EdTech and Gender in 4 Scenes

This post started out as a post about getting large systems to move forward with EdTech and notions of frontier. The more I thought about it the more my examples seemed to be about gender roles as much as about technology. I think this much less true in higher ed than k12 but still. You may disagree, even then the post might illuminate something.

1. All of my students have tablets (it is a requirement) and most have an iPad or iPad mini. In a conversation one of my students confided that her dad hates the iPad. I smiled and said: "let me guess, he loves tinkering and hates the fact that you do not need him to conduct maintenance and problem solve your computer problems." She paused, thought about it and admitted: "yep that's pretty much it".

2. In a work with a specific district the school technology guy refused to get iPads for the teachers. He was an old army guy (I can relate) used to the age where we could fix anything with pliers, a screwdriver and a few components he rebelled against the blackbox. His main defense was "how will we change the batteries once they start running out?" Once again it was an issue of control of a male "techie" over mostly female staff. By the way there was a lot less patronizing over the high school staff in the same school with many more male teachers.

3. Two weeks back I was in Western Nebraska participating in the ESU 13 MidWinter Conference. We had two great sessions with teachers (60 in one session and over 100 in the second). A few kindergarten teachers complained that they have yet to receive the iPads because the technology person at the district will not release the iPads until they take a class and a test. They were frustrated as was I. I've seen 3 year olds and cats manage the iPad effectively- a course?

4. A large district I work with bought i devices, but gave the elementary teachers (predominantly women) sets of predefined apps and no passwords. The devices were updated 1-2 times a year. Again, the same women we trust with 16-30 of our children (a woman's role) cannot be trusted with technology and access to a password or just the freedom to create their own.

Each one of these scenes on its own is just a tiny sliver of reality but taken together we start seeing a whole picture. I am not "blaming" anyone I just think that we have persisted with stereotypes and attitudes that go unexamined. Why do teachers need to pass a "test" or a "cours" to use a device meant to be used out of the box? Mainly because we want to "protect" the womenfolk from their own foley. Some of it is based on previous experience. Elementary teachers (again mostly but not exclusively women) disliked using computers that required constant tinkering and time wasting on just getting things to work. They needed machines that worked and for that they needed techies (mostly menfolk). Now with new devices that do not require support it is the techies that resist because these new devices make their role as gate keepers and winners of admiration less somehow.

Because as we all know the role of the tech experts is actually much greater than ever, security, network, wireless and privacy are all necessary, crucial to the operation of any school system. But that puts the techies away from the teacher and her gratitude. Teachers as a result developed a dislike of technology and its many obstacles. How many passwords will you try before you give up on that Youtube video?

Technology in it's modern transparency is part of literacy. Devices let us express ourselves and experience others in a multitude of ways that are crucial for raising this next generation- remembering that the kindergarteners of today will graduate college (or the open-badge factory) in 2030. As a result we cannot heap obstacles in their way we should be opening doors to seamless technologies and let everyone- EVERYONE- play.

An Odd Post about Democratic Education

This is an odd post because Democratic education is not a topic I usually address in my blog. Well, at least not directly and intentionally. I have some of my best ideas emerge during the summer. Summer for me is a time of concentrated teaching. I spend full days teaching, and something about that focus on two teaching projects at once seems to focus my mind and generate surprising new directions. Two years ago it was the time Tech EDGE idea was born.

This summer I woke up one morning and thought: I wonder what a democratic teacher education would look like? I posed the question throughout that day and found that it resonated with two graduate students. Now, I am quite center that the same two students are probably the reason I asked myself the question in the first place. Our conversations during the intensive weeks in class help direct my thinking and allow me to wonder.

Fast forward 3 months and we now have a troika exploring democratic teacher education embedded within a  teacher education program that focuses on pedagogical content knowledge. So my task here (homework assigned by graduate students really) is to try and explore in writing what Democratic education means to me.

On that morning I first consciously thought about democratic education I walked around and asked anyone I can. What would it even look like? I found the idea tantalizing but far from fully formed. To me democratic education has three main features: participation, tolerance, and process. This view has emerged after some discussions and additional thinking I've been doing. It is not an attempt at an objective definition it is what it means to me.

It starts with participation. Show up, use your voice, work with others. Democracy for me is about using your voice on topics you know and care about. It is not part of an agenda define by others but instead guided but a set of principles you work out for yourself overtime. It starts with showing up, if you do not show up nothing else will happen, tacit voting does not replace engagement. Using your voice is a balancing act. I know people who use their voice because they have it and frankly like to use it more than they actually like thinking through issues. For me the heart of using your voice is actually about understanding the problem first, the complexities involved the risks and opportunities. Finally its the ability to work with others, more precisely others who may not agree with you about everything. I HATE debate, the way it plays out in American schools and congress, it is not an effort to reach compromise or listen. Instead it a battle with points winners and losers, teaching that it is all about who comes on top and not what we can accomplish together, but I digress.

Tolerance has to be a key principle in any democratic endeavor. When defining what democratic processes are, there must be ways to protect divergent views from being squashed by fear of social or grade pressures. This has always been a struggle for me. How to get an honest discussion in class when I am the all powerful instructor (read: grade giver), professional authority (education and experience). I also have a strong voice and am a male teaching mostly female students in a genderized (my dictionary says it is not a word, is it not?) profession. The completely unsatisfactory solution (like democracy itself?) is on creating a community in the classroom. Creating familiarity that can increase students' level of comfort (and mine) to reduce the power relationship so central to higher education.

Process for me is the how. This is probably where most of my work must be. How to create procedures and actions that will create a more democratic milieu. The paradox of course is that I cannot fully define such process, because if I do it becomes inherently undemocratic.

This is it for now, welcoming all democratic ideas...