Schools and Tech: Something New in the Abyss

It is acknowledged that each teacher is on an individual journey of technology integration. Some teachers use technology sparingly in their own lives. They may be impressed with what technology can do but do not believe that the investment in time to learn how to navigate and manipulate those technologies for education are worth the possible gains.  

There are those teachers who actually are quite resistant to technology in school. They are not convinced that any gains can be made through the use of computers.  They think it is a waste of time.  Some of these resistors have done their homework and know that there is no conclusive data that proves the claim that technology integration results in higher levels of learning.  

That being said, technology such as tablets laptops cell phones, and internet are not going anywhere. Technology is vastly changing our world.  So the question isn't whether not we should integrate technology into classrooms and schools. Technology gives us a way to change the paradigm around education.  

Never before in civilization have students been able to learn 24/7. Never before have the reins of knowledge been released to the masses. Never before has it been possible for amateurs to access reams of information by the world's greatest minds and discover something new in the abyss. Never before has collaboration been so meaningful. And global. Never before has the voice of one teenager, one child had so much power.

We must decide whether students will learn because of the opportunities we give them or despite them.

Another Fad in Education?

Are we experiencing yet another fad in education?  Streaming to de-streaming back to streaming. Hooked on phonics to whole language.  Letter grades to percentages to levels. Individualized to cooperative learning. New math to new new-math.  One-size-fits-all to differentiated for learning styles recently debunked by none other than Howard Gardner ~ Washington Post, Oct. 16, 2013).  Are we in the midst of another fad?

Experienced teachers are collectively rolling their eyes as the wave of resources, money, professional development, and rhetoric brings its crushing weight down with "integrating educational technology," "critical thinking skills," "problem based learning," "global education," "authentic assessment," and/or "flipped classrooms."

Such "new" approaches to education, and their early adopters, are charged with energy. Those who are blogging, tweeting, connecting, ed-camping, and then reinventing their teaching styles find the process rewarding.  They find each other and build PLCs that transcend distance, grade, and subject. They are reminded why they became teachers and feel empowered.

New teachers graduate from faculties of education armed with iPads and determination. They enter classrooms and quickly become disillusioned by blank stares from students, skill gaps, and standardized tests. Sometimes they are encouraged by colleagues and administrators.  More likely, they find themselves drowning in the divide and trying to do it all: teach the way their more traditional mentors teach and incorporate new approaches. They lack confidence in their pedagogy, and students smell the fear.

Experienced teachers who have ridden other waves are cynical. They stick with what they know, with what they have tried and tested, with what resources they have developed.  They may substitute here and there with a modernized version of an old assessment or lesson - youtube videos instead of VHS tapes or projecting a quiz on the interactive whiteboard instead of handing out dittos. But all-in-all they expect these "new" methods shall also pass and be replaced.  They see no evidence that these methods yield better student results (the evidence is only now being gathered and is still soft). When they do begrudgingly try something "innovative" that someone gave them, it flops - and is deemed a waste of time.

However, just because something is a fad, is trending, is charged with rhetoric, does not mean that it lacks value.  What all fads should have taught us is that there is no panacea for education. Experienced teachers who want students to learn are constantly adjusting their methods, day-to-day, student-to-student, year-to-year. They seek ways to make content relevant and to help students engage.  They respond to a changing world in the best way they can.

The world has changed immensely in recent years.  The proliferation of the internet, mobile devices, and computer tools will not pass in time. It can be a great opportunity for educators to maximize student learning. Yet this world is completely overwhelming even for the best-intentioned educators (including me). Each of us needs a focus that can guide our decision-making, evaluate our effectiveness, and help us determine next steps.

I am not choosing particular tools, methods, or fads to guide me.  I am carefully considering the question "What should I do next to help my students become capable learners in this new world?"

So far, my answers are:
1) Talk to them.
2) Figure out this new world for myself.

What else can I do to help my students become capable learners in this new world?

"Mechanical Pencils": Finding Balance between Basics and Forward Thinking

Our school is launching an Ad Hoc Committee to plan our school's technology needs.   Jokingly or not, someone responded, "Mechanical pencils!" A few chortled at the response, and then we moved on. But the question remains.

When parents, community members, and business leaders express their woes about education, the back to basics concept is held up as a holy grail: Arithmetic, Reading, Writing, and perhaps Vocabulary, Spelling, Manners, Life Skills, and Penmanship.  I am not even sure I disagree with them,  Of course I want my children and students to be able to multiply in their heads and print legibly.  There must be room in 14 years of schooling (from JK to Grade 12) to ensure some degree of competence in such basic skills without compromising the rich, meaningful, personalized learning that has become the ideal in today's education.

I believe that we could find agreement among stakeholders about what basic skills are non-negotiable in the learning process.  In fact, many schools are developing exactly that: a "Non-negotiable" curriculum for each grade (Common Core in the US and Non-Negotiables in the UK). An infographic that captures such trends was compiled from a survey by Education Week. The danger of course is that a "back to basics" approach will fall into a "drill and kill" pattern, with some children falling short of mastery.  What about the value of student-centred exploration, project-based learning, interdisciplinary connections, differentiation, choice, and personalization?

Excerpt, "Teaching Well-being in Schools" from pioneer in Positive Psychology, Dr. Martin E. P. Seligman, full article can be read here.

First, a quiz: 

Question one: in one or two words, what do you most want for your children?If you are like the thousands of parents I’ve polled you responded, “Happiness,” “Confidence,” “Contentment,” “Fulfillment,” “Balance,” “Good stuff,” “Kindness,” “Health,” “Satisfaction,” “Love,” “Being civilized,” “Meaning,” and the like. In short, well-being is your topmost priority for your children. 

Question two: in one or two words, what do schools teach?If you are like other parents, you responded, “Achievement,” “Thinking skills,” “Success,” “Conformity,” “Literacy,” “Math,” “Work,” “Test taking,” “Discipline,” and the like. In short, what schools teach is how to succeed in the workplace.

Notice that there is almost no overlap between the two lists.

Yet parent would not want the so-called academic skills abandoned and often do not trust approaches to teaching that differ from the way they were taught.

The pendulum swings back and forth, and we need to find a balance.  Parents want their kids to come home excited about what they are learning.  Students who want to learn are more apt as pupils.  As long as we work from a belief that all kids can learn functional skills (barring neurological impairments) , the expertise of the teacher and school should be harnessed to recognize and facilitate students' personal learning readiness, providing an environment where all can thrive.

So, it is not a balance between back-to-basics (i.e. mechanical pencils) and innovative methodology (i.e. student blogs) that we need.   It is immersion in both, where each provides fuel for the other. 

Deeper Learning: Why are Students Hesitant to Use their Personal Passions in the Classroom Setting

Whether we are talking about personal devices, gamification, favourite books, or hobbies, why are students so hesitant to use their personal passions in the classroom setting?  It seems that there is a great divide between “school” and “personal” lives and students are often the ones patrolling the border.   More and more teachers understand the need for relevant, meaningful, authentic tasks to engage learners.  They are increasingly fluid in offering choice, differentiation, and personalization even in traditional learning environments.  Many are starting to incorporate “Passion-based Learning,” “Genius Hour,” or “20 Percent Learning” into their instructional time, where students get to pursue a personal passion and are given support, structure, and time to do so. Yet when offered such opportunities, only a minority truly run with it.  Some begrudgingly go through the motions (but without real buy-in), some resent the intrusion on their personal domain and resist, and others shrug it off and wait for the teacher to assign them something to do next. 

There is a perception that most students have personal passions that schools do not integrate.  Do these students dive into personal learning – LEGO, basketball, rocks, dance, skiing, camping, anime, trucks, hockey, horses, space, etc.?  If they are lucky, their families can foster their interests in the home environment.  Elementary and secondary classrooms give many free choices in reading selections, journal ideas, and project topics. Yet looking around at my elementary-aged children, their friends, and cousins, the majority of young people skim the surface of their varied interests. There is so much out there to learn.  There is great value in students having a broad base of knowledge and skills.  And there is constant temptation to emulate the passions of peers.  And it is so natural to become bored and lose interest. The learning for most does not go very deep.

The reality is that most students need to learn how to sustain and develop a passion.  They need to see depth modeled (by peers, by community members, by teachers, by public figures):

• I want to learn about/how to ______________.
• How do I learn best?
• Why do I want to learn it?
• What are my options?
• How much time will it take?
• What sacrifices am I willing to make?
• Who can I talk to ?
• Where can I turn?
• What is the history of _______________?
• Who else is learning _______________?
• How can I use _______________ to make a difference?
• … and so on. 

Ultimately, if we want young people to know how to learn, we need to place greater value on metacognitive skills.  We need to give students the language and a voice in the learning process (“this is hard, and I want to give up, but I will persist,” “this is a personal, and I am not ready to share it,” “I need more practice,” “I am ready to learn something new,”  “this is necessary even if tedious”). The most important lesson we can teach to all of our students is to recognize and name their learning and to guide students to become self-aware, honest, and deliberate as learners and as people.

First EdCamp Experience

On Saturday, January 4, 2014, I attended my first ever EdCamp from the comfort of my own home. EdCamp Home was the epitome of both the medium and the message.  I found myself impressed by the scale and scope of the event and wowed by the organizers who were creatively, fluidly, and miraculously keeping everything on track.

Since this is my first experience with an un-conference, I have no frame of reference for comparison.  For my first session, I joined a GHO on Incorporating Ed-Tech in schools where 1:1 is not available.  I agreed with my gathered colleagues that 1:1 is not a necessity and that Ed-Tech is not the goal, only another tool. I have heard (from blended learning PD) that the ideal ratio is 2:1, where students use tools collaboratively and interdependently. This is hard to believe.  A 1:1 ratio (and the bandwidth to support it): empower each student with 24/7 access to learning supports, provide all teachers with the impetus to develop their own competency and incorporate innovation into lessons, and a multitude of other benefits (See Nine Reasons 1:1 Learning is Revolutionizing Education by Alexy Kudashev).  

Most schools are not there yet.  Many schools (including mine) have out-of-date desktop computer labs, limited ethernet connections, prohibitive wi-fi bandwidth problems, students without internet access at home, and no present means or plans for changing these realities. Does that mean that these students and teachers are relegated to the sidelines and miss out on the endless educational benefits?  No way!

My first EdCamp Home session was much too short to arrive at any meaningful learning.  By the time everyone joined the Hangout, introductions were duly completed, and a few challenges were raised, time for the session was at an end.  No answers, no direction, not even a lead… Yet, when EdCamp Home ended, I registered for Google Classroom Connections, explored Virtual Field Trip options (that ironically require an Ethernet connection), and considered Flipped Classrooms (and in the process discovered the ideas Zack Blois posted on Blended Learning models in non 1:1 environments).

EdCamp Home was not what I expected, but it opened the door to my learning, decision-making, and problem solving. It was the medium and the message for modern learning.  Hmmm… Now I will have to check-out the video from the EdCamp Home session on applying the EdCamp model in a classroom.