confronted administrators, Superintendents and Board of Education members when I did not agree with policies they were mandating which were not in the best interest of kids. These administrators were not bad people, just misinformed. As Educators we deal with ideas and everyone has opinions about ideas. Some people are threatened by certain ideas. If we, as educators find truth in those ideas, we use our best skills and passion to teach them. If someone in power disagrees with those ideas, our effective teaching becomes a threat. As educators we work under people who are political by the nature of their positions. Sometimes administrators prefer dealing with the person pointing out a problem as an easier task than addressing the problem itself. In this era of economic despair budgets are being cut. Education Reform too many is code for cut my taxes. With senior, experienced teachers making the highest salaries, what better way to cut expenses? Teaching quality be damned. Tenure protects educators from these attacks. It insures our academic freedom as an educator. Again, it only guarantees due process; it does not guarantee a job for life.

Now let’s talk about why people attribute Tenure to “BAD TEACHERS”. It is the most convenient of excuses for administrators who fail to do the right thing. It is not always their fault, but nevertheless some people are not being held accountable. In order to get Tenure a new teacher is supposed to be observed by several administrators over a three-year period. If at any time during that period a non-tenured teacher does not meet the standard, he/she can be summarily dismissed without explanation. It is reasonable to assume that after three years of administrator observations that an accurate assessment of a new teacher can be made. It is after three years that the recommendation for tenure is made. If no decision is made by the administrator, it does become automatic. That only occurs if the administrator allows it to happen. A big problem in the process is the time administrator’s need to complete the observations that they are required to do. Administrators don’t always get to it. It is not intentional, but many things must be prioritized over the course of the year and observations do not head the list. This is further complicated by the administrator turnover rate. As administrators come and go a clear picture of observed teachers is not always there. There is no continuity for observations or personal conferences. If a teacher is brought up on charges of any kind to force a firing, administrators often do not have the documentation to prove the accusations. It is a quick step to say, I couldn’t fire him because of Tenure. A more truthful statement would be I couldn’t fire him because people did not do a follow-up for the process to prove incompetence. The biggest problem in my estimation however, is that not all administrators are cut out to be leaders who make tough decisions. They do not want to be a bad guy and say we have to let you go after your three years of service. This makes the capable leaders weakened in their attempt to do the right thing.

That being said we need to address the problem. It is not Tenure, but the lack of enforcement of the process that grants Tenure that has the most flaws. The observation process also needs to be addressed. Administrators as well as teachers are often upset when an incompetent teacher fails to be removed. Tenure allows incompetent teachers to be removed as long as it is done fairly. Bad teachers make it bad for all teachers. A union however, has a responsibility to defend all teachers to make sure the rules are equally applied to all.

I am most upset at the scab-picking and bickering by teachers. The ugliness of this reform movement is in the name calling of teachers by teachers: Public school teachers against Charter school teachers; Young teachers against experienced teachers; Non-Tenured Teachers against Tenured teachers. The common word in all of these pairing is teacher. We need to work together for positive change and work to build ourselves up, not tear each other down. Teachers are of the most educated people in our society. We can’t point fingers at folks who teach differently or have different educational philosophies and say they are incompetent, FIRE THEM! We need to push this reform to include teaching teachers and parents as well. We can’t hold people accountable unless we train them for what they are accountable for. Learning is ongoing. We need to professionally develop all of our teachers continually. It is not an expense, but an investment.

By the way, I became a teacher at a time of declining enrollment in New York. I was granted Tenure, but I was excessed (not rehired until September) every year for my first nine years of teaching. I knew I was a good teacher, but had to live with the fact that I had to leave while others, that I deemed not as good, remained in their positions. I still support Tenure and I still support seniority.

If we are moving forward with reform let’s do our best to identify the real problems as educators. We need to take a more prominent role in a discussion that is being hijacked by business people and politicians. I understand that this topic will draw on many emotions based on one’s perspective in the system. Please try to stick to the facts and not address the myths on this. Your comments are welcome.

Read Full Post »

Education Nation Reflection

Posted in Administrator, EdChat, Education, Merit Pay, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Skills, Teacher, Thought Provoking, Truth on September 26, 2010| 13 Comments »

NBC should be commended for shining a light on what should be a national discussion on Education Reform. Expense was not spared to create more than just a venue for this examination of education. It was an atmosphere created from banners hanging from streetlights to a modern tent pavilion which encased the iconic skating rink in Rockefeller Plaza. All of this created an air of excitement and passion to finally gather educators in a public forum to clearly state what so desperately needed to be clearly stated in the pursuit for education reform. With all that sizzle, I could not wait for the steak.

The Town Hall style meeting began with a touching film about the experiences of a first year teacher. It was well received by the several hundred educators under the big tent. That was a great start with all the members of the tent in accord and reminiscing about their first days as a teacher. The next big question further solidified that feeling of solidarity. Do you feel that teachers are under attack? There seemed to be no one standing up and saying, “No, it ain’t so”. It was shortly after this that I viewed the big tent as more of a circus tent with three rings in the center and a different activity in each of the rings. There was no focus.

I understand the Town Hall meetings are for everyone to get up and say their piece, so I really should not be so critical. Maybe I should be critical of the selection of this format as not being the forum of choice to advance Education Reform. It seemed to me anything but productive in moving reform forward. If this were a class discussion, I would say that the teacher needed a better lesson plan. I don’t know if it could have been done in this format, but I wanted a moderator to summarize, focus, refocus and lead with facts and questions. There were some facts flashed on the big boards, but they were not addressed or reflected in the questions or answers from the participants.

One big objection I had with the entire discussion was the lack of definition. I always have problems with people addressing a problem without defining what the problem is. I bet if you asked a dozen of those educators, “what does a successful education look like?”, you would get a dozen variations. We easily point out all of the failure signs, but even the failure signs are determined by standardized tests and few educators agree on that as a valid assessment. One problem we can identify is that we as educators do not all agree on what a good education is let alone how to get there.

The other lack of definition was that of a “Bad Teacher”. The only thing clear as to what a bad teacher was, was the fact that anyone using that term did not include him/herself in that category.I sumized that a “Bad teacher was similar to the definition of pornography. “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it. It always gets ugly when teachers go after teachers. Why do we always find a need to FIRE the offenders? We are teachers. Do we fire our students who don’t get it or do we go back and continue with a different approach. Teachers are amongst the most educated people in this country. One would think that they are at least trainable. Is it possible that some of these “Bad Teachers “are victims of poor leadership and/or a lack of professional development? We are talking about people’s careers. They too had that first day in the classroom experience that we all reminisced in the opening movie.

Where the entire meeting seemed to be sidetracked was when someone brought up the topic of TENURE. As an educator of 40 years it was obvious to me that there is a huge disconnect on the part of young teachers as to what tenure is and why it is necessary. It was also obvious to me how naïve some of these young people are about thinking the only thing that would affect their maintaining a secure teaching position was the quality of their teaching. This subject also seemed, at least to me, to open a rift between Charter School educators and Public School Educators. I was getting a feeling that each felt threatened by the other. This was when I noticed that many of the audience members were wearing shirts identifying their schools. Of course my Hawaiian shirt did not give anyone an inkling as to who, or what I represented.

I came away from the Education Nation Town Hall Meeting more frustrated then when I went in. I understand that by a number of assessments our education system needs to make changes. I consider myself a reform advocate. The changes are many and it will require that we define things clearly and dispel any of the myths that people seem to hold onto from their education experience. Of course, with education the common experience of all citizens of this country with compulsory public education, everyone is an expert. There is no single answer to solve this problem. We can’t fire the Bad teachers and expect all will be right with the world. We also need to be truthful about agendas. Education Reform to many people is the code for “Lower my taxes”. Or fire the most expensive teachers. Or, let’s get in on the profits and make money with charter schools. Or, I need to get re-elected by jumping on the education bandwagon.

We need to make changes in the system, but they must be made by people who have an understanding of the problem. It can’t be left to town hall meetings. These meetings are useful in underscoring the concerns, but emotions tend to cloud the facts. We need educational leadership to step up and replace the business people and politicians who are stealing what should be our issue. We need educators on every level to be aware of not just their problems, but how they fit into the big picture. We need to take responsibility for our actions. We expect nothing less from our students. We need to model that which we teach. We need to be educated about our profession in order to guide the discussions to a positive outcome for reform.

Read Full Post »

A Modest Blog Proposal

Posted in Administrator, Blog, conference, EdChat, Education, Leadership, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter, unconference on September 22, 2010| 53 Comments »

I have really grown tired of the teacher-bashing that is currently being carried out by politicians and media outlets. Teachers are not the cause for educational reform. They are however, the means we need to enact the reform. Teachers often offer positive education reform suggestions with less of an audience than popular media. Since education is their profession, one would think that these suggestions come from experience and training. Those are two elements that are often not evident in many of today’s Education Reform contributors.

I read great suggestions for reform from educational Bloggers on a daily basis. I would like to focus that voice. My suggestion is to have as many educational bloggers who wish to participate, do a Post for positive educational reform on one day. Individual contributions could be a single idea or a range of ideas in an overall plan. There are no limitations on the ideas.

My plan is to have all of these Blog posts come out on the same day. I would have the links to the Blog sites posted on a Wallwisher page with the Post title and the link. We could drive people to the Wallwisher site for a large group link recommendation, as well as the usual twitter link recommendations for individual links.

I have chosen Sunday October 17^th as the day for this effort. It is a Sunday, so the week should be filled with great suggestions being bounced around schools for the entire week. It will give us time to develop ideas and promote the Day. Any individual, who wants to participate, but doesn’t have a blog, may place their post on the Educator’s PLN Blog Page. We could call it Reforms from Educational Bloggers Links of Educational Suggestions, REBELS Day

That is my Plan and I have yet to etch it into the granite slab now on my desk. It would be a great time for your suggestions or refinements.

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 »

Tech Org Reorg

Posted in Administrator, EdChat, Education, Interactive White Board, ISTE, IWB's, Leadership, PLN, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth on June 18, 2010| 9 Comments »

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read Full Post »

Feast of Assumptions

Posted in Administrator, Education, Leadership, Ning, PLN, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Skills, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter on June 3, 2010| 26 Comments »

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read Full Post »

Teacher Lounge PD?

Posted in Administrator, Alfie Kohn, Blog, Education, Leadership, Ning, PLN, Pre-Service teachers, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth, Twitter on May 13, 2010| 15 Comments »

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

]

Read Full Post »

Deal Or No Deal?

Posted in Administrator, Education, Leadership, Reform, Social Media, Teacher, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Truth on April 29, 2010| 59 Comments »

Since I have shifted my news-junkie habits from print media to my computer, I find myself screen-screaming more often than is good for my health. The object of my screaming is often educators who think they are properly taking a stand against the evil encroachment of technology into the education system. For whatever reasons, Tech, and the internet specifically, cause disruption of what, according to many educators, should be a highly controlled environment.

Educators must now deal with distractions from students’ cell phones. Students are texting during class. Students are playing video games during lectures. The cyber bullying is getting out of hand. Kids can be lured from the safety of the school or home by child predators. They can even search for answers to tests on Google or Bing. An even tougher issue to deal with is the children’s ability to access porn. These are some of the problems that educators and parents need to deal with in the 21^st Century. Whether real or imagined, if these problems are negatively affecting our children they need to be addressed. There is no question about their existence, only a difference in approach to the solution. As I read the text on my screen of proposals for solutions by education leaders, my dog runs from the room in fear as I expel vocal outbursts of profanity. Will these Education leaders choose to deal or not deal with the problems?

In order to address these problems, we need to understand the role of technology in the lives of children and not adults. Any of us, over 25 years of age, (I am considerably more) have had a choice about our technology involvement. The older one is, the more choice of technology involvement one has had. Children today have no such choice. Their world is all tech. They use it at home, in school, at the Library, and in the supermarket. They have been in front of a computer of some sort since before they could talk. Toy manufacturers know this and create Social Media platforms to engage children. They recognize the power of social learning. Check out Webkins or Club Penguin. For these children it is an easy transition to MySpace or Facebook. Educators have two choices. Either they acknowledge that kids are doing social networking and teach them to be appropriate and responsible online, or they can ban it from the school, ignoring to address any skills. Education must take place from the age that these kids are beginning their technology involvement. Ask what choice your school has made. I hesitate to ask for the sake of my dog again running away from the din of expletives not deleted.

Cyber Bullying is a real problem. Bullying itself has been an issue that we have always dealt with. Now however, with the use of technology, it can have devastating effects in a short period of time. This is another issue that needs to be addressed with education. Even before Columbine, we recognized the horrible effects of bullying on individuals. We cannot expect it to fix itself without someone stepping up and addressing the problem with education. The other choice is to ignore it until there is a problem and then bring in counselors and psychologists to the school to help everyone deal with the consequences.

Distractions from texting or game playing are another problem for some. This is especially an issue in Higher Ed, since many secondary schools ban laptops and cell phones. Accessing inappropriate sites is another issue. The inappropriate use of technology is a social issue that must be addressed through education. The consequences for abuse or misuse of technology must be taught to our children at an early age. Maybe after we educate them we can attend a play without needing an announcement to turn off all cell phones. People will know, because they were taught.

We do not need Acceptable Use Policies for technology. We do not have Library Use Policy, Cafeteria Use Policy or a Playground Use Policy. The misuse and abuse of technology is behavior and requires a common sense conduct policy. Any such policy will define the infractions and also the consequences of the poor decisions. Technology is not outside what we do in Education, it is a big part of what we do in education. If it is integrated, then it should not require a different set of rules to govern it. We educate and test people in driving and our laws cover traffic infractions. I do not remember agreeing to an automobile use policy.

The biggest obstacle we have in Education in regard to technology is the parent perception of child safety on the internet. I am not going to say that there is not a safety issue here. We are driven however by the high interest “gottcha” programming of nabbing internet child predators on TV. We need to educate children and parents how to safely and responsibly navigate the internet. The elephant in the room however, is the fact that if a child is going to be a victim of sexual abuse, it is most likely to come from a family member or friend, or someone they know, and not an internet predator. We all need to be educated.

If we choose to view technology in our society as a problem and not teach our children safe and responsible use, then ban technology from school. That plan will not work however, if you do not ban it from your home, and your neighbor’s home, and your other family members’ homes’ and the library. I am sure I left someone out.

Our educational leaders have a choice; Deal with the issue with education, or do not deal with it by banning it. A ban will leave the problem for others to deal with after it becomes a larger issue. In the not too distant future, when technology is a ubiquitous tool of education, people with cooler heads will look back at this time and question the leaders. “What the hell were they thinking?”

My final thought on this subject is a mystery. If schools ban and filter the Internet for “Student Safety”, what is the rationale for filtering and banning the teachers as well? Are they not responsible adults? Leaders Deal, or No Deal?