As an eager twenty-something with some technical skills and a degree in Secondary Education-English/Communications I was naive enough to march into New York for a job interview. It was with a start-up network consultancy in midtown Manhattan that serviced mostly financial institutions throughout the US.
The subway series was underway and so was the dot-com boom. Harry, the HR recruiter, projected that our company's stock would open at $45 during the IPO on the NASDAQ within a year. I left that morning with a job, good salary, inflated ego, and 4000 shares of stock as a signing bonus. Life was good. All I had to do so far was manage to get cross town in rush hour traffic.
I soon would hear stories of grandeur of how life would be in the future. In the present, I saw excess and lots of it. In the words of Alan Greenspan, I saw the "irrational exuberance". We know the rest of the story.
Maybe the phrase "once bitten, twice shy" is to blame but seeing Epic 2015 pointed out in Gary Stager's post reminds me somewhat of this "irrational exuberance". No doubt our world is seeing a cultural transformation never seen before that is shaking up how we do business, communicate, understand/learn, and collaborate thanks to technology. And no doubt our students are learning differently as members of this world. It's all very exciting!! But 7 year predictions to me seem like a crap shoot at best and somewhat misleading.
In the opening of school this year, I have two choices in the context of Epic2015:
I could show this video in my opening year conference. I could also talk to my teachers about the future of technology in hopes to teach students.
Or as Gary points out, I could talk about the things we can do now to help our students learn better to have a brighter future. A focus on teaching and learning behind the tools seems like a great place to start.
The question of balance seems to be in whose future do we want to talk about? Is it the future of our students or the future of technology and tools? And if it's our students, doesn't the future start now with teaching, learning, and technology? Should that be our starting point? I know there are folks that are very adept at making projections and we need those people. From my tiny vantage point, though, it seems like we need to keep more focused on latter choice above. If our beliefs and values of teaching and learning haven't quite caught up with 2008 we are just going to be applying a tired paradigm to a concept that we're projecting in 2015. Already out of the gate, our perspective is murky. Trying to figure out our students, learning, and teaching in the 2008-2009 school year first seems like a good starting point for me.
Before I get into trouble, I'm not implying that we don't need to forecast and look at trends inside and outside of education. Nor I am trying to say that folks shouldn't do it or aren't capable. We need to plan by looking ahead without a doubt. But these types of videos-Orwell-like or Bradbury-like-make for fun "what-if" games but shouldn't be used at the expense of focusing on figuring out our current world of education. Trying to conceptualize these specifics into the future when we're still trying to figure out the present seems like the "irrational exuberance" we saw during those halcyon days of the dot-com boom.
My bonus shares and 4000 more that I was "awarded" throughout my tenure, by the way, never did open at $45 a share....they never materialized.
What a beautiful day to go to a music festival right on the Delaware River with Philadelphia's skyline and blue sky as a backdrop! Sure it was a little hot. But it was nothing water ice and a trip around the carousel couldn't cure.
An online school display piqued my interest so I stopped to by to chat with the very kind teachers manning the booth. From our conversation, I didn't get the sense that 21st century skills were part of their learning experiences. The school did make AYP.
But collaboration, creativity, problem-based learning were not central threads (or so it appeared) to learning. Overall, I just didn't get sense that students would be any more prepared for the 21st century learning through an online environment than in a traditional school. [ Please note: The was conversation was not extensive from a research standpoint and in no way am I try to be overly critical of this school. ]
Put another 2 ways: Does the medium for delivering content make the difference? Or is the difference in how the students come to understand the content?
"What's new? You don't know what's old." recounts Dr. Richard Schwier of the exchange between him and a professor during a chance encounter in the hallway as a doctoral student. Dr. Schwier explains during this 83 minute 11 second Elluminate session that conversation was the catalyst for studying the history of educational technology.
Thinking about the future is great. From the future, we can develop our vision. From our vision, we can help ensure our students are ready for what lies ahead. But, I think looking back is valuable too. It's provides a context for understanding how we came here. Dr. Schwier's session was really helpful. Here's a few key items that were of great interest to me:
11:25 - Greek Influence on Educational Technology Dr. Schwier talks about the 4 questions of cause according to Grecian philosophy. They are: material, formal, efficient, and functional. He then compares them to modern day educational technology - interesting!
14:00 - 7 Cardinal Virtues and 7 Deadly Sins Compares Greek 7 Cardinal Virtues and 7 Deadly Sins to modern day educational technology beliefs. Dr. Schwier points out that people either "vilify or promote" technology based on these 7 sins or virtues found in classical content. 44:22 - 20th Century History of Educational Technology Here Dr. Schwier discusses educational technology according to decade such as film, TV, instructional design through to social web and web 2.0 of present day. The header for this slide is "Panaceas for schools".
47:12 - MPATI - Great Story (I won't spoil it). Wow!! Double Wow! I had never heard of MPATI. MPATI was the Midwest Program on Airborne Instructional Television. A plane would literally send a signal cone. Schools within the cone could view instructional programming. Dr. Schwier tells a hilarious story about MPATI that I won't do justice...you must hear it for yourself.
57:30 - Movement of Knowledge Dr. Schwier provides a context of educational technology. To paraphrase him, our current movement isn't from technology to technology - such as radio to film - it's epistemology to epistemology such as congnitivism to social learning. The biggest shift is individualism to social learning. "Collective constructionism" or how groups learn is taking center stage.
59:50 - History/Timeline of Educational Technology Here Dr. Schwier provides an interesting overlay between the history of educational technology, epistemological phases (objectivism, cognitivism, constructivism, and social learning), and growth of individuals and groups.
71:00 - Common Mis-Speakings of Educational Technology One of my favorite lines from this segment is how overheads were projected to transform learning and teaching. What happened? Teachers were just photocopying pages of books and reading the words from the screens. Most memorable quote: "We make the same mistakes today, we just use different means."
Lastly, I'll end with this story about educational technology and learning that hopefully tie this together:
I eagerly started my M.Ed in Educational Administration in a traditional university's online program. This university was ranked by US News and World Report as one of the top 50 in the country. Call me a snob, but I didn't want my graduate experience to be anything less than what I received at Penn State as an undergrad. The first round of courses came and went with even an offer to teach in a new instructional technology program. Flattering and super-cool!! Then came two classes in the second term complete with the following quotes. "Thanks for teaching me about this topic...I didn't know anything about it" and "When I took the course my instructor had us..." are not phrases I want to hear in a graduate school. We can all learn from our students as teachers...but not basic content knowledge. I ended up leaving and finishing at another university in their "traditional" program. Professors there were seasoned practitioners who knew their craft well. Come to think of it, I never got an adjunct position. I know that all online programs aren't the same as the one I experienced. But it has made me question ever since: How do we keep the "bad habits" from inhabiting virtual spaces as it does a physical space? Just because my masters was in all accounts 21st century, the learning was not. Dr. Schwier saw it long ago too in his comical story of MPATI. I saw it recently. Will we see it again? What can be done to reduce these occurrences?
In response to Chris Lehmann's great post and Will Richardson's and Sylvia Martinez's reflections: How are, as Dr. Schwier puts it, the same mistakes, just using different means avoidable?
If you are a teacher, David Jakes and Dean Shareski'sOne Hour PowerPoint: A Strategy for Improving Presentations talk at NECC is a must see and read. I didn't go to NECC but fortunately these presentations were blogged by Wesley FryerandEwan Macintosh. Both are excellent write-ups. Jakes and Shareski provide practical, simple advice for transforming PowerPoint presentations such as, "PowerPoint doesn't kill presentations bullet points do." As an alternative, they suggest using images to tell the story. This is all done by reviewing the basic biological fact that humans have far greater number of visual nerves than auditory nerves. [ Full disclosure - I'm using an Arial font for this post as a result of this presentation. ]
The pedagogy behind their PowerPoint strategy could be quite powerful. The sources of understanding are equally solid. Both design, story, and using metaphors (symphony) are three of the six senses Daniel Pink contends, in A Whole New Mind, that we will need to be successful in the Conceptual Age. How enriching is it to let students open their eyes and classmates' eyes to these 3 senses in the context of a story being read in Language Arts, a math problem, a scientific concept, or an historical event?
So here are some initial thoughts on using these strategies in my classes (September can't come soon enough).
I think a comparison-contrast would a great strategy tool for students: compare/contrast bullets vs. pictures, compare/contrast fonts and colors.
Having students create just 1 slide of text to sell something and then finding a picture to tell the same story could be a great introduction.
It would be cool to have students critique a published SlideShare Powerpoint presentation using the design principles here.
Metaphors are powerful on a bunch of levels: literacy, understanding, our own thinking; being able to find a visual metaphor for a textual one is even more so.
Student peer review and collaboration is a must for comparison-contrast and final products. It would be super cool to do this with a remote school. Seeing and then critiquing the collaborative responses and collaboration would be awesome!
Some teacher modeling would be helpful especially for younger students.
Finding images especially on Flickr Storm may be a bit problematic due to filtering but not an insurmountable obstacle.
Digital storytelling would fit nicely into this unit but 40 minute classes on once per week cycles can make continuity a bit rough; digitial storytelling may have to be it's own unit before we do this. Even better, powerpoint --> digital storytelling --> powerpoint could make for a helpful sequence.
Connecting this to classroom content is important since these would be taught in separate classes.
Showing not just telling about Creative Commons could be made into a mini-activity.
Crafting a messaging can have a thousand tie-ins to content areas.
Teaching Technology Literacy skills such as font, font size, font color, image insertion, embedding, new slide, and other mechanical stuff would be a snap. It all lends itself to it beautifully.
On July 4, 2008, blog about whatever you like related to effective school technology leadership: successes, challenges, reflections, needs. Write a letter to the administrators in your area. Post a top ten list. Make a podcast or a video. Highlight a local success or challenge. Recommend some readings. Do an interview of a successful technology leader. Respond to some of the questions below or make up your own. Whatever strikes you.
School leaders have a lot on their plates. And then there's technology. When it comes to technology, I think of it as a game of connect the dots without always numbers and a definable shape. Where to start and where to finish (if there's such a thing) are often murky. Everyone usually has their own dots to add or order in which to connect them. That adds complexity. Finally, the reasons for connecting the dots surely can throw the monkey wrench into the spokes. Come to think of it - it's much like the act of understanding or knowing in our classrooms (but more on that later). Here's an attempt to connect at least some dots to define a possible shape of technology leadership.
[ I hope the sophomoric Sketchcast I made to map out this blog post isn't making you feel that you've lost 3 minutes 41 seconds of your life that you'll never get back. I included it to help visualize this concept. ]
1st Dot - VisionVision may seem too M.Ed. 101-ish for some but I think it deserves the opening dot when talking about educational technology. Thompson and McKelvey (2007) described vision in schools as a "guidepost for decisions". This is a perspective that resonates with me for a number of reasons. It implies the vision is living and commonly embraced to be referred to on an regular basis. If it's commonly embraced, I have to assume that folks at all levels of the school have hopefully help set the vision or at least buy into it.
Vision is hard stuff. It's even a tougher question to answer when we throw technology into the mix. I think the one central question that a vision of technology should answer is: "what is technology's role in learning and teaching?" This question could help us answer, "what and how do we want students to understand?" which I think is the overarching question.
But one person - even the school leader - can't answer these questions by him/herself. They've got to be answered by everyone. It's all stakeholders' responsibility. We can't expect leaders to come up with them on their own. It's up to everyone to help craft the answers. The good news is that there really are no right answers. When it comes wrong answers, excuse the cliche, the only one is not answering them at all.
A lot can be written about vision but since I'm already 3:41 in the hole with you, I'll move on.
2nd Dot - Culture
Beneath the conscious awareness of everyday life in schools, there is a stream of thought and activity. This underground flow of feelings and folkways wends its way within schools, dragging people, programs, and ideas towards often-unstated purposes: This invisible, taken-for-granted flow of beliefs and assumptions gives meaning to what people say and do. It shapes how they interpret hundreds of daily transactions. This deeper structure of life in organizations is reflected and transmitted through symbolic language and expressive action. Culture consists of the stable, underlying social meanings that shape beliefs and behavior over time" (Deal and Peterson, 1990, p.7)
Like vision, I don't know if we always talk about culture in the same breath as technology. But we can't overlook it as it's such a quiet gale wind force in our schools. I'm sure we've all seen the whole gamut of school cultures: brilliant, mediocre, and toxic; student-focused, teacher-focused, curriculum focused, cynical, energetic, and flat. And since vision is on our minds, I believe a vision is as only strong as the culture of a school. Jerald (2007) notes a school’s strength of culture is about alignment between vision and actions.If the vision's spirit is to enhance teaching through technology, the culture has to be amiable to it. The "beliefs and assumptions" that Deal and Peterson talk about have to be grounded in things such as: learning can be enhanced using technology, the professional development is worth it, and personal time investment will be fruitful.
No matter how cool the technology tools, culture, I believe, will win the tug-of-war. There still may be a few trailblazers but systemic buy-in is likely to be minimal. I believe culture ensures the sustainability that Michael Fullan talks about. It's the culture to paraphrase Deal and Peterson that impacts everyday. The President of Southwest Airlines Colleen Barrett writes a similar sentiment about culture in the airline's magazineSpirit, "Their experiences confirm what I have always believed: Lip service can be a great danger. It’s easy to write columns like this bragging about our Culture; the hard work is living up to it every day." How does your school's culture live up to learning and using technology everyday? 3rd Dot - Ethnography - We all need to put on our ethnography hats and do a little listening to what kids are saying, thinking, and doing inside and outside of the classroom. Listen the same to teachers, parents, community members, practitioners, and experts on modern student learning/understanding, pedagogy, and educational technology. Listen for the patterns and stories that Daniel Pink talks about. Not to taint your research, but we do know our students are reading and writing ferociously. How does that impact our instructional decisions? The spirit of these enthnography questions asked about literacy by my former professor Dr. Jamie Myerscan serve as a starting point:
How often have we focused our inquiry on what is going on inside students’ heads? Why do they read and write? What do they do with literacy to marginalize or expand consciousness? What do they want to know more about and how could literacy facilitate that learning? How do the lessons and literacy practices we sponsor serve the construction of their identities, relationships and values in their lives within and beyond our classroom community?(Myers, 2001)
4th Dot - Teaching - Teaching is a huge one to talk about with technology for 3 reasons: (1) technology use, I believe, is really about the learning and teaching, (2) teaching encompasses so much, and (3) there's a fine line between tools and teaching. So in trying to recoup the time you've lost watching the Sketchcast, I'll keep this simple and present 2 tools a la cart (I'd go with Chris Lehmann's talk personally).
Tool 1: What Research Says About Teachers and Technology Adoption Teachers choices and beliefs about technology fascinates me. Maybe it's because it seems like a binary yes/no decision. Maybe it's a control issue. In either case, here are 7 themes that I found through my research looking at research about teachers and technology adoption that I think are important for school leaders to consider:
Teacher's beliefs of teaching (pedagogy) and student learning (epistemology) affect teacher technology adoption.
Teachers who engage in more teacher-led pedagogy adopt less technology.
Teachers who leverage constructivist-centric pedagogy have a tendency to use more technology.
Teacher's beliefs and values are not hardened systems; however, they are complex and prone to revision.
The richness of an environment (technology, support, quality, quantity) can change a teacher's beliefs and values in learners and pedagogy.
The manner in which technology is presented-teacher-centered or student-centered-impacts those teachers holding differing views.
Web 2.0 and 21st century skills are collaborative in nature; thus they are constructivist. This collaborative and constructivist nature of the technologies require teachers to adopt their beliefs which brings us back to theme #1.
5th Dot - Learning - This is another biggie not just in importance but in scope. In fact, it's the core of every school and educator's mission. There's a lot that can be said about how students learn, what they should be learning, how learning should take place, teacher's role in learning, and technology's role in learning.
Despite this being the star of the show, I'm not sure if we spend enough time on it especially when we talk about technology. Back on the 3rd dot, I mentioned ethnography because it's a great tool for us to see really what's going with our students, to try to better understand them. A lot has changed since we were undergrads learning about learning theories, if they were even discussed. Even more has changed since our K-12 days. We all did well for ourselves learning the way we did. But that was then. Our students are here in the now. We need keep this our focus and connect it outward to the other aspects of our schools: teaching, technology, culture, vision, and assessment. That's my elevator pitch.
Now for the dim sum cart. First, here are some ways to experience 21st century learning outside of dot 3's ethnography (compare these references to what you find in your ethnography-how do they compare?). Secondly, are two diagrams I created to help present some of these concepts.
Dot 5 Diagrams The first diagram shows the sources of understanding in a "traditional" classroom. The second is in a "21st century classroom". I use standards since we are familiar with them as topic of understanding. The objective of including these is to help visual these sources of understanding and show how they can be used in learning.
Traditional Classroom
21st Century Classroom
6th Dot - Professional Development/Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) Professional Development has never been so easy and so hard at the same time. We can learn, connect, ask, talk, communicate, collaborate, share, teach, or just plain lurk 24 hours a days, 7 days a week, 365 days a year all without leaving the glow of our monitors. The hard part is: making it stick, sustaining it through vision and culture, and connecting it to learning and teaching. Welcome to Personal Learning Networks...and they're not just for teachers.
Personal Learning Networks are sources of conversations, information, experiences, thought, and guides that an educators can leverage thanks to technology. Specifically, they include blogs, wikis, social networking sites such as Classroom 2.0, Twitter, and Skype. Through the networks that are developed, other networks emerge since you and everyone else likely has 2 different networks. Through these networks the world is at your fingertips. Have a question? Twitter it or post it to Classroom 2.0. Want to explore something or reflect on a experience? Blog it yourself. Interested in some thoughts of colleagues (who are likely in similar situations as you), read a blog.
One of most enticing things of personal learning networks to me is that they're personalized. Most teachers from my experiences come into workshops with a range of expectations and needs. Trying to effectively meet them all is hard and really, really tough especially when managing different subject areas, grade levels, and experience levels. Using personal learning networks takes the N/A out of how does apply to my classroom column on evaluation sheets. It makes learning relevant, meaningful, and real. Just when we think we're islands with unique problems, we find that there's a bunch of folks around the world going through the same thing with the same thoughts. PLNs take a very isolated profession and turn it into a very connected one.
7th Dot - Support/Access This is a subject near and dear to my heart and SEDTA's heart too. I wrote an article a couple of years ago on this topic. More recently I blogged about it. Since you most likely don't want to hear stories: I'll be direct: without support and adequate access, technology will not see appreciable rates of adoption. The technologies may be complex but the logic is simple: frustration with technology stinks for most people. And most users don't want to know, care to know, or even know how (that's not a criticism just an observation...how many people can replace their car's brakes?) to fix slow network connections, sluggish computers, or errant applications. And when things break or get slow, which they do, someone needs to help out quickly. Support and adequate access are the keystone to a 21st century school and something leaders need to keep in mind.
8th Dot - You/Your Dot! I reserved this one for you (us) school leaders since I think there's a lot of leaders and potential leaders in our schools. I really never feel comfortable with writing prescriptive lists. There's always something that's left out or doesn't apply. (These statement are in no way an admission of omission of not coming up with an 8th dot for U in the Sketchcast.). Seriously, every person brings to leadership experience, insight, and wisdom. And there's usually a nuance to every school. The challenge is to put something there about you or your school to complete the picture of leadership.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
References Deal, T, & Peterson, K (1999). Shaping School Culture: The Heart of Leadership.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jerald, C.D (2006, December). School Culture:"The Hidden Curriculum". Retrieved March 1, 2008, from The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement Web site: http://www.centerforcsri.org/files/Center_IB_Dec06_C.pdf
Myers, J (2001, March 3). University of Pennsylvania Ethnography Forum: Quotes shared by Jamie Myers (jmm12@psu.edu). Retrieved July 6, 2008, from Various Quotations on Literacy and Inquiry Web site: http://www.ed.psu.edu/englishpds/inquiry/excerpts.htm
Thompson, S, & McKelvy, E (2007). Shared Vision, Team Learning and Professional Learning Communities. Middle Ground. 10, 12-14.
Photo CreditsConnecting the Dots photo is from user mlsj from Flickr
To grasp the meanings of a thing, an event, or a situation is to see it in its relations to other things: to see how it operates or function, what consequences follow from it, what causes it, what uses it can be put to. In contrast, what we have the called the brute thing, the thing without meaning to us, is something whose relations are not grasped...The relation of means-consequences is the center and heart of all understanding (pp. 137, 146) (p. 38)
This is one of my favorite phrases about learning and teaching at their core. It comes fromHow We Thinkwritten by my hero John Dewey.I first came upon it from reading Understanding by Design. I mention this because when I went back to read the quote in the book I discovered the 1910 version I have doesn't contain this quote. The 1933 version cited in UbD must.
I am a K-8 Teacher and Technology Coordinator for the Bridgeton Public Schools.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in The Brute Thing are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.
Twitter/ewargo
GMail/Edwin Wargo
Technorati/ewargo
Posts
