Administrators!! Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

Every year, the Principal’s Office participates in a 360 evaluation process.  An online performance survey is sent to the faculty and staff on a random administrator for feedback.  The survey is anonymous and asks various questions about our communication, leadership, and ethical character.  Last year, someone wrote on mine:

“Jen might benefit from teaching a class at Brebeuf, as her more regular encounters with students in the classroom could give her a whole new appreciation of the teachers she evaluates, as well as these teachers’ unique challenges in the classroom”

This statement really stuck with me.  This is a very fair suggestion but I didn’t know how on earth to make it happen.  And then we had no teacher for our Newspaper Publications course.  Okay anonymous commenter – challenge accepted!

**side note – I have never taught Newspaper Production in my life.

Tweet by @jdferries

Going back into the classroom, albeit for one class, was the best decision I’ve made since leaving the classroom 10 years ago.  I work with bright, talented, witty students in a hard-core project-based learning environment.  We use industry standard software (InDesign), write in various formats (news, op ed, sports, reviews), podcast, engage in social media, and all the great ed tech, student-centered buzzwords I’ve been writing on evaluations to others for years.  The class is led by student editors who do the heavy lifting of daily routines.  We have a large, open classroom functioning much more like an old-fashioned news room.  

And some days … it kicks my middle-aged butt.

Eight weeks in to the school year I’ve learned:

Living in a bell schedule again is hard

Every administrator I know accepts being late to meetings just happens.  Guess what?  You can’t be late for class!  Those teenagers will call you out faster than your own mother!  Your school have a tight tardy policy?  Just try and write up a 15-year-old for being late to class the day after you yourself was late…. Not cool.

Changes in the schedule really do mess things up

As administrators, all kinds of great ideas walk into the office that will disrupt the school day.  I fall under the “Let’s do it! What a cool experience that will be!” bandwagon.  And maybe it is worth it – but I have learned the hard way that too many altered schedules (and last minute changes) really is frustrating for classroom teachers and students.  We need to do better at discerning our somewhat whimsical time shifts.

Online grading is time consuming

I now know the joy of watching the spinning wheel of death while the online grade book tries to load.  It’s real.  It’s frustrating.  Teachers have a right to complain.

Designing meaningful lessons enhanced with technology is hard too

I teach a tech heavy course with a seriously concrete product at the end… and I have trouble sometimes integrating technology in meaningful ways.  If your school is like mine and incorporates a lot of walkthroughs – seeing deep integration is not going to happen every moment of every day.  Deal with it.

Kids surf the web every chance they get

Just like adults do in staff meetings J If your school’s evaluation has any check box about 100% of students being on task with their technology – delete that now!  I actually am fine with a little surfing – it’s natural and gives everyone a little break to reset.  I do step in when it’s causing a ruckus (four 15-year-old boys huddled at a desk snickering draws my attention every single time).  Otherwise I let them decide how to best use the allotted independent work time.  Can’t wait until my office mates come through for my walkthrough!

  

In short – like online trolling – it is so easy to be critical behind the safe walls of an evaluation form.  But the classroom is a real, living, messy place.  I challenge more admins to get back in the classroom, see what it is really like day-to-day and then reflect on evaluation documents and processes.  You will get serious street-cred from your faculty, hone your own skills, meet some really cool young people, and learn a lot about what teaching is actually like now-a-days.  It’s different from the last time you were here – trust me!

And I'm not just talking K-12 here... even higher education is testing these waters!

Lessons Learned in 1:1: Stay on Mission

So students now have devices in their hands... now what?  

The temptation to begin random acts of technology looms.  Students and their families have spent time and money discerning the best device - we want them to use them.   But is a classroom full of students staring at computer screens really what we want?  No...24/7 constant computing was never part of the learning objective and we must push against the temptation to let the machine be teacher.  

In the day to day living, I must admit our learners (those over and under 18) do drift off into Temple Run, Facebook and yes, the occasional Shark versus Octopus video.  I have conversations about potential cost savings of open source and online content.  I still have conversations about "integrating technology" based on an online activity someone saw at a conference and thought it looked cool.  And in all cases (yes, even after the shark vs octopus video) I asked...

"What is your learning objective?"  

It's become a bit trite in my world.  So much so, my husband posted this blog post, "Who Needs Learning Objectives?" by Charles Jennings for The Training Zone, on my Facebook page.  

Jennings, who is not a fan of learning objectives, writes: 

"Remember, learning objectives may be useful to help you create a logical design, but that’s all they’re useful for."

Luckily for us, the learning objectives of access, evaluate and use were used to create logical design.   But we also had another framework to give our 1:1 initiative purpose: the Ignatian Pedagogical Paradigm.  

Insert short interlude on the Ignatian Pedagogical Paradigm... you know... because you all are curious now that #Jesuit is like a major news story....

In brief, the IPP guides the learner much as the retreatant is guided through the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius Loyola.  


By meeting the learner in their contextual environment, creating experiences with knowledge and offering time for reflection... Jesuit educators guide students through the learning process...  With the end goal of developing young people who are intellectually competent, open to growth, spiritual, loving and committed to social justice (affectionately known as The Graduate at Graduation).  

End Interlude and cue...

What are the implications for other 1:1 programs?  

Don't forget your objectives!  Why was 1:1 computing considered and implemented in your learning environment?   

Part of the lesson we've learned is staying in conversation with parents and students.  Distractions will happen.  Yes, access the Angry Birds was fun for the 10 minutes... but under closer evaluation/reflection... was that the best course of action?  Engaging the conversation can be one of the most powerful reflective practices our students will carry forward into their lives.  Learning how to balance the productive power with distraction capabilities is a crucial skill for academic and life success down the road.  Stay on mission... for us, that's developing the whole person.  Even the part going for the high score.

Part of the lesson learned we've learned is staying in conversation with faculty.  The temptations will be strong... online tutorials, virtual field trips, blogging... all which can be valid learning experiences if they are a part of the larger objective.  Otherwise, they can be distractions under the guise of learning.  Engaging online tutorials outside of context may keep students quiet for 20 minutes, but retention of content will be minimum. Virtual field trip experiences without clear (and actually articulated) outcomes are just as much a distraction as a round of Angry Birds... just ask any middle schooler who has recently been on such a journey.  Blogging can mirror the worksheet unless framed in creation and reflection.  Stay on mission...for us, that's ongoing dialogue/PD with faculty (most often in our Teacher Resource Center... over coffee...).

The shiny pretty is by its very nature a distraction. Fight the temptation of random acts of technology.  Stay on mission.  And enjoy those National Geographic videos...

BYOT In the Classroom

One of the many hats I wear around here is Evaluating Administrator.  This year, we have introduced walkthrough evaluations based on Carolyn Downey's Three-Minute ClassroomWalk-Through model.  I must admit, I am having a marvelous time seeing what is going on in Brebeuf classrooms - especially all the innovative uses of technology (although Dr. Sperry rocked it out with a traditional lesson on diagramming sentences with her Teach-Learn method).  And if I am this excited about what I see and hear... well, good readers, I thought you might be too...

Guiding Student Time Management/Responsibility

Always helps to post clear directions as to what assignment is and expectations for delivery (how student is to get assignment to you).  Now that every student has a device - our learning management system (BlackBoard Engage) is a stronger tool.

Example from Ms Hathaway (Theatre) using Edline Calendar : Each assignment is linked to calendar.  Student clicks on day or assignment and is taken directly to Homework Hand-in.

This example is from Ms Haffley (English 12).  She uses outside sites but clearly notes where Calendar, Assignments, Class Blog is located and gives direct link…  

Blogging

This can be done as a “What We Did Today” in  Ms Annee does in BioTech with her class Edublog

 Or in truer journaling as reflection based on experiences with new material… as this photo from previous semester in Mr. Tague’s Genocide course illustrates.  Tool is Edmodo.com. 

Authentic Experiences

French 5 students with Ms Martin (in her words) “are getting more contact time with the language b/c of BYOT.  They are assigned and immersed in the “real language” through almost daily opportunities to engage in listening and speaking skills (they study excerpts from films, popular television shows, talk shows, daily news, radio programs, etc and then re-group to discuss what they learned) and reading and writing skills (they read newspapers, recipes, advertisements – almost anything you can think of that a native person is exposed to!) and then can correspond with each other or students in France about what they have read….”

US History Students in Mr. Lo's class were asked to created picto-notes (taking a concept and illustrating).  Most students used pencil, paper and markers to create artwork after researching online.  Some students animated their picto-notes in Photoshop.

And here's Computer Science (notice all those lonely desktops) with Ms Dugan... collaborative research project on history of computers.

Even the Administrators hanging out in my office get in on the action...(this is what my day looks like - and you all thought I just made up all that stuff on Twitter...)

A BYOT Glossary for the School Community

The feedback loop is hinting that @jdferries and I are speaking a little too "techie" these days for the local school community.  And that feedback is probably correct as we hang out with tech-types and each other so much we speak in what sounds like code (and sometimes is code - but I digress)... So I am starting this BYOT Glossary for the School Community.  All Brebeuf students are expected to have a device, in hand, ready to use on the first day of school for 2012-13!  Devices pictured below have been piloted this year (by students - more than one - not just heavy tech users) and we feel confident saying they work at the school. The MBS electronic book platform has also been successfully tested on these devices (the electronic devices - not the mechanical pencil).

BYOT: Bring Your Own Device.  Refers to a computing model where the student chooses the device best suited for them... rather than an IT department dictating device.

For those new to the Bring Your Own Device discussion - I offer some key terminology you'll need to know in the glossary below.  Regular readers - feel free to add other suggestions in the Comments box below.  Eventually this will all go on the school website - but as the website is being redesigned I thought why not start here on the blog.


BYOT Glossary


The following are operating systems… basically what makes the device turn on, light up and run programs you want…These operating systems work on the Brebeuf Jesuit network.

Android – refers to operating system for mobile devices not made by Apple.  Marketplaces include Google Play, Amazon App Store for Android and Android Marketplace.

Examples
· Samsung Galaxy Tab
· Asus Transformer Prime
· Lenovo ThinkPad Tablet
· Motorola Zoom

Chromium – refers to operating system creating by Google.  Currently only runs on Chromebook sold by Samsung and Acer. Unlike traditional laptops, Chromebooks are “nothing but web”.  At startup, Google Chrome opens and all applications are run through browser based apps.  Marketplaces are Chrome Store and Google Play.

iOS – refers to the operating system for mobile Apple products.  Marketplace is iTunes.

Examples
· iPad
· iPhone
· iTouch

*** Linux – Open system which is mostly used by tech geeks because it allows for modifications and doesn’t involve all the licensing mess of Mac OS and Windows. We have not tested Linux extensively on Brebeuf network – if you are thinking of using a Linux machine please stop by IT.

Mac OS – refers to the operating system for laptops and desktops made by Apple (MacBook Pro, iMac).  Recently named after large, predator felines such as Snow Leopard, Lion, Mountain Lion. Helps run programs like Pages, Keynote, iMove, Office for Mac and the like in a traditional computer model.

Windows – refers to operating system for PC laptops and desktops.  Used by a variety of vendors including HP, Asus, Lenovo, Dell, Acer.  Helps run programs like Word, PowerPoint, Windows Live MovieMaker and the like in a traditional computer model.  Will not run most Apple programs.


Other terms you may hear:


App – short for “application”.  Apps are small, single use programs that run typically on mobile device (although apps for full Apple and Windows devices are in the works).

Browser – program that gets you on the Internet.  Popular browsers include: Chrome, Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Safari, Opera.

Cloud Storage – back in the day, when you hit File-Save, the document saved on the computer in front of you or a server in the basement of the building you worked in.  Now there is a third option generically called “The Cloud”.  Don’t be confused, the file still sits on a server in the basement… it’s just that the basement is 600 miles away.  You can access that server from anywhere, anytime as long as you have an Internet connection.

Examples
· iCloud
· Dropbox
· Google Drive via Apps for Education (Brebeuf will give student account)
· Box
· Microsoft Skydrive

eReader – Devices specifically designed for reading electronic texts.  While some eReaders may do basic web-based activities, the primary function of the device is reading.  Think of a book that can get to your email.  These do not meet Brebeuf 1:1 BYOT requirements as you cannot create documents, presentations or spreadsheets on these devices.

Examples
· Kindle devices
· Nook and Nook Color
· Sony Reader

Marketplace/Store/Walled Garden – Each mobile operating system has online store where one buys apps, music and movies.  These stores (gardens) do not share between each other (thus the wall) very easily if not at all.  For example, an iTunes app for iPhone cannot be transferred to an Android device and vice versa.  We mention this because a garden can influence preferred device – particularly if you have money invested in one garden already.

Examples
· iTunes (Apple Devices)
· Android Market (Android Devices)
· Amazon Markets (Kindle Store, Android App Market, Cloud Player)
· Google Play (for Chrome and Android apps, music, movies, books)

Ed Tech Lingo Bingo 2012

Some of you might be aware of a little game @jdferries and I made up last year after sitting in way too many webinars entitled "Ed Lingo Bingo".  Now, after sitting in on way too many #chats, we bring you Ed Tech Lingo Bingo.  Curl up with your favorite device, login to a #chat and play along!

We are encouraging one of our students to create an app for the game over the summer.  Hopefully, more to info on that front soon...

Ed Tech Lingo Bingo by @40ishoracle and @jdferries

Invisible Integration: The Challenge of Communicating Progress

Lately, @jdferries and I have been doing a lot of talking about 1:1 BYOT to constituents.  One challenge of communicating progress lies in the visualization what is essentially invisible integration.  We didn't go out and buy 800 of the latest, glossy marketed shiny pretty device.  We chose the apparently radical route of encouraging choice in technology - which is exactly what all the shiny pretty marketing campaigns tell us we should do... at home.  


Let’s take a journey back in time and situate ourselves in the historical context of instructional technology.  Thanks to Rodney Earle's article, The Integration of Instructional Technology into Public Education: Promises and Challenges (2002), instructional technology has been defined as....

• a systematic way of designing, carrying out, and evaluating the total process of learning and teaching in terms of specific objectives, based on research in human learning and communications, and employing a combination of human and nonhuman resources to bring about more effective instructions. (Commission on Instructional Technology, 1970)

• [Instructional technology] is concerned with improving the effectiveness and efficiency of learning in educational contexts, regardless of the nature or substance of that learning. …Solutions to instructional problems might entail social as well as machine technologies. (Cassidy, 1982)

•  Instructional technology is the theory and practice of design, development, utilization, management, and evaluation processes and resources for learning. (Seels & Richey, 1994)

  To be clever – I put the above definitions into Wordle to make my point… 

Apparently, instructional technology is all about learning.  So Mr. Earle is correct when he wrote (10 years ago), “Integration does not just mean placement of hardware in classrooms.” (Earle, 2002)

Let’s say it again shall we... “Integration does not just mean placement of hardware in classrooms”.  I couldn’t agree more.  I think I have been clear in my opinion that education is spending way too much time on the hardware (nouns).  The challenge of communicating progress with technology is… nouns are visible.  I can touch, count, take marketing photos of… hardware.   I can create push button trainings for... hardware.  I can create a single jailbreak to dismantle cameras... for hardware.  Quite frankly, just as they are the easiest part of speech to identify on a standardized test, nouns are the easiest instructional technology element to control student access, market to the school board and lecture about in trainings.

But you can ask my mother… I seldom take the easy path.

Learning is hard to photograph.  Learning is hard to control.  Heck, as current discourse shows, learning is hard to measure with any tool, test or imaging machine. Oh sure, we say learning … a lot… but reading on we get side tracked into products, devices or matrixes designed to measure learning… but we losing the subtlety of the process of learning - context/experience/reflection/action/evaluation. 

So how do we visualize verbs to showcase instructional technology for our constituents (and the occasional newspaper we are trying to encourage to cover the magic - yes you - @indystar and @criteriononline)?  Borrowing some ideas from others (most generally the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory) here are a few ideas.

Is technology in the classroom embedded in the curricular objectives?

I’ve said it before, but the curricular objectives MUST dictate tools used.  More often than not, a highly integrated classroom will have students working with a varied of tools at a variety of stages.  I am most concerned when I see a room where every eye is glued to a screen.  State of the Art is not shiny pretty, silver screens broadcasting the same information, in the same mode to all students.

*This does require someone walking into a classroom - not just reading aggregate data in a spreadsheet.

Problem solving and higher order thinking is evident in classroom activities.

Notice the “classroom activities” part of this one.  Not in the homework.  Not in the assessment.  In the actual, observable activity taking place in the classroom, students are synthesizing, suggesting solutions, experimenting.  These classrooms are often loud, with students working with a variety of tools.  To some, this might look like chaos.  (These pictures seldom make the newspaper except for articles with the title “Kids Today!”)

*Again, this does require someone walking into a classroom - not just reading aggregate data in a spreadsheet.

Students independently chose the technologies appropriate to their learning objectives.

You knew I’d get to BYOT eventually!  This is part of that “problem solving” piece.  It takes a high degree of critical thinking to determine the best tool for the job.  Empowering student to make that choice is no longer an option.  Instructional technology as "concerned with improving the effectiveness and efficiency of learning in educational contexts" is not just the arena of PD officers and teachers.  State of the Art is allowing for differentiated content acquisition/engagement modes and individualized demonstration of mastery .

*Yet again, this does require someone walking into a classroom - not just reading aggregate data in a spreadsheet.

As we like to say around here - integration is happening best when it's invisible...and not a classroom full of hardware. Communicating progress in a noun driven world though... that's a real challenge.

Driving Bring Your Own Tech (BYOT) Forward

This weekend I loaded up Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris and curled up for 94 minutes of escapism.  It’s a good movie to meet the escape objective.  I will try not to spoil the end for those of you who haven’t seen the movie, but toward the end, the protagonist, Gil, explains how people glorify the past in order to escape the uncertainty of the present.  Well, in a much more poetic way… but that’s basically the point of the conversation.

Glorifying the past to escape the uncertainties of the present is not the solo purview of an angsty writer in a Woody Allen film.  Look around education and you can see the same glorification of the past inflicted on the uncertain present.  Just this year, Indiana House Enrolled Act 1003, focusing on school voucher program, also slipped in a variety of golden age requirements a school must incorporate in order to receive voucher funding. Reading HEA 1003 is like time traveling to the classroom of the 1950’s (scroll to Chapter 4 about half way through document).

On a smaller scale, the same past/present tension can be seen in educational technology.  I saw a tech discussion board just this week where a technology director recommended Device A because of the ability gives IT departments to block students from loading apps, accessing the web and the general ease of admin control over user experience.  Another listserv recommends Dashboard A because the entire user experience is controllable…created by adults who can grant or block any given website, app or tool student might access.  Even those of us in March 1^st #BYOTchat had to be reminded to let go of the concrete tools (nouns) and get back on track with how we encourage students and teachers to explore learning regardless of device.  Facing uncertainty does send one running back to what we know.  And in educational technology, what we know is a CPU with local hard drive, Word/Pages, attached to a printer, in the safely monitored, staffed by adult. in a computer lab.  Bring Your Own Technology (BYOT) rocks this image to its knees… and that is more than a little unsettling.

Brebeuf Jesuit’s mission reads in part “Students at Brebeuf Jesuit are called to discover and cultivate the fullness of their God-given talents as a responsibility and as an act of worship.” Our determination in moving forward with 1:1 BYOT was in response to our responsibility as educators.  Cultivating choice in OS, app, web tool, word-processor creates innovation and creativity.  Christian Long advocates a comfort level with failure.  Through failure we learn divergent thinking and problem solving – the learner grows and society moves forward. Through safe, controlled environments where failure is not an option, we are comfortable, but static.  Learners guided by a sense of uncertainty make discoveries more powerful because THEY are the one’s making sense of their discord.  We have planned professional development, redesigned infrastructure, tested and retested tools and devices.  And yet, I lost some sleep in anxiety ridden restlessness pulling the trigger on 1:1 BYOT.   There will be failures – how can there not?  We’re only human.  But to cultivate individual talents, how can I do anything but move forward?

It is comforting to look back on the solid past of bulletin boards and overhead projectors and desktop computer labs… but as Gil learns in Midnight in Paris, every Golden Age looked back on the age before… reflecting on the safe glory of a time where we know how it ends.  Living looking backward will not help our students today.  So take a deep breath, let go and move forward.

BYOT Lesson Example: Biology Fish Bowl Activity

The other night on #BYOTChat, we were sharing lesson ideas for Bring Your Own Technology environments.  I mentioned the Fish Bowl activity completed in Freshmen Biology that week.  A Fish Bowl is a discussion activity model involving one group of students looking in on another smaller group.  The smaller group is participating in a discussion where they have researched a topic.  The outside group (picture watching fish in a bowl) observes and takes critical notes on the observed discussion.  Groups then flip roles.

Here's a better description

In a BYOT classroom, the teacher has more tools available to facilitate collaboration and research.  In this case, the teacher chose Google Docs and Google Chat (we are a Google Apps for Education school).  Images below are from the various activities (not complete - just snapshots).  So try out a Fish Bowl...

Focusing on mitosis and blood typing, students collaboratively researched given topic via Google Docs...

During the Fish Bowl activity, a Google Chat back channel was open for those observing.

Caught in the Middle of a Growing Trend

Well, Bring Your Own Technology/Device movement is certainly picking up pace!  JD and I were contacted by the second reporter in a month writing a whitepaper... all the while working on a book chapter on the same topic.  The concept is on most Ed Tech Trends list that has floated through my Twitter feed.  I expect to see the idea in mainstream media by the end of the year.

In all the conversations we've had lately a few themes keep rising to the surface...

1. BYOT is about student learning.  Developing young people who ASSESS their learning need, EVALUATE tools to meet the need and successful USE the tool is our learning objective.
2. By comparison, BYOT is not about saving money.  Initiatives may (and I do mean may - remains to be proven) create cost savings down the road but the first years out will see expenses based on equity of access/choice financial support and infrastructure improvements.
3. Teachers do not resist change as much as educational reform pundits try to make us think they do.  We expected push-back and it didn't arrive.  In fact, most teachers say BYOT is a relief... no longer are they responsible for push-button training on tools (example: in the past if you are going to grade PowerPoint presentations on form and function you needed to spend at least a class period teaching PowerPoint).  Students are responsible for meeting the academic objective with appropriate tools.  
4. Students are capable of making intelligent, creative and appropriate choices.  File under #iceiscold but many "innovations" in education continue to revolve around adults making choices in the name of students.  The conversations this year held between students - faculty - and IT about learning reflect a deeper reflection of self-awareness: weaknesses, strengths, successes and needs for improvement.  

To borrow the analogy from my previous post, we're just sowing seeds at Brebeuf this year.  I look forward to watching Bring Your Own Technology programs grow and develop over time.   

A Great Act of Hope

In prepping a discussion of first year teachers on Ignatian education, I am reading Kevin O’Brien, S. J.’s article “The Classroom as Holy Ground” (America, May 26, 2003 if you are so inclined to read).  In the article he writes:

“…the classroom – the vineyard to which we teachers are called.  There we build and plant, trusting that the harvest will be bountiful one day, even if we are not around to see it. 

Teaching is a great act of hope.”

I’ll admit that before the holiday break, I was feeling a little hopeless about education.  Everywhere I turned, education was villianized and marginalized.  Current educational analysis would have the casual reader questioning Fr. O’Brien’s observations.  Build and plant … trusting a bountiful return some day in the distant future?  Not when test scores are paramount, schools must compete to appease a consumer market of education and outside “experts” legislate from afar.  The seeds these days are low level recall data germinating in multiple test scores aggregated immediately into graphs and charts used to compare and judge.  Any potential for a bountiful harvest (see JD Ferries-Rowe’s post) is terminated by the next test, the next piece of legislation and the next 21^st century learning tool.

And then comes along Fr. O’Brien to remind me of the hope.  The hope I see in young faces every morning.  They are not caught up in the arguments of adults over how, when and in what format learning should take place… they are too busy germinating all the seeds sown in their environment.  I see my role in education to engage the conversations.  To cultivate ideas and cherish those which challenge mine. To unleash potential in all the many varied ways available today.  To understand that not everyone learns the same way or the same speed.  To be flexible in how learning is shared and articulated.  In short, to trust: myself, the educators I work with and our students.

I may not see the harvest… but today I am full of hope that it will be amazing!

Time to Play

As we reach the end of the semester… I hope all educators take a little time to play around with new tools.  And I mean PLAY… no agenda, no administration making you, no goal in mind.  Some of the best tools I’ve encountered were because I took the time to just play around to see what happens.  For example, this morning I was drinking coffee looking over my Twitter feed and saw this post

I had a moment… so I downloaded the app and tried it out.  No reason beyond it was free, I had 5 minutes and the iPad was charged.  And you know what – it’s a nice app.  I could see it being useful to some.  Maybe a little low power for high end screencasters… but for the new iPad user (perhaps one who has recently been given an iPad by their school IT department) it’s worth a look.   So, take some time to play and make your technology integration choices your own.  You'll be glad you did! 

 … and those of you at Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School get ready!  I hear many students have personal electronic devices on their holiday wish lists… 

Library Space in a BYOT School

Four years ago, as faculty and students embraced the idea of collaborative experiences, I was part of a team of people trying to find space in a max’d out building for collaborative workspaces. The library was considered an ideal place to create some collaborative workspace: it was well lit, had seating conducive to collaborative work … and the necessary computers! Plus a local architectural firm analyzing our over-crowded, out-date space reported to us that a library as information commons should create “a comfortable environment where students like to meet, study and collaborate.”

Now, we are a few years in… the library is busier than ever. Two fantastic librarians are facilitating research experiences, supporting technology initiatives, constantly assessing resources in light of learning (electronic and print), experimenting with new hardware options (e-Readers, Chromebooks, tablets) and yes, checking out books. I witness students studying, collaborating or just sitting and reading. Environment where “students like to meet, study and collaborate” achieved.

Now on to the new challenges…130 high school students in one space (built for less than 100) effects both students and adults using the space. Many students prefer to work in the library because it is the one quiet space in the building dedicated to study. The library has a back wall of windows allowing for natural, soft light and a sense of natural space. The library has librarians… adults who can help navigate those days when you need a helping hand. But when so many students are in the space, the law of rising conversations applies. Table A must talk louder to be heard over Table B. Table B must then start talking a little louder to be heard over Table A. Table C talks even louder… and soon the din is comparable to the cafeteria. Students wishing for the quiet workspace are frustrated. This puts the librarians in “policing SHHHH” mode. And contrary to popular belief… no librarian really likes to spend their whole day shushing (really… I am speaking as a librarian here… I have more interesting things to do with my time).

The challenge of computer access is changing. Now, with the advent of BYOT, we are no longer tied to the library as THE space where students can access computers during the day. Wireless is throughout the building (even outside) and there are other spaces to work (cafeteria, Student Commons, lobby). Teachers and students are communicating more frequently via electronic means. This redefines the sense of a, one place to study and collaborate.

So what is the best use of the library space? This is how I have spent the last week… How to maintain a student focused workspace that respects those who need quiet space AND respects those more collaborative in nature? In what is essentially one big room! Suggestions welcome!

Oh the Marketing!

This weekend, I tweeted about a K-12 educational marketing white paper that floated past my desk. The more I pondered the report, the more I realized I had more than 140 characters to say about it. The “key takeaway” that stuck with me concerned the marketing tip to innovate disruptive technology in stages… the exact wording being


The interactive whiteboard segment offers a particularly instructive example of how disruption can happen slowly, in stages, and still fuel growth (meaning marketing/sales growth – not learning growth). At a time when schools are reluctant to invest in new technologies, this market has exploded, and one key reason for the rapid growth is that the technology need not disrupt traditional classroom practices: for a teacher standing in front of a classroom, and interactive whiteboard can be functionally similar to a blackboard. Ignoring the argument about whether this is pedagogically sound, one less derived from the success of interactive whiteboards is that technology succeeds best when it disrupts least.

Let me take this apart…

1. The interactive whiteboard first hit the market in 1991. So by slowly, they apparently mean over 20 years. That’s really slow folks. Too slow for our students.

2. Let us remember market value. While many of our vendors claim to be partners in education (and some may even believe it)… the bottom line is they are for profit companies. They need schools to buy their product. Period. According to the Association of American Publishers, in 2006 educational materials was a $8.1 billion industry for publishing. I appreciate everyone needs to make a living,.. this is not a rant about costs. However, we as educators need to remember educational products electronic, print or plastic are a for profit industry.

3. Educational resource companies do not teach your class. Bad pedagogy is on us.

4. The industry surrounding education is marketing to the lowest common denominator. If we sit back and allow manufactures to dictate our teaching by dictating our resources… then nothing is going to change. They do not think we want a disruptive force affecting daily classroom practices.

No one is creating magic in a box for $29.99, $599.99 or even $3999.99. The time, the talent and disruptive change is going to have to start with the classroom teacher. Daunting, yes… but rather exciting.

BYOT

JD has been more prolific at posting on the topic than I at http://geekreflection.blogspot.com/... but here's my two cents...

We began a voluntary BYOT program this semester in our private, 9-12 college preparatory school. I tend to use the term (or acronym as the case may be) BYOT as I see student choice evident not only in device, but in all the various tools student use.


Our goal in BYOT is critical in understanding why we chose this model:

Brebeuf Jesuit IT focuses on the learning needs of the students, creating an environment where students, faculty and staff:


• have the ACCESS to all the resources necessary for teaching and learning;


• develop EVALUATION literacies (skills) to discern appropriateness of their tools, their actions and their behavior;


and


• are supported in the USE of technology tools personalized to the learner.



I approached our faculty and staff with Marc Prensky’s “nouns vs verbs” argument. It’s not important to get hung up on the nouns (Mac, PC, tablet, desktop, Word, Pages) in education. What we need to focus on are the verbs – what we DO to illustrate mastery. For example, with BYOT, our teachers are still confident that they can teach persuasive writing techniques. How students evidence learning can be done on a Mac, PC, mobile tablet… heck a cell phone (which will happen once and lesson will be learned). What matters is not the device or word processing program used. What matters is the academic learning objective of the persuasive essay. We are finding that students are more engaged in determining the best tool for the job when they are held responsible for demonstrating the learning objective. Learning how to access, evaluate and use technology to meet one’s objective is critical and oh, so valuable for the future.

Why I Need to Stop Watching Educational YouTube Videos While Eating Lunch

Nothing like expanding one’s job scope to… I don’t know… Director of Faculty Development… to wipe out blogging time!  I am really going to try and get back on the wagon.

So I am watching a YouTube video from the Hunt Institute introducing the Common Core State Standards.  Seemed like something a Director of Faculty Development would do while she eats her peanut butter and jelly sandwich.  About 17 seconds in, I put down my PB & J at the line “…our students need better knowledge and tools to compete in the global economy…” And there it is folks, the commoditization of education.  We no longer educate to create informed electorate, to create life-long learners, for the growth of humankind… we educate to compete.   We educate to make more money than our neighbor.  We have our commodity to create: men and women who compete in the global marketplace!  I guess this is why mainline educational arguments surround improving test scores, value-add accountability matrixes for teachers and the predilection of social media forming the bullies of tomorrow.  We can count those things!  We can make more, do more, score more than our neighbors.

Silly me – I thought it was about cultivating God-given talents to live in the fullness of creation.

Frustrations at the Curve

I find it annoying that I am thwarted at every turn this summer testing new tools. Not by my non-Digital Native status. Not by my lack of formal education in the computer sciences. Not by gender, age, ethnicity, location… or any of the other demographics usually surveyed to determine computer comfort and proficiency. No, I am thwarted by the fact that I update my browser.

Yes, I run IE9, Firefox 4.0.1 and Chrome. This is apparently odd amongst educators as currently I am 2 for 12 on web-based products working on my computer. I am not even going to start on my mobile devices (Blackberry and iPad). No, today’s rant is simply an open request to educational vendors. Contrary to what you appear to think, schools are not in the dark ages. We do upgrade our operating systems. We do upgrade our production tools. And we do upgrade our browsers. I will not buy your product if I have to wander the building looking for an old machine running an outdated browser (and now that re-imaging is complete I can’t even do that as every machine here is running either IE9 or Firefox 4.0.1).

I spend a great deal of time with curriculum and technology integration. The annoyance of having to roll back browsers in order to run outdated vendor created products does nothing for student learning. In fact, I would have to hinder student learning (Firefox 4.0.1 has some wicked web developer tools) in order to run web-based learning environments which refuse to keep up with the times. Brebeuf is going to a BYOT model. Our students will learn on a multitude of devices running all sorts of operating systems, apps, software and browsers. The days of platform uniformity are slowly but surely ending. I believe those vendors who embrace flexibility and fluidity will survive. The rest of you will not.

BTW: Firefox 5 is on the horizon... Just saying.

Test upload from iPad

This is a sample test using Blog Press app to blog from the iPad. Now to try and upload a photo of the birthday present the guys gave me in April.


Okay... I am optimistic this will work. Used the camera connection kit to get photos from camera SD card to iPad.

And for my vanity... No, I was not born in 1965!

Ed Lingo Bingo

Because professional development webinars need a little "fun"... feel free to use at your next department viewing of your favorite education reform movie/webinar/network expose or article/book discussion.

Pondering Presentations (and bad blog post titles) Part 2

When we last visited our intrepid rant, we uncovered feelings of anxiety that seemed interrelated with the use of technology by those crazy kids to quickly create presentations using tools that are much more natural to them than they are to the educators (please Google “digital natives” for the 5 million blog entries, books, and YouTube videos on this subject).

But rather than continue to pick apart some of the flaws in presentations-as-assessments, let’s see if there is a correlation between the assessment tool and the tendency to foster an environment that promotes critical thinking skills in students. In fact, let’s just compare presentations to one other tool:

Traditional papers, especially those with multiple drafts, seem to have this call to critical thinking built into the process. First, it is apparent when someone is not saying anything of relevance for paragraph after paragraph (the irony of this multi-post blog is not lost on me). Second, the drafting process itself forces the reflection on both the content (is this really what I want to say?) and writing style (is that the best way to say it?). Finally, the traditional written paper has set modes of attribution and citation that encourages the use of outside resources to broaden the scope of the individual mind.

In summary:
· Built-in checks to validate the presence of thought
· Built-in reflection on content and style through drafting
· Built-in assumptions and methods for incorporating the thoughts of others into your own

Conversely, while the typical presentation is made better when these things are present, they are not necessary. Presentation assessments typically (and frankly ideally) have fewer words so that lack-of-thought can remain hidden. Use of multimedia, pictures, sounds, clever (and not-so-clever) transitions tend to compound the issue, particularly when educators are liable to be impressed by things that have nothing to do with the content of the presentation (but a lot to do with the presentation mechanics).

Informally, there seems to be less of a drafting process with presentation-based assessments. Where formal papers may typically have one-on-one meetings with a teacher, peer reviews, work-shopping strategies, etc., the typical project timeline for presentations often consists of a combined research-and-preparation period (individually or in groups) followed by a class presentation. Feedback by the class is limited and feedback/assessment by the teacher is done in the form of written comments given afterward. There is little presumption that a presentation is “drafted” or will be refined throughout a creation process.

Furthermore, the growing tradition of “borrowed” photos without citation and a lack of feedback from teachers about attributing ideas properly also feed the trend to use other ideas and claims as one’s own thoughts. Not only does this reinforce a cultural trend of plagiarism, but it eliminates the critical process required to properly present the ideas of another and critically compare them with one’s own.

Unfortunately this issue is happening at all levels of education; thus we as secondary educators find ourselves encountering students who have less and less exposure to the assessment strategies that most naturally call for the upper levels of Bloom’s famed taxonomy and more and more experience with assessments that can be done quickly, without drafting, and with minimal critical feedback to evaluate proof of accuracy or originality of thought.

So what is the solution?
1. Let’s isolate the problem from its apparent technological origins. This has very little to do with the mechanics of Keynote or the tendency for teenagers to tweet in 140 characters rather than handwrite letters. Technology is an emphasizer of trends, seldom a trendsetter in its own right.

2. Design assessments timelines that build in the critical thinking process and identify when that process has not been followed. Two examples:

a. The teacher from the illustration in the last blog modified his assignment to require a written paper (with traditional citations, page length, drafting etc.) as a preface to the presentation. Thus the teacher engages with students during the “thinking” portion of the education and the presentation becomes a distillation of the thought that has gone before.

b. Embed another process for showing critical thinking into the presentation assessment. This might include a question and answer period used by both teachers and students after the presentation, formal reflection writing afterward on a prompt of the instructor’s choosing based on the presentation, or a separate analysis of literature about a research topic as pre-work.

c. Require drafting and peer-review of PowerPoint presentations.

It is easy to blame the trends of society at large or the looming media-consumption tablet explosion on our lack of student’s willingness to engage in critical thought. But if we have fallen into the all-too-comfortable trap of lowering expectations due to the lure of the shiny and pretty, we may need to take time to identify our ultimate learning objectives, reflect on our experiences, and match our assessments and activities with our desired outcomes. It is the same bar to which we should hold our students, whether they are thumb-typing a book report at the elementary level, researching for term papers in high school, or presenting with Keynote in middle school.


PS: Yes, this is a long multi-post blog. But according to Mark Bauerlein’s article “Too Dumb for Complex Texts?” (Educational Leadership, February 2011), we need to encourage reading of complex texts for at least one hour a day (we’d link to it but we don’t think he’d like that… oh whatever…click away). Consider today complete for you.

Pondering Presentions: Part 1

It has been an interesting week in the world of technology and #edtech and, as is often the case, a number of seemingly isolated incidents have begun to swirl around in my head enough for me to draft a blog-entry. Luckily, I have @40ishoracle to look over the writing to make sure that it makes sense when all is said and done (if you haven’t had the opportunity, you should take time to read her profile in “School CIO”).

Incident #1: My nine-year-old (for those of you who follow me on twitter, Daughter Prime) came into the living room where I was diligently working on the RIO version of Angry Birds and her mom was typing on a laptop. She asked “can I use the (Google)TV? I need to type a reading log.” Now this question could be worth a blog entry in and of itself, but I watched in fascination as she accessed her school’s learning management system, brought up a blank report template, thumb-typed three solidly written paragraphs about The Mysterious Benedict Society, and posted it for teacher review to a virtual homework dropbox.

Incident #2: I had the opportunity to play with the ASUS Transformer brought in by @brebeufjesuit alum @kcklippel. As I played with the device (an Android Honeycomb tablet with widescreen that docks with a larger-than-netbook keyboard for fast typing and 7hrs additional battery life), I began to see how useful it could be in the post-pc world that Steve Jobs declared with the release of the iPad 2.

Incident #3: (stolen from fellow parent, @40ishoracle): Her daughter has had an increasing number of assignments taking the form of “presentations” created in Keynote for assessment and evaluation in place of traditional papers at the middle-school level.

The discussion that swirled around these incidents began with typing.

For a number of years, I have been saying as part of the precursor to Bring-Your-Own-Tech language @40ishoracle introduced me to, that the role of tablets/phones will be as personal productivity enhancers…That a computer will be necessary for “full production” – papers over a certain length, multi-tasking or multi-window or multi-screen research, etc. After watching my nine-year-old comfortably manipulate a thumb keyboard at a decent rate and speed indistinguishable from a nine-year-old at a standard size qwerty keyboard, I opened myself up to the idea that home-row typing vs. thumb-typing alone is not a distinguishing element from critical thinking and productivity.

So if students can be as productive typing (or swyping), what does this say about the types of assignments that we offer?

Rant Begins Here:

When @40ishoracle and I offer a presentation, it is backed up by hours of work. This work ranges from formal and informal discussions, conversations with other educators, background research on the topic, examples in the lab environment that is our Jesuit High School, etc. The presentation is a distillation or interpretation of the thinking that went before it. This combination of context (the work that has been done by others), experience (trying and interpreting lessons in the classroom), reflection (the conversations), is the heart of the Jesuit educational system and parallels with critical thinking that is so beloved of everyone from the ASCD to legislators to *gasp* teachers.

But (and it is a big one): It is absolutely possible to create a presentation that does not benefit from this level of prep work.

Last year, as part of our preparation for addressing issues of information literacy and research rigor that the school wanted to address, we had the opportunity to review a number of student presentations created by our junior class. A common trend that became apparent in our evaluation was that the presentations, while for the most part factually accurate and in most cases properly, if loosely, sourced, lacked the depth of thought that we would have hoped to see (that critical thinking piece again).

In our year on the social-media and research presentation circuit, we found that we are not alone with our assessments. Teachers have noted and agreed that:

• The number of presentation based assessments are growing and in some cases replacing traditional writing.

• There is a general feeling that students are not thinking as hard about the subjects on which they are being assessed.

• There is a malaise of inevitability about this that is wrapped up with “info-whelm” and technology anxiety.

Ultimately, the call for educators, and the educational technologists that support them, is to help craft lessons, including assessments, that will challenge students to think and then demonstrate in some way the level, accuracy, and intensity of that thought process either publicly (presentations) or interpersonally (papers, tests).
If our anxiety level is increasing and we lack confidence in the student-created presentation as an assessment tool, then we owe it to ourselves and our students to analyze the assessment and figure out how to make it fit our critical thinking needs.

Will students notice if we replace traditional keyboard with thumb boards?
Is there an inherent flaw in electronically assisted presentations?
Do these rhetorical questions raise feelings of nostalgia for 60s syndicated super hero TV shows? Stay tuned to the blog for your answer…Same #edtech time, Same #edtech URL!
…