The Teacher Pipeline and TikTok

This weekend I dove into Teacher TikTok. It was fun and, at times, entertaining. I learned two things that are on the teacher's mind:

1. Requirements- for time beyond the contract, whether extending the school day, weekend or during unpaid summer time.

2. Professional development- the list here is even longer but can be summarized:

    Booking snooty speakers.

    The leaders of professional development are divorced from the reality in classrooms especially post-pandemic.

    Professional development that does not walk the talk.

    Professional development could be a video or email.

Professional development that does not consider the diverse needs of different teacher based on topic, experience and expertise.

Our professional learning in Art TEAMS is trying to provide an alternative that creates learning for teachers that is attentive to needs and presents new ideas but allow for time to process and design. We are focusing on respecting professionals and helping them achieve new things. However, I must also stress that everyone in our cohort chose to take this path. It follows that this work cannot be dictated and still expect to get the same outputs.

Art TEAMS is off to a Great Start

 

This week we finally started our Art TEAMS grant with teachers. The project is developing self-driven creative learners who connect disciplines using arts and emerging media as a language to engage and organize knowledge and life experiences.

We will accomplish this by developing, implementing, and evaluating a professional development program for K-12 art educators, generalist teachers, principals, teaching artists, and museum educators.

This week was our first with this great crew of educators. In this professional learning opportunity, we have been careful to design a program that respects the strengths of all the participants and positions everyone as a participant and co-leader. I have to admit that I have not created this much physical representation of learning since my Graduate school days at UCR, nor have I created this much art since my elementary school days. I have found the interactions and the learning powerful, and I believe we are on our way to creating a powerful model that will provide an avenue for innovation. 

Reflecting on this week, my lessons are:

1. We all require protected time to make leaps in our practice and transform our approach. I do know that summer workshops transformation is hard to bring back into the classroom, and thus we will continue to support and work with our team of educators for the next two years.

2. Art is fun even for those with a limited artistic ability (me). You just have to let go and be playful. 

3. Exploring the affordances of materials and discovering their malleability is a truly engaging endeavor.

4. Movement. Movement is magical; in many ways, it is a discovery for me, a discovery that makes me dance with joy. 

Finally, I want to reflect on a moment of pride. In this grant, we insisted on supporting local Nebraska artists. We have found four unique and outstanding artists. I will talk about each of them in a different post but for now suffice to say that I have had a glorious week, and I cannot wait for next week to continue the work.

3 Reasons Scaling Up Open Educational Resources Should be the Next Step

Open Educational Resources (OER) have been with us for over 20 years. The world wide web revolution made them accessible to anyone with an internet connection. The move in schools to 1 to 1 devices is making it possible now to rely on OER to replace curriculum companies. I believe that this is the time to scale the use of OER and move our schools boldly forward. I believe that the movement has matured enough to move from the periphery to the center of the education process. Here I outline the three most important reasons to do so.

1.  It is democratic. Well vetted OER breaks the hold that publishers and some states (Texas, CA, NY) have had over the creation of materials. The use of OER allows districts, and potentially even teachers to exercise their professional judgment in curating the curriculum without having to create everything themselves. This will help build the professional capacity of educators to make decisions that fit the students and communities they are serving. The challenge here is tackling the potential for dealing with overabundance and the paradox of too much choice. To make this reality, a vetting process should be added to OER, so teachers have a sense of quality. Such curation is visible on sites such as OERCommons and ReadWriteThink.
2. It is flexible. OER can be updated and corrected in real time without lengthy editing processes. In effect, we can use a Wikipedia-like process with super-editors who help maintain the integrity of the process. The value of OER is, therefore,  based on the quality of the original and the willingness of users to keep the resource updated and commented on. The use of crowdsourcing to determine the quality and maintain the "freshness" and accuracy of the information can be invaluable.
3. It is (almost) free. Resources saved by not buying textbooks and teacher materials can be turned to making sure that schools have adequate technology infrastructure, adequate device distribution and most importantly- turn most of the savings into professional development that makes sure that teachers are well positioned to take advantage of the opportunity afforded by OER.

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.

Four Ways to Start Integrating Technology in your Class Tomorrow

(Almost) Thirty years ago I jumped out of an airplane. It was after about a week of practice, and I knew I wasn't ready. Our guide disagreed, "you will never be ready until you have done it". I found her logic faulty but got on the airplane. When the doors opened, I was sure I was not ready. I advanced with the rest and one by one we all jumped/ were pushed out. Six years later I was driving our car to the hospital with my wife who was experiencing contractions. "I am not sure I am ready" I tried to say. She just looked at me glaringly.

We all have to start somewhere. We all have to take a leap. Like parachuting, it is often scary and full of unknowns, but it is also exciting and exhilarating. In technology integration, it is also like labor, we cannot undo the way technology has permeated our lives.

As educators, we must all take the plunge so here are three practical ways to start:

1. Plan a short formative assessment with technology. Build a quiz, group race, or a Q & A with technology. I prefer Socrative because it allows open-ended questions and works across platforms. Start with two warm-up questions that are easy to make sure everyone understands the technology and then have about 6 -8 harder questions. You can also use websites like Quizizz or Kahoot- the advantage is the high number of shared assessments that you can search. Even if your students do not have devices, you can use a system like Plickers to get a similar result. Formative digital assessment is a short but useful jump into tech that engages students and produces quick results.

2. Have students introduce themselves or a topic using a simple presentation. You can use HaikuDeck Google slides, or even a single pic found online. Keep it short and simple 1-3 slides for each group or student.

3. Assign a digital product replacing a written one. The idea is not to add to the workload, vary it and allow students to use a tool and another way to express themselves. The key is to enhance productivity.

The idea is to add engagement without adding too much to our workload. We have to jump sometime, or someone will push us. Just start doing something.

Boot Camp as Metaphor

I have been working with secondary teachers this week. As we were discussing technology integration, some explained that they just came from boot camp. A Google boot camp! I nodded, and we continued but in the back of my mind I was thinking: "boot camp? Why is it boot camp?"

I find it fascinating that as we get further away from the military as a nation we adopt more militaristic language to describe everyday non-military activities. Boot camp is a foundational experience for anyone that has served. It is a formative period in the life a recruit (or volunteer) that through intensive interaction, extreme activity, and a lot of yelling, to socialize you to army life. It serves to create new bonds with peers and help separate civilian life from a new and challenging reality.

The term got co-opted by exercise routines. The first few mimicked actual boot camp practices (complete with boots) but then it drifted farther and farther. So now a few intensive days or even hours of technology training are called boot camp. Really? The part of me that went through boot camp 30 years ago is rebelling. But then an idea occurs to me.

What if we recreated a boot camp for teachers in the spirit of boot camp? Technology integration boot camp. Longer than a week, intensive and transformative. Say five weeks of full immersion. Not just about technology but creation, teaming, collaboration. The idea would be to transform teachers in fundamental ways, so their practice is inherently different. For this transformation to be successful, we need to continue support for the first year of implementation. Boot camp could be a way to induct new teachers (who would love a few more weeks of pay). I believe we have at leat a partial model in the writing project that creates this kind of a transformational space with teachers.

So, Boot Camp? Only if you mean it!

Four things we already know about PD (but need a reminder)

I just finished a week with a fantastic group of educators. Laurie Friedrich, Alison Preston and I ran our fourth iPads in the Classroom workshop. The name of the workshop is inadequate since we had users with all kinds of devices including windows machines, Macs, Chromebooks, smartphones and of course iPads.

The intensive one-week tech workshop is always fun although at the end of each we all experienced the sense of reaching capacity. It also reminds of what we know and often conveniently forget about effective professional development (PD):

1. We need significant time away from the everyday tasks to make significant changes. If you are tinkering with existing structures short workshops can be fine, but if you want a departure from normal you need to take time.

2. We need to work in teams. Shared cognition when learning something new is empowering, supportive and extends the boundaries of what can be accomplished. Even after facilitating numerous PD events (30 presentations and two classes last year) Laurie and I are still learning new things every time.

3. We all need time to practice. Showing isn't enough, everyone must participate in doing and experimenting during the PD. Showing and then sending teachers back is just not enough especially with new technologies that without support can become frustrating and with support are almost trivial.

4. We all need follow-up. That is our next step, making sure teachers have opportunities to discuss and extend what they already know.

Apple's Folly (in Education)

The news from LAUSD (see here) who is suing Apple and Pearson has made the news and is probably hurting the chances of a large district buying iPads in the near future. Apple is an iconic company and I believe that it has exceptional products that work very well in k-12  and higher ed environments. You can see my reasoning in this short YouTube.

HOWEVER

The fail in LAUSD has to do with two major problems. The first is not directly up to Apple, but instead to the partner Pearson education who offered up a not fully developed product to a large district. The second was the lack of preparation of teachers to meaningfully use iPads in the classrooms. These are common problems that are seen in a lot of tech integration including districts I work with. Adding to LAUSD and other district woes are restrictions on student and teacher uses through management software that prevents students and teachers downloading or accessing certain features. Notice that most of these problems are not directly linked to the Apple product but rather to the way it was rolled out.

It's easy to give advice, but given the PR that Apple gets from failed implementation (definitely at the scale of LAUSD), I have radical suggestions about how Apple may prevent implementation nightmares. I suggest that Apple can use its position to insist on having certain pieces part of any sales contract and be brave enough to walk away from contracts that do not include them. I believe that such an approach actually fits with the way Apple image has been projected- no compromises, we know what is good for you and will insist on it!

Remember this ad?

I believe that the same approach is needed here. Walk away if implementation is doomed (yes I know easy for me to say).

Here are the three elements that I think Apple should insist on when selling in Education:

1. Insist on a reasonable professional development for teachers that goes beyond a single event. Part of the contract needs to be a reasonable plan for supporting teachers for at least one year. This can be part of Apple services (they do it extremely well in some places) or internal to a district or school, but insisting on a funded well designed PD is a must for successful integration (and good press, and renewed contracts). We all know what it should look like (if you don't watch out for our next publication).

2. Insist on minimal or NO management software. The management software has repeatedly failed, updated and still falls short of the quick agile response that people expect from personal mobile devices. I will argue that it will never work because our expectation from mobile devices is inherently different from other devices. Students and teachers are perfectly capable of managing devices like iPads. Insist on the personal freedom to make decisions and learning to be a good digital citizens without external control (rewatch the video). I cannot express how many frustrated teachers I meet during PD that describe in exasperated tones how long it takes to use a new app that we just talked about and will take 3-4 weeks to get to them (if not more). For example an description from a teacher I worked with:

"As easy as it may sound when someone says “oh, that’s easy, there’s an app for that”, when working with public school property, it was definitely not easy to just download the apps I wanted.  After several frustrating, failed attempts at trying to download from the app store, I found out that despite having an apple ID to purchase, download, etc., from the app store, that does not carry over to School owned devices.  There was a protocol for getting an app put on a device that was owned by the district.  Unbeknownst to me there were several steps I needed to follow in order to get a single app downloaded to just one device, and there were three.  I could not simply ‘get an app’ downloaded within minutes like a personal device.  Nor could I just delete one that I didn’t like.  One of the biggest barriers so far was not being able to put the apps on the devices when I needed them. "
 

If you want teachers to use devices and give the product a good name (and repurchases) insisting on full access (even if just to free apps) would be priceless. The note to districts is always the same. If we trust teachers with the lives of 20 priceless six-year olds I think we can trust them with devices. 

3. Make a push for OER (Open Educational Resources). The device gets much cheaper when it is coupled with an excellent free curriculum. OER is on the rise and may very well be a major part of the new No Child Left Behind Act. The move to OER can also pay for the aforementioned professional development. This last bit is not a must in my mind but a strong suggestion that will help use of the great aspects of the device such as iBooks, iTunesU etc.

I love Apple products and think they have great promise in the classroom. That would be my roadmap.

Transformation

By Real Change [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

After two negative posts I vowed to write a positive one. This week it's easy. We concluded our semester long professional development course on new literacies integration. As each teacher shared it was clear that we have all changed.

I have to admit that taking this new path was not easy. Laurie (Friedrich) and I had constant discussions about setting clear expectations and providing support. We rejected a notion of formal point by point grading. Instead we embraced an atmosphere of acceptance and support. We were absolutely right, every participant in the class emerged as a true professional and found ways to surpass our expectations (and I am quite sure their own). In an era when teachers are devalued and de-professionalized our humble experiment showed (once again) that treating individuals with trust and professionalism leads to exceptional professional growth.

This group of teachers have put their trust in us and Laurie Friedrich and I did our best not to fail them as a group. This PD was not about grades or reaching some arbitrary standard, instead it was about each professional identifying a goal and working towards it. To be honest I think everyone, myself included, achieved more than we originally planned. Here are some excerpts from our teachers' blogs:

"Even though this class has only lasted a semester, I have learned a tremendous amount. I have pushed myself to try new things and through this process have found incorporating technology into my lessons as simple, fun, and best of all… engaging for my students! "

"I've learned to be a little more patient as I try to integrate technology into the curriculum. I'm still working to be OK with the "messiness" that comes with using new technology for the first time. No matter how much I prepare and try to anticipate glitches, new issues arise when we use an app or website for the first time. I can't let that stop me from trying new ways to enhance learning via technology."

"As I reflect over the course of the semester, I realized I have integrated more technology into my teaching than I ever have before. I now feel more comfortable trying out new technology resources with my students. Previously, I was too scared that the lesson would be a total flop or that my students would know more about computers than I do. As it turns out, I am knowledgeable, capable, and confident in teaching my students skills with the use of technology."

We included in the class graduate students who were not currently teaching. These students with varied classroom experience stepped into the breach and supported classroom teachers as they worked to integrate new literacies into the classroom. Carly is a graduate of our program who will get her first classroom next year wrote:
"This semester I learned so much about how I can integrate technology into a classroom. As I start my first teaching job in August in a third grade classroom, I am very eager to take many of the activities/ideas and the knowledge I learned and use them in my own classroom! I was very fortunate to be able to work with many great teachers this semester that have prepared me and shared many great things I can do in my classroom. I am very thankful for the teachers who invited me into their classrooms for me to observe and help out with the technology aspect of their lesson. From these opportunities, I gained confidence as a new educator."

Why am I doing this? (four reasons I work with schools)

This week I met with a colleague from our school district. We had a lovely working lunch/coffee sharing ideas and current projects. I described our main Tech EDGE activities:
    Laurie Friedrich and I have been working with Rousseau elementary at their invitation for over two years. During the time we developed a professional development model that seems to work well and is responsive to staff needs and time frames.
    The UNL elementary education program has developed a class that focuses on tech integration while pre service teachers are in practicum. The instructors are available to teachers as are our preservice teacher. This makes trying new integration ideas a lot easier. It also allows us to reach another six! schools.
    We offer a graduate class in tech integration to practicing teachers who have presevice teachers in their classroom. This class is offered at a great reduction in tuition to teachers and content parallels the one we have for preservice teachers.
   We offer online resources through youtube, iTunesU and beyond.

My colleague looked at me and asked: "Why are you doing this?" This is not the first time I have been asked that, and probably not the last. It always makes me stop and ask myself if in all the activity I have (35 presentations, 74 videos, 60 blog posts, 4 articles all last year) am I doing the right thing? These are my reasons:

1. I work for landgrant institution. Working with our community is a big part of our mission. This is even more true of our college aiming to improve lives and communities across the State. Working with schools let's us have a measurable impact on the future.

2. It allows me to make sure that the teachers leaving our program are truly ready to teach in the 21st century. The teacher we train will potentially teach into the fifth decade of the 21st century. We are responsible for making sure they have a solid foundation for their future growth.

3. I can generate research on tech integration working WITH teachers to figure out what works. This is a new and exciting field and there is much we do not yet know. It is the kind of design work that calls for trrue partnership between practitioners and university faculty generating ideas and measuring impact.

4. It is fun. There is no way around the fact that I love working with teachers, seeing impact, solving problems and coming up with innovative ideas for instruction.

Reflections on China Tour II- When the Stakes are High

Here in the US we often talk about High Stakes tests and their impact for example the work by Berliner and colleagues. In China the conversation about High Stakes was very different.

We had lunch on our last day in Shandong province hosted by one of the lead directors of the school district. After the exchange of gifts and pleasentries we had an inetersting discussion which started with his concern for student well being. He relayed that families are putting too much pressure on students to excel within the system, pressure that may harm some students maybe all. At the same both of us acknowledge the immense impact educational success measured by tests can have on individual lives.

We saw the importance of high stakes testing in almost every conversation with teachers and parents. Our research in China (With Stephanie Wessles and Guo Ji) is looking at the interaction between school and family. We had a chance to see the interaction in our first meeting with parents. Teachers took charge and directed parents who, in turn, complied without question. The parents were professionals from a middle class background but they followed teacher's demands. In the US middle class parents would have responded very differently probably actively resisting what they did not like and asking for a voice in the discussion. Here in China it was different and we were intrigued by it. In conversation some have speculated that this was part of the culture and Confusian ideals. Culture may have had something to do with it, though in private conversations and interviews parents were often critical of teacher's actions and did not think that teachers "knew better". The question that emerged was why parents did not resist what they thought was bad practice?

The answer seems to be linked to High Stakes. In China high stakes are meaningful most often to the individual. Starting very early students take tests that are critical for their advancement into the next level. There is a middle school test, high school etc. Each one of these has potentially dire implications for the student and his/her future path. The High Stakes for students and their family (pressure is intensified by the one child policy) create a need to comply. Parents relayed to us: "I do not always agree with the teacher  but I will not say anything because I fear there will be negative outcomes for my child." In the large classrooms (we saw elementary schools with 40-50 students) teachers cannot attend to all student needs. Each parent is keenly aware of the high stakes and the positive role the teacher can play, thus they do not want to rock the boat fearing that their students will be ignored or underserved.

In this case the impact of high stakes testing is a lost voice for students and parents who should be part of the conversation about education. This is not all one sided. This very same situation helped our efforts to integrate iPads into classroom instruction. Not all parents were in favor and a few worried about it but none resisted it This gave them an opportunity to see the impact on their students. After parents saw the impact they were decidedly positive. This is similar to the model Guskey suggested for teachers.

Five ways that edchats are more than just coffee with Colleagues

A few weeks ago I shared my journey into educational research and technology with first year doctoral students. I was invited by Ali Moeller (or here) a great colleague and an even better friend to talk about researcher identity and I chose to tell my personal journey. Towards the end of my talk I mentioned #nebedchat and #edcamp as exciting examples of the way teachers are using social media to develop, support, and grow.

Ali asked one of those questions/comments that stimulate my thinking and push me to define what it is I am thinking. The comment was: "we used to go out for a coffee and talk about our work. How is this different?". The indication was that it is not very new- and not very special. The comment has pushed to try and explore why I find edchats so great despite my everyday conversations with teachers and colleagues. The need for such a connection is important for three groups: teachers who teach in remote rural schools, teachers who are the only ones at their school to teach that topic (business, German etc.), teachers in schools without a supportive climate.

1. Twitter chats have a moderator and a topic. Casual conversations are less professional and often less supportive. Twitter chats, especially well moderated ones, have a direction and a s result enrich our thinking faster.
2. Twitter chats help rural teachers connect with like minded educators. Small schools often have excellent personal relationships but it is less likely you will find others interested in what occupies your mind at the moment. Teachers have different professional trajectories and finding an affinity group can be affirming and sometimes life changing.
3. Teachers in some schools can feel very isolated. The daily pressures of assessments, (sometimes) toxic administration, and collaborative styles of peers can make some teachers feel very isolated. Reaching out on twitter can provide an outlet and a receptive group of colleagues. It may very well be that we will find that edchats can increase teacher retention.
4. New ideas. The wide  local, national and international reach of the different chats really enhances the strategies, apps, and instructional ideas that we have. It is the ultimate self guided professional development.
5. Respect and crowdsourcing. Twitter chats are affirming because they are democratic, anyone can participate, post, and discuss. The ideas that float to the top are ones other find useful or enlightening and are highlighted through retweets and likes.

The Golden Rule of Professional Development

I got an email a few days ago announcing the potential for professional development in the areas that I have some expertise in. I actually produce research in these areas and so my first reaction was complete rejection. On second thought I re-examined the invite to see what the format was. It was the classic workshop where we will be given all the wisdom collected by beings with superior intellect and secret knowledge. Then we can turn around use the secret knowledge and transform our results.

This is the model of professional development that our own research would point to being highly ineffective. On second thought I realized this is how most teachers feel when PD from the outside is brought to the school or district. The Golden Rule should apply here as in all other social interactions.

As a professional I would like to be treated with respect to my expertise and knowledge I want to part of a change process not a subject of a program. The same could be easily argued is true of teachers. Instead of coming and talking at we can come and talk with and stay awhile. This of course is a much less profitable suggestion to professional developers and harder for schools to sustain. I have erred in the past but our work in the last few years supporting technology integration in school leaves no doubt- we have to abide by:

Develop other professionals like you would like to be developed. Not as a show but as a sustained discussion.

Five things I Learned at EdCampOmaha

I just came back from EdCampOmaha and I am still
 processing. EdCamp is an unconference without a program, fees or a hierarchy. You just show up, offer a session and join others. The experience was immersive, so much enthusiasm passion and powerful learning moments that you cannot but feel hopeful about education teachers and the future. Teachers came from as far as Minnesota and Oklahoma but also Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri.

The energy was undeniable and I wish every one of my students was there to experience it. So here are five things I learned or relearned:

1. Democracy in professional development works, to a degree. In EdCamp sessions are arranged on the fly and teachers choose by title. In essence anyone can create a session that anyone can attend. Participation is key. The afternoon crowd also showed that people vote with their feet and choose to come back in smaller numbers.

2. Gamification can be effective without technology. And easier to implement in some ways. Physical badges, leaderboards and other ideas can put a spin on tedious tasks. Thank you Nate Balcom. The session has renewed my interest in gamifying a portion of my classes.

3. It is fun to be a learner and just enjoy. Its been awhile since I've been to a PD conference just to learn and not be in charge, worry about details or prep another presentation. I've been doing so many TechEDGE conferences and presenting in others that I forgot the joy of just being open to new ideas.

4. Some people are so impacted by circumstance and professional isolation that they find it hard to open up to other possibilities. In a few of the conversations I had it became clear that professional isolation in some schools created an environment in which educators find it hard to innovate. They want to, and I guess they came to edcamp to get energized but the isolation was so severe that they actually sucked the energy out of discussions. My heart went out to them.

5. Teachers are focusing on student creation. Student creation is a literacy multiplier and some teachers have figured it out. The teachers I talked with (especially from Bellvue) were on fire saying: "I have been one to one iPads since January, it has transformed my teaching. I cannot go back!" Thank you Brent for an exceptional opportunity.

Great learning with great colleagues! I do have some ideas and concerns but those will come at another post.

Five Wrong Paths Down Technology Integration Road

I believe we stand at the dawn of a great change in education. Technology is forcing schools to change as it does society at large. The direction of change, however, is not always clear and looking around I see plenty of examples for paths we should not be taking.

1. Buy Devices- This is an if you build it they will come argument. True new devices will push some teachers to try them out. But, it usually starts and ends with a massive investment in equipment followed by very little professional development and opportunities to experiment. Devices are great but they are just tools, teachers and students need to be shown how to use them well.

2. Teacher Devices Only- For financial and other reasons some schools see teacher devices and professional development as the end game. They champion a laptop/iPad/smartboard in for every teacher or in every classroom. These are inherently teaching devices and will increase student achievement marginally if at all- the real gains and 21st century learning will be achieved only if we put instruments in students hands.

3. Lets wait until they master basic skills- This is an old argument that has been used in many ways to stand in the way of making sure that all students learn high level thinking. In technology integration it usually means that students who have lower achievement are robbed of opportunities to explore other modalities and ideas. In this we may be limiting the futures of our most needy students. Just last week I heard a teacher say that her third graders were going to do research without computers because they have not learned how yet! It is our job to teach them and administrators jobs to make sure there is space for that.

4. The disabled device- Most teachers I meet have device/s from their district that they cannot update, download to or in one case even change the background on. In that way iPads go for a year before they are updated (making some apps useless) and prevent teacher from downloading great (mostly free) apps.  In some ways it is a curious argument. We trust teachers with the lives and well being of 20 seven-year olds but do not believe they are responsible enough to use their computer/iPad wisely. The same goes for student use. While I do not advocate allowing students full access to every device, if you do provide individual devices you must open it up, as recent examples from LAUSD show.

5. The canned curriculum- At the heart of 21st century learning is user choice motivation and creativity. In some districts, however, technology is leveraging curriculum company software to deliver a "one size fits all" curriculum. Paradoxically what started as an opportunity for teacher leadership and professional decision making is turning into a regimen of assessments, activities and monitoring that limits teacher decision making. If the curriculum companies with districts created a dashboard driven structure in which teachers can create their own sequence to a core curricular path, that would be great, but that is not what is going on on the ground. This is perhaps the most dangerous road to take as it may very well help de-professionalize the teaching profession further.

At the heart of my argument is that technology is opening new paths to leaning, adding a diversity of possible paths. Let's not use it to close down options. And if we choose to go down the road (I do not think we have a real option about that) we need to make sure that it is used by students and supported by top notch PD that helps teachers experiment and learn not follow a predetermined path.

My Chinese iPad Adventure

Ji Guo is a new graduate student in our program. With his help I have been able to expand our work on professional development in technology integration to China.

The first foray was adopting our YouTube videos so they can be accessible in China's YouKu. We went even further and developed a separate series of video PD on iPads designed specifically for the Chinese market.

This monday we tried something new. An online presentation for Chinese teachers who are interested in integrating iPads into their classrooms. It took us a full day to prepare and make sure the technology and content were all up to par. We had a great crowd of about 50-60 computers linked (we estimate 100 viewers) through Adobe Connect. This was a great experiment in producing a cross cultural professional development. I think that the team including Ji and Qizhen is very aware of the cultural differences and we all took special care to make the content relevant and helpful as well as culturally sensitive. The viewers were attentive, interactive and fun to work with!

As a reality check I would like to talk about 3 unexpected outcomes that can serve as a guide to working with China.
1. Less than 48 hrs after we made our powerpoint available someone was using it as their ow selling PD.
2. Our book on the Universal Learning Model is available in China in digital format illegally
3. Someone has charged $50 for the password to our presentation (that we served for free).

I find the experience educational and amusing. In some ways it is flattering.

I take a few things from it- We can have a real impact in China- there is obviously a thirst for innovation. The added value in the market cannot be a product it has to be the service- us. Finally that there is considerable monetary value to our and if anyone is profiting it might as well be us.

Here's to continuing my Chinese adventures...

You Tube for Professional Development: or what I Learned Making iPads in the Classroom

Friday I had a conversation with Dave Brooks a colleague and a friend. He is also the person who seems to be two steps ahead of me in his thinking. Well, a few steps ahead of most of us. My favorite example is MOOCs, that he has been running for 15+ years on his servers.

During our conversation he mentioned that he watched one of my iPads in the Classroom shows recently. I smiled, he said "how are planning you monetize it?" I looked back somewhat quizzically. He continued: "This is a new area you should write it up. Writing is how we academics monetize". I whole heartedly agreed.

So what have we learned making iPads in the Classroom?
Just do it- don't wait until you know what you're doing. The medium is new and the only way to move forward and create something meaningful is to try. Everything about the show has changed. It is shorter, snappier, easier to make.
Keep changing- listen to your audience and team and make changes that allow you to deliver a better PD product.
Learn from others. We are constantly looking at other outlets trying to see what may work for us. Our original model was "iPad Today". More recently we've been looking at "AppleBytes"
PD is unlike other media. Content and quality rule. This limits how much you can learn from other video outlets.
Persistence- perhaps the hardest thing is to keep producing. But viewership and feedback come only if you keep at it.

Simple I know but as more PD goes online it is important that we learn from each other!

Creative Teaching, Personal Growth, and the Brain Drain

Take one: One of our presenters in the Tech EDGE conference (coming next week for the third time) told me when we had a few  minutes that she was tired of how slowly her district was transforming. She felt that after 5+ years at the forefront of technology implementation she wanted to move to better and bigger things.
Take two: At the NETA conference last spring I came face to face with a sobering reality. Here was a crowd eager to learn, eager to grow and be creative in teaching. We heard exceptional speaker, learned new applications and had way too much coffee together. But conversations around the tables and the professional reality of many of the presenters (and I suspect participants as well) was in transition. Many were working at the district level, ESU (Educational Service Units), some even for technology companies.

The question is whether education or more specifically teaching is experiencing a "brain drain". Is it possible that  teachers leaving the profession after 5-20 years experience because they cannot be creative and innovative in large bureaucratic systems? The data I have is anecdotal (there is a dissertation in this I am sure) but still intriguing. It is possible that creative and innovative teachers seek out more education, professional development and new ideas. I have long held the belief that there is a point in a teacher's career that she feels that there must be something else out there beyond the district. That when teachers seek out professional development, graduate degrees and new projects. The irony is that the new knowledge and innovative ideas can be exactly the thing that starts distancing them from the classroom until they cannot see themselves going on and start looking for alternatives. When the opportunity is there they get a doctoral degree, become teacher educators, or perhaps go work for Apple.

Why now? I think that there are structural reasons in public education that may be encouraging the "brain drain". On the one hand the increased pressure on teachers to "perform" on high stakes standardized measures constrain curriculum and creativity leaving little to no room for experimentation. This is contrasted by the fast paced changes in technology and society. The difference in rate of change is staggering. Finally, it is more socially acceptable and often necessary to change careers at least once in adulthood.

While I understand the urge to make personal changes I wonder if the state of public education might be progressively hurt by this phenomenon. Are the best minds running in the other direction? It could be that this is "The new normal" for education. The challenge is not just having a younger less experienced teaching force, it is that a good portion of the veteran work force are exactly those who are less likely to innovate and lead positive change. Now, to be totally honest, I am not in the classroom anymore either. I made the same move. How, I wonder, can we create schools that will allow teachers like that to stay, grow, and innovate without leaving the profession? Should this even be a goal?