What Girl Volleyball taught Me about EdTech

I am visiting my mother in Israel for a few days. Sitting around the table were some family and friends that came to say hi. My aunt was telling us about her granddaughter who is just over 15 and already 6'2". My first thought was, does she play volleyball? This is what I perceive to be a Nebraska question. After 14 years in Nebraska, I think like a Nebraskan. It is unusual for a girl who is tall not to be involved in sports. Einat, a long time friend, and an athlete, chimed in does she play basketball? The answer was No, she does not do any sport. Instead, she is modeling. My aunt explained that there were no opportunities afforded to her in sports.
Einat, who is a former pro athlete, lamented the status of women's sports at all levels. The opportunities aren't there, and there is very slow change.

I started thinking about what made the situation in Nebraska and the US different. While the status of women in the US is somewhat better than Israel, it is not dramatically different. Israelis love sports. While speaking, I realized that the main difference was schools and extracurriculars. I have to admit that I have an ambivalence towards high school sports. But through this discussion, I realized how the structure of extracurricular activities allows schools to open opportunities across ethnicity, income, and gender lines. The fact that it is a school sanctioned activity allows students who might never find such a home to "try out" new selves. In this case to try out their identity as athletes. This would not happen for many students unless schools offered the activity. In popular culture, I am reminded of the path that Jesminder 'Jess' Kaur Bhamra took in Bend It like Beckham. I am convinced that the road would open to many more girls and minority women when it is a school activity.

So what does that have to do with EdTech? Quite a bit. I hear calls to limit the use of technology in
schools or even not teach with devices. Teach thinking, basics, writing. I believe that much of this argument is coming from a middle-class belief that students will eventually get there. I make this point often about my kids. If their school fails to teach them about digital citizenship, search, or tools, I will show them. The problem is that this approach leaves too many capable students behind. Students who will not find a guide that would help them explore if they are interested in science, programming or gaming. Without schools affording to expose all students to these areas we are reproducing gap and losing some of our most talented future creators. We should teach science, technology, and making to ALL in school right NOW.

An Open Letter from a Teacher Educator to EduTech Companies

I am a teacher educator. I work with pre-service teachers every day. I am also an EdTech expert leading professional development and research in this area. I love apps OERI and bells and whistle. I want my students to use tech tools for every opportunity it fits their lesson. I want them to give feedback electronically and use the best tools for the job. But I can't. The simple truth is that my students are having less open access to the technology. As a result, my students have very limited access to the tools used in their school district.

Here is the deal,  curriculum companies turn into Tech companies joined by startups in the field. They all try to sell district-wide products. The problem is that they are selling to school districts, but my students who are in practicum, internship and student teaching in the same classrooms do not belong to the district. As a result school districts do not want to pay for licenses that will not benefit teachers or additional students.

The problem is that more and more the cost is locking my students out of the materials they need to teach. There are hundreds of thousands of pre-service teachers in the US. EduTech companies, please figure it out. Use some of the capacity for innovation to create a profile for pre-service teachers.

Help us make the next generation of teachers connected capable and ready to go.

Now and Next in Ed

"Maison tournante aérienne" by Albert Robida

I spent some time at the Early Childhood Summit this week. It was an excellent opportunity to hear some innovative research. Quite a bit of the research presented was incremental, based on past assumptions and deeply linked to education as it used to be. In a sense, I find that the incremental advances in much of the work are too tied to 20th-century conceptions of education. The problem is, as Berliner noted that much of educational research is related to context and time. Once the context has shifted significantly, it becomes irrelevant.

This led me to think about the now and next in education. The NOW includes two changes:
The shift towards individualized or differentiated instruction. Technology is poised to make fully differentiated instruction possible since it decouples curriculum delivery from its dependence on the teachers thus freeing teachers to focus on guiding students and managing complex information systems needed to support students moving from different starting points. This process is far from over. In fact, I would say that we have only begun. There is, however, an emerging consensus that this is the right direction. This consensus allows teacher education, curriculum providers, and professional development efforts to focus on the task.
The second shift is towards Open Educational Resources (OER). I have spent the better part of the last decade trying to promote these practices from the bottom up. Now with federal support and some states buying in it feels like this tide has turned as well. We can produce quality curricular materials that will be accessible to any teacher and student making the proposition of differentiation affordable for any school. The shift in costs can help education agencies focus on the development of teachers and their ability to deliver differentiated instruction.

The NEXT is linked to assessment. Our current assessment systems are slaves to pre-information-age technologies. In the past snapshot in time assessment technology was the only one available. We simply did not have the technology to capture student performance in-vivo. We had to resort to a weekly spelling test and annual achievement tests. We have perfected these snapshots and now use technology to better and more efficiently capture them. In essence, we are still captive to this thinking- there has to be an assessment event that counts, that we prepare for and then celebrate. Technology and big data have opened the door on a completely different assessment technology. One that captures everything our students do and can measure it in real time. The need for snapshots has passed. If my students writing is captured electronically, then every teacher can get a report of their students spelling without a need for a special event. Instead, they can know how their students are spelling when they are writing authentic texts. Real performance for the real world.

I know that charting potential does not guarantee it will happen. I just hope that researchers and funders and eventually schools can move beyond the practices of the past to recognize the shifts in technology go beyond a more efficient snapshot to describing authentic performance across academic tasks.

What my Ski Accident Made Me Learn about Ed Tech

It is the last day of spring break, and I hobble around on crutches. Our family travelled to our favorite spring skiing spot in Park City Utah where we had a fantastic time, and where I had a skiing accident.
I was skiing down the slope on the last run of the day. My skis got caught, and suddenly I found myself on the ground facing the wrong way with one string of thought flooding my brain: "pain, knee, stupid." Someone came to my aid (thank you whoever you are) undid my skis and called for help. Ski patrol took me down the mountain, and an enthusiastic intern at the clinic informed me that I had an MCL injury.
Having gone through this delightful experience has been an opportunity to think about what I can learn from the accident beyond being more careful when I ski. So, here are some of the lessons I came up with that are relevant to my daily life.

1. The affordances of technology. The first two items I got from the clinic were crutches and a knee brace. The crutches are ancient technology, effective and crude. The knee brace, though, is fantastic. The treatment for my torn MCL in the past would have been a cast for an extended amount of time. It being my right knee it would have prevented driving and exercising for a prolonged period. Instead, this knee brace is hinged, flexible and removable, allowing me to function more normally and start walking within days instead of weeks. We sometimes focus on the downsides of technology and the burdens it adds that we forget the joyful affordances it introduces into our lives.

2. The power of partnership. I was on the slope on my own. There were other skiers around but none that were with me. My dad (78 and till skis better than me) lamented that had he been there this would not have happened. After joking about the way we parent at any age, I started thinking that he was right. Having a partner that helps you have a perspective on the path if he is in front of you, on speed if he is by you, or the responsibility of leading, if he is behind, would have probably caused me to slow down and be more aware of my environment. The parallel to innovating with technology is evident. When we innovate with colleagues, we can prevent burnout (or ski accidents) by working with others. That someone else has to be on the slope with us to help us pace, consider our surroundings, signal when to slow down and rest and help us when we fall. Without this kind of collaboration may be doomed to refuse to put on skis ever again.

3A. Fear is good. A healthy amount of apprehension is good. It keeps us from making catastrophic mistakes. Yes, I fell and got hurt, but I up and about and will be able to do most things within a few weeks. Fear kept me from going much faster and kept me focused on the path.

3B. Fear is bad. I cannot let my recent experience dictate that I will never ski again. I will do so cautiously, but I will certainly try. It is common to fail the first few times we use new technology in teaching. These failures increase apprehension in many practitioners; we must make sure that it does not paralyze us from trying again. As teachers, if we model giving up, how can we foster a "try, try again" attitude in our students.

EdFuture is Now- Predictions

By Parry https://www.flickr.com/photos/21585925@N07/

My colleague Al asked me to think about trends in educational technology in the next 5-7 years. It is both a lovely and futile to try and predict where things are going. As I thought about it I found myself thinking of changes that are already in mid stride. To make it clear I am interested in technology and technology induced trends only as they impact education. Other trends (e.g. self driving cars) are exciting but have little relevance to the thing I know much about.

In the next few weeks I will blog about each group of predictions independently but here are the main topics I will try and tackle.

Already here:
1. Mobile
2. Flipped
3. Social

In the works:
4. OERI
5. Augmented reality
6. Individualization
7. Gaming

Social Engineering:
8. Citizenship
9. Leisure

Fashionable but educationally negligible:
10. Wearables
11. VR
12. User Interface beyond touch and voice.

How we can get "fully trained" teachers?

Graduating class of the Lady Stanley Institute for Trained Nurses in Ottawa, Ontario

I hopped on to #satchat this morning. The chat was lively and focused on assessment practices. One of the participants made this comment:
A5: Technologies in the classroom are only as effective as the teacher using it. Realistically, most are not fully trained
indicating that most teachers are not fully trained to use technology in assessment. That comment stuck out to me. What does it mean to be fully trained?

The term fully implies a finality, that there is such a time when we are done learning and can then go out and perform. As a teacher educator, I fight this notion all the time. Most hiring officials want fully trained teachers. We work hard to prepare capable teachers, but most evidence shows that they have much to learn and the good ones will keep on learning for many more years. Professionals are always working on improving their craft learning of innovations and reflecting on their practice. 

The other fallacy is the idea that there is a set of practices and tools that sum up the profession. If you master this set you will be fully trained. The problem with this notion, of course, is that we do not have a set. Instead, we have an ever evolving set of practices (hopefully supported with evidence) and technology tools. There is no way to be fully trained because the what we train for keeps changing. In fact, the changes in technology do not just change the tool but the affordance in a way that can change the nature of the task and as a result the nature of what and how we teach.

So what can we do? 

1. We can provide teachers with ways of thinking and problems solving. Having productive strategies to think through Problems of Practice is a key element in our work. This is what we do in our student's Capstone Projects.

2. We can provide an environment that supports professional learning for all. Teachers have different problems of practice and thus different professional learning needs. To be ready to tackle the ever-changing challenges of teaching we must help teachers define their learning needs and seek out the right supports. These can be as far ranging as informal edchats on twitter or formal as graduate degrees in education.

3. Change our expectations. We should not expect fully trained. We should expect innovative teachers who keep trying new ideas. Sometimes we will fall on our faces, but with the help of a supportive group of educators we can get up dust ourselves off and learn.

We should keep trying because there is an important lesson for our students in seeing us try, fail and try again until we all succeed together, students and educators. This is especially true of our attitudes toward new technologies.

Why my new Apple TV will not matter (much) for learning and Why it will!

I caved in and got an Apple TV. I spent a few minutes setting it up and enjoyed the way all my work looked on the large screen. And then I had to remind myself that while it is slick and easy to use it will not matter much for learning.

Where it doesn't matter- Learning happens with student devices handled individually or in small groups. It is the active interaction that really pushes students forward (and engages them). The question is: is it a teaching technology or a learning technology? Apple TV falls much more in the teaching than learning. Teaching is important you might say. True, but we've focused on teaching for a few thousand years, time to focus on learning.

Why it will matter- As a teaching device the Apple TV will allow me to share presentations, websites and media from anywhere in the room. This allows me the flexibility to move around, interact with students while giving all students access to what I am looking at. This improved mobility and ease of operation will make me a more effective teacher. One that has to spend less time on tech and more on students. The sharing extends to my students they can share their thinking with the rest of the class using their own devices- a way to teach and learn t the same time.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Apple TV and will use anytime I can BUT I will remind myself constantly that real change will come from individual learning devices not the fancy teaching ones.

iPads in Chengdu China

This spring I have sent Ji Guo to Chengdu to collaborate with the iPad classroom in a first grade.

His report seems to indicate that teachers are in the replacement and augmentation phases of technology integration. They very ably use iPad linked to projectors as agile white board applications for sharing content (through projection) and presenting.

At the same time we are seeing a few creation apps used to create videos that are then shared with peers. This is a huge development for all partners in the project. What we are having a harder time is having student discussions that include critical feedback. That said they are only first graders and they are busy creating video, writing, and sharing.

What is clearly emerging is that beyond the affordances of the specific technology, there is an overarching theme. Technology seems to create a non-trivial opportunity to transform instruction. This transformation is not just about technology integration (although it is also about that), it is about student centered, differentiated practices that focus on engagement, participation and creation. The question that still remains is what impact it will have on more traditional measures of achievement.

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.