Work With Hope

I'm at a two day workshop in Boston hosted by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. There are several presentations on a variety of instruction topics as well as obligatory demonstrations of the company's wares. I was in such a demo this morning and the speaker handed out flash drive wrist bands with informations about all the products. While I was pleased to see them adhering to my “no paper” rule, as I took the drive I was struck with how even this distribution method (even disguised with a fun package) is feeling dated.

I suppose if I only used devices that had USB ports my reaction would not have been so immediate. Carrying only my iPad, it was clear that I could not see any of the materials until I returned home. However, even in the desktop/laptop world there seems to be a disconnect between a cloud-based, available everywhere, model and carry-able (and lose-able) storage.

So what should it be? If floppy discs were replaced by CDs, CDs by DVDs, and DVDs by flash drives, what replaces the flash drive for easy distribution of materials? Based on my recent fascination, I was wondering if it might be the QR code. I've recently begun including these on the screen during my presentations so people can scan the code from their seats. These codes lead them to an information sheet with links and further information. I've also been experimenting with variations of the v-card, a business card with a QR code that enters information directly into a contact list.

If a vendor were to post a QR code on the screen or better yet give it out on a card, or a pen, or some other chatchki, I could take it and scan it into my phone or iPad, and I could have that link on any machine I use.

I suppose my fascination with these codes might be troubling to some, the reduction of information, of people, to box codes. However, they are a simple, portable way to transfer stuff, which is what we have been doing all along. I'd love to hear about other ways we might use this new technology to increase information and decrease trash.

As always, I welcome your comments

 

Let me start today by saying that I have no idea what direction the future of classroom devices will go. It seems like every device that is widely used now involves compromises, and the trend I have observed in tech is that limited platforms become less limited or they disappear.

Taking a snapshot of today, however, one would conclude that the two devices with the most heat in the classroom solution arena are the iPad and the Chromebook. Many schools are using traditional laptops, but you don't hear much about these at conferences. Currently discussions range about 80% iPad and 20% Chromebook, using statistics that I made up at this moment.

I've talked about the Chromebook in the past. It has some clear advantages, most specifically with price and best integration with the Google applications. There is also the HUGE advantage of not dealing with Apple, a marriage I am finding more dissatisfying by the day and one I will be writing about soon.

Today, however, I want to deal with only one aspect of the comparison, the clamshell vs. the tablet. All Chromebooks that I have seen employ the traditional laptop clamshell. They are smaller and lighter than a full-sized laptop, but they still have the fold over screen and keyboard. Many find this configuration better for writing and other creation tasks than typing on an iPad screen.

The problem as I see it arises when it comes to replacing textbooks. One of the “givens” of 1:1 programs is that texts will be available on the device, rather than in paper. Even though many would argue (and I would agree) that the format of the text will change, no one argues that students will not be reading significant passages. As well as “textbooks” students will also be reading novels and other supplementary texts. Given that these materials will not be available in paper form much longer, this is a must for any student device.

Here's where I find trouble reconciling form to function. Reading for any length of time on a clamshell device is inefficient and uncomfortable. When I was experimenting with devices, I tried reading with a small laptop by flipping it sideways and holding it like a book. The good news was that I could read; the bad news was that it was a miserable experience. The machine was heavy, holding the “dead weight” of the keyboard was uncomfortable, and navigation, looking up definitions, and notation was a nightmare. Reading with the clamshell in upright position was only slightly less uncomfortable. I have a hard time picturing students spending significant time reading this way, and no one argues that reading should be a less integral skill to instruction.

So as we look at this format, we need to respond to this issue. Some suggest that we will split out the reading functions, and students can have a single-use reader. However, this seems impractical and costly and contrary to the trend of devices doing more, not less. I don't want students carrying a backpack full of devices like they now carry a backpack full of books.

Ultimately, I don't want to compromise. I want my student devices to do EVERYTHING well, but I don't see how the clamshell model fixes this.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: 'waiting for linguine' http://www.flickr.com/photos/23688516@N00/3486181734 Found on flickrcc.net

 

This is a quick one. For the last few days I have been at the University of Notre Dame for the ACE Superintendents’ Academy. It has been a wonderful time to meet with other superintendents from across the country and enjoy the beauty of the Notre Dame campus.

One night I walked over to the library and took the obligatory picture of the iconic building. While admiring the beauty of the imposing structure, a thought came to mind.

What will they be using this building for in 10 years? In 5 years? When the majority of the paper resources within become readily digitally available, what happens to this pride of the campus? Will it be a crypt for unread books? a photogenic anachronism? a backdrop for football games?

As always, I welcome your comments.

I was reading something (or listening to something, or watching something…hard to keep media straight) last week, and I came across a statement that I had heard in some form or other, many times before. The author alluded to the “fact” that reading comprehension and retention is better when using a retro (paper) book than when using an electronic reader.

This is the kind of sloppy use of data that forms our world. The author of this statement made no reference to where it came from (though I do recall the mention of scientists…so it must be true). A Google search of key terms shows many similar statements, but few actual studies. The studies I found were narrow and preliminary, yet they have been thrown around so often that one no longer feels need to reference.

I know this is nothing new, and not unique to education, but given my push for greater integration of digital media, I wanted to address this here. There are two reasons why studies like these need to be kept in clear perspective.

First, there is an assumption in these statements that comprehension is a static skill. If subjects demonstrate better comprehension with one medium, then (it is implied) that medium is objectively more comprehensible. This assumption ignores the obvious fact that digital reading is a very new skill. Just as one is tentative with a new car, but soon adapts and improves performance, a person new to digital reading takes time to feel fully at ease and perform at her or his best. When I first read novels on a e-reader, I found the experience clunky and unsatisfying. However, now I am more comfortable reading an electronic book than paper book. I am certain my comprehension has increased with this facility, just as human comprehension of digital text will grow over time.

The second implication is that we should just go back to paper texts. Frankly I don't see this as a possibility. The case for paper texts economic, academic, and practical, grows weaker every year. The idea that paper books will somehow make a comeback contradicts everything I'm seeing and reading (online). If this comprehension issue is a fact (which I dispute), then we need to fix it.

There is so much nostalgia connected to the paper book, and it is difficult to sort out feelings from facts, and it is likewise difficult to separate facts from meaning.

…if you didn't understand this, you can print it out.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: 'Parole perdute' http://www.flickr.com/photos/8418112@N04/3526002850 Found on flickrcc.net

 

By now most of you have read that the Los Angeles Unified School District has announced a contract to purchase $30 million worth of iPads for student use in 1:1 implementations throughout the district. This is only phase 1 of a multi-phased plan to roll out devices to all students K-12 by 2014.

The article I read: LAUSD Approves Phase 1 Districtwide 1:1 iPad Initiative — THE Journal

Wow.

My first reaction was, frankly, awe. Whatever you think about public schools, or 1:1 implementations, or iPads, it can't be denied that this is one big gutsy idea. When I announced that the schools in my diocese would have a 1:1 implementation by 2015, I thought I was hot stuff. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I'm pulling out my napkin, because I got served!

My second reaction was irritation, because I didn't see this coming. I believed that this was one of the advantages we had over public school districts, that we could put in place fee structures to pay for programs like this when public schools couldn't charge parents. I thought that public schools could never generate enough funds to give devices to all students. I still don't know how they are doing it, whether by title funds, bonds, or extortion, but this is an ongoing cost of many millions every year forever. I have cried my last tear for “underfunded” public schools.

Third was more practical. In one single stroke, the definition of school has been forever altered. Years ago I claimed that education technology was an arms race. Once one school put in (fill in the blank) computer labs, teacher machines, projectors, Smartboards, or document cameras, other schools had to follow or fall behind in the minds of the public. While this led to lots of wasted money and many mistakes along the way (both true for Smartboards), it also has forced a school system, too in love with status quo, to participate in contemporary (not 21st Century) media. LAUSD, with nearly 700.000 students is a self-contained tipping point for the entire educational community. No school district will long be able to ignore this development or stand on the sidelines. 1:1 learning is the wave of the future, for good and bad, and there is no turning back.

Finally, I was interested that iPads were chosen as the sole device. In my initiative I tried to build flexibility, always stating that many platforms and devices will be used. While I intend to continue to embrace flexibility, this massive choice may be a shot to the heart of other student devices. People may argue that other devices are superior to the iPad, and this may be true, but becoming irrelevant. The bulk of development from publishers, the availability of apps, and the institutional knowledge from thousands of school sites will be directed toward the greatest number of machines, and this has just been re-computed. I agree that the future of computing is cloud based and platform agnostic, so maybe this won't matter…but it will.

Who knows, I might be wrong again. The entire program might flop and disappear. However, with probably $100 million at stake, I don't think anyone will let it go easily. 1:1 education and the preeminence of the iPad in the classroom are here for a while.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: 'Row' http://www.flickr.com/photos/33869420@N00/5205361522 Found on flickrcc.net

 

There are terms used in Ed-tech articles and presentations that set my teeth on edge. For a while I’ve reacted to any non-ironic use of the terms Digital Natives and Digital Citizens. These well-intentioned terms, introduced in a 2001 Marc Prensky article, provided a useful beginning to conversations about different starting places. However, in recent years they have been reduced to magic formulas “These kids know this stuff instinctively, they’re digital citizens,” and excuses, “I can’t do this…I’m a digital immigrant.”

My latest pet peeve is a term that is so ubiquitous that one runs eyes over without seeing it…until, like a virus, one is irritated by every place it occurs. Like the digital twins, this was a well-intentioned and effectively descriptive term that the passing time and events have made progressively less and less useful and more irritating, like an adult using groovy to show that he is down with the kids today.

What is this bugaboo (no, it’s not bugaboo)? Let’s say it together in chorus, 21st Century______ (fill in the blank, skills, learners, classroom, etc.).

As with the other term, Twenty-first Century had a valuable beginning. It was first used as a rallying cry among educators in the 1990s, suggesting that the skills of the new century were going to be very different from those of the past. It said there was a need to update our classrooms, our methodologies, and ourselves to meet the needs of the students we would soon be teaching. However, like digital natives and digital immigrants, the term was co-opted by the education establishment and over-used to the point of triviality. As I look at school mission and philosophy statements, TFC is almost a qualifier, a code word that has to be there to validate the school’s existence. The term is no longer startling. It has become fuzzy and meaningless.

A drinking game for Twenty-first Century at a tech conference would result in an audience suffering from inebriation, and lacking enlightenment.

There are three specific areas where Twenty-first Century no longer hits the mark, and may actually mislead. The first is the practical consideration of time. We are at this writing THIRTEEN YEARS into the 21st Century. It is no longer new or novel, and every year it becomes less so. Will we be talking about TFC skills in 2020? in 2050? in 2090? I know this sounds silly, but this term is still being used in documents of some permanence, and unless it is changed, it will date everything that surrounds it. It is acceptable in January to accidentally write 2012 on one’s checks (assuming anyone writes checks), but in November it just looks strange.

The second consideration is about purpose. In an educational world that supposedly is focused on students, we are using a term that would never be used and has no meaning to students. Twenty-first Century is a reminder to teachers and administrators, because students need no such reminders. Unlike many of us, they are living in the 21st Century. In fact, here’s a surprise, a good number of them were born in the 21st Century. To a student, this must sound as absurd as if we had seriously advocated the need for air-breathing skills.

Finally, the term is lazy because it feels good while not specifically meaning anything. I know we all feel that we know what we mean when we say it, but there is no specific agreed definition. Plenty of skills of the 21st Century are already obsolete. Shall we teach students how to use MySpace? AOL? flip phones? All of these are 21st Century skills that are as useless today as buggy-whip manufacturing.

So what to do? I know that one of the challenges is that there is no simple term to take its place. In discussing this I suggested progressive skills, but a good friend wisely pointed out that this might have a political connotation, and a backlash over a misunderstood term is the last thing we want. I have always liked the term authentic skills. I know that this also needs continued definition, but it is a reasonable, future-proof goal. Maybe we simply use the word skills, which is current for any time.

I hope that schools and educational organizations will start weeding Twenty-first Century in all of its permutations from all policies, statements, and documents that are not simply historical. Now is our chance to do this before it becomes embarrassing, demonstrating to all an essential backward orientation. 21st Century anything only makes sense in terms of the 20th Century…and that is long gone.

As always, I invite your comments.

 

 

Image: ‘balustrade’ http://www.flickr.com/photos/66656285@N00/263292870 Found on flickrcc.net

 

 

I was listening to a podcast yesterday, and they played a newly found clip of an interview with Steve Jobs, recorded back in 1994. Jobs has just left Apple for the first time, and he was reflecting on his legacy. Contrary to expected, he is extremely pragmatic, claiming that everything he has done will be obsolete by the time he turned 50 (which was slightly melancholy, remembering how soon after 50 he died). Although I’ve never been part of the cult of Jobs (and as an English teacher I can never forgive Apple for the “Think Different” campaign,) but this resonated with me deeply and corresponded to remarks that I have made.

Here is the part I liked

 

Working in the area of educational technology brings with it many things, frustration, minor victories, amazing friendships, but the one thing it guarantees absolutely is a lack of permanence. I did a couple of talks last week that I originally wrote three years ago, and in revision I was shocked by the amount of ideas and facts that had been run over by the realities of just two years. I know speakers in other disciplines who go on the road for decades with basically the same ideas and just a little new stuff at the end. Likewise the programs and strategies that I work on will be shown to be laughably wrong or incomplete in a very short amount of time. If I’m lucky like Jobs, I’ll stay around long enough to bury my own ideas, but even these burials will be shoveled over before I am. Technology, particularly in the field of education, has no permanence, no monuments, no Mona Lisa’s.

However, as the video suggests there is a different kind of immortality (to use a very lofty word) in these endeavors. The evolving field, with all of the stages and people involved, is its own kind of cathedral. Our ultimate contribution may be a small layer, but as medieval cathedral builders (at least in legend) we lay our bones into the structure to build it up just a tiny bit higher. Unlike a cathedral, our monument will never be done, but we keep building higher and higher, all the way to the stars.

I’m a working on building

I’m a working on building

For my Lord, for my Lord

It’s a holy ghost buildingIt’s a holy ghost building

It’s a holy ghost buildingFor my Lord, for my Lord

If I was a preacher I tell you what I would do

I would keep on preaching and work on the building too

And that’s what it’s all for.

As always, I invite your comments

Image: ‘p.v. jensen-klint 05, grundtvig memorial church 1913-1940’http://www.flickr.com/photos/94852245@N00/2164161632 Found on flickrcc.net

And thanks to Bill Monroe for the lyrics to “Working on the Building”

 

OK, OK…it's been a long time. Life and laziness have beaten intention and resolve to keep me away from the blog keyboard with alarming regularity.

But it's now summer, better than that, it is those wonderful first weeks between June 15 and July 15 when there are not yet back to school sales in the paper, and we don't start counting down the days yet.

So now is the time to relaunch this blog with greater vigor, and in order to do that, I've created another mind-game to trick myself into writing on some sort of schedule (thanks to those fives of you who read this and participate vicariously in my mental self-manipulation gymnastics).

I'm not doing anything as ambitious as last year's 30 blogposts of summer (which was finished on Thanksgiving). However, beginning with coming week, I am committing to at least twice a week between now and September. If I do this, we should have about 20 new posts during the summer.

Another decision, I'm retiring two of my older blogs, TotechasJesusdid.com and Platformsandparadigms.com. Both of these were early experiments with the form, as I tried different approaches to sharing the word, but I haven't written in either for years (I can't write in this one). So I'm bringing old content into this blog and letting them fade away (I'll probably keep totechasjesusdid.com, because that will be the title of my book if it ever gets written…HA!).

So I invite you to join this next burst of thoughts on the world of technology in education in my schools and schools all over.

And, as always, I invite your comments.

Image: 'Sorry stamp' http://www.flickr.com/photos/7612457@N07/2617651509 Found on flickrcc.net

 

It is no surprise to anyone who knows me that I love giving talks and workshops for teachers and administrators. The ability to share with others while learning from people from all over the country has been a true revelation in this middle part of my life, and one which I hope will be continuing for years to come.

However, since most of my sessions are about Ed-tech, I am always worried about staying up to date. I looked over my list of talks earlier this spring and decided I had to retire two that simply were no longer relevant and not updatable. Even with the other talks I often need to do major revisions to reflect changes that take place between the original composition and delivery date (often between the time I'm asked to speak and the talk itself). I know that tech talks are bananas, with a very limited shelf life…and black spots appear almost immediately. If I am to keep this going, I will need a constant supply of new topics or new approaches to older material.

So I was very happy this week to light upon titles for two new workshops that I hope to offer later this year. A workshop has no reality for me until I think of the title, and I can't over-emphasize how important the title is. Often I'm speaking at places where the audience members have choices between several talks, and it is the title above all else that catches attention and draws traffic. Right now the key word is iPad. If I put this in a title, I know I'll get a good crowd (why I don't just call all my workshops “iPadding with iPads in the most iPaddy Way” I don't know). More than this, a title, often for the first time, encapsulates for me what I want to talk about and how I feel about it.

These two new titles came about within two days of each other, but in completely different ways. The first was something I said in conversation. I was talking with a colleague who is at the cutting edge of school progress about my need to develop something about blended learning (probably the iPad of the next couple of years). However, I want to think broader than just classroom blended models. I think entire schools will start blending traditional classroom attendance with a variety of external digital and other programs. “It's like there will be a double-blender,” I said.

DING!

Coming the Fall: Life in the Double Blender: How Blended Classroom Instruction and Blended School Structures Will Define the Future of Education.

Then two days later I was speaking to a great speaker who was talking about bringing his faculty along with technology progress, an ongoing topic of challenge and discussion. At one point he said, “So most of them are coming along, kicking and streaming.” Asked, he said that of course he meant screaming, and we both laughed.

DING!

Coming this Fall: Kicking and Streaming: Helping the Reluctant Educator to Move from Fear to Technological Proficiency.

I'll be very interested to see what I have to say about each of these.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: 'The Orpheum' http://www.flickr.com/photos/98019953@N00/6076604482 Found on flickrcc.net

 

I spent last week in Houston along with over 8,000 Catholic teachers and administrators in Houston for the 2013 National Catholic Education Association annual convention. In four days I spoke, attended workshops, and had countless enjoyable conversations with old friends and new. As I suggested in my last post, a workshop is usually not true professional development in terms of skill building, but I did learn an awful lot. Here are a few of the “Texas Ten,” the “Houston Decalogue”

• Teachers are concerned about the changes to their profession brought on by ed-tech, and many are frightened by the uncertainly of the future. However, most of those I spoke to (admittedly a self-selecting sample) are excited by the possibility of 1:1 classroom implementations and anxious to learn their role in this new world. Behind this I saw a deep concern for students and desire to do whatever it takes to serve them best.

• One of the speakers gave out a ballpoint pen with an iPad stylus on the other end. It isn't as good as my Jot pro stylus, but this is really brilliant, and I find that I'm carrying it everywhere.

• I felt and heard a strong sense of Catholic identity; that everything, all instruction, all governance, all marketing flows from this.

• Y'all is singular. All y'all is plural

• I am OVER paper. If a vendor or speaker gave me a flier or handout, this found its way to the trash at my first opportunity. Related to this, I am also over tote-bags filled with sales junk. We need a check-in where you can get a badge holder without the bag…or at least an ecologically responsible bag drop for those who choose to go without. I know this is an opportunity for vendors to get their stuff (paper) into the hands of attendees…see original statement.

• iPads continue to be the implementation of choice for schools looking 1:1. Of all the sessions in this area, I saw only 1 dedicated to Android, and nothing dedicated to PCs. While we will have to be sensitive to inevitable winds of change, this suggests that the bulk of institutional growth and professional development will be in this platform for the foreseeable future.

• Overheard many times, “I'm frustrated.” Never overheard, “I'm going to stop trying.”

• Meeting friends from Twitter whom you have never seen before in person is a rare kind of thrill (overheard coming out of my mouth, “Oh my goodness, that's Barb from Nebraska”). Finding out what truly wonderful people they are is an even bigger thrill. Related, Twitter is used only slightly less when you are all in the same room.

• Some of the vendors are the best people in the world…some less so. Interesting new game this year, I walked the aisles of the exhibit hall, deciding for each booth whether what they offered would be relevant 5 years from now. Many won't; some aren't relevant today, though they don't know it.

• Finally…DO NOT HOLD A PROFESSIONAL CONFERENCE IN 2013 AND NOT HAVE WIFI AVAILABLE IN ALL ROOMS FOR ALL USERS.

As always, I invite all y'all's comments.