Schools as a Malleable Material

 The Art TEAMS project has an exceptional advisory council. This group of professionals includes Diana Cornejo-Sanchez, Megan Elliott, and Jorge Lucero. This group of thinkers and doers stretches our thinking and brings joy and engagement into our work. A key moment for me was when Jorge Lucero challenged us to think about school as a malleable material. 

Jorge Lucero (Photo from Engage Art)

What I say from this point forward is my interpretation of the topic inspired by Jorge but the responsibility for any mistake is mine alone. If you think like an artist, the world around us is filled with materials that we can shape to make art. Thinking like an artist helps think about the world as a material that can be shaped, rejecting the notion that the material should be accepted as is. We tend to regard schools and schooling as rigid structures that need to be abided to (especially for teachers and students) or completely reformed or even replaced (policymakers). But what if the best approach is to think about schools as malleable and set on a journey to discover how and where we can shape that malleability to create something new and beautiful.

This is exactly the role we see for Art TEAMS. While we explore using art and creativity to transform learning in classrooms, we are also seeking to start teasing out how to find malleability and push its boundaries to create better classrooms that will be culturally responsive, opening new futures and experiences for all students and their teachers.

In our work with teachers this summer, we came up with some ideas about how schools can be malleable. So I am sharing this list with you as a way to start a discussion.

1. Designing the building. While not a daily occurrence, schools do renovate and sometimes build new schools. This is a golden opportunity to rethink the design of the school and create new affordances for learning. The Pegasus Bay story is such an example.

2. Schedules: Time is a great material that allows new things to happen. Changing schedules by creating longer learning periods or conversely dedicating a few weeks to exploration are great ways to create opportunities for change and deep and self-guided learning. Even adding a few minutes of movement every day could be transformative.

3. Changing mindset- a focus on a growth perspective for teachers and learners can transform the way we think about the way we teach, assess, and provide feedback.

4. People: the way we team, support each other, and leverage student strengths can help create a more vibrant and healthy.

I am including our original whiteboard ideation board and promise to keep exploring and writing about these ideas.

Mass shooting at Uvalde elementary school

 I found out about the massacre on a flight to the RESPECt conference in Philadelphia, the city of brotherly love. What is the point of discussing how to teach computer science to young children when their lives are forfeit? Yes the gunman/child was most likely unstable. But the fact that the act of desperation is aimed at young children and the people who care for them? That is a social ill. We have to do better, we have to do something. We shall say prayers, but those are not enough. I just hope that this will not kick off a new campaign of denial debasing the loss of grieving parents.

Two out of Three Dentists Still Use Hand Cranked Drills...

Can you imagine this headline? Who would go to a dentist that claimed that it has worked in the past, so there is no need to change?

Two out of three of my students out student teaching or in practicum, report something along this line (actual text) "So far in this semester, I really have not seen a lot of technology used in the classroom."

The fact that in 2015 this is still a norm in many schools reminds me how big a task we still have.

Digital technology is part of our everyday lives. It should be part of the learning as well. Even if your students do not have 1:1 devices all schools have access to mobile devices of some kind that can be brought into the classroom or a lab you can go to.

If you or a colleague are still not quite there, I have a few suggestions.

Here are my top three ideas for supports you can find at your school:

1. Talk to knowledgeable peers. Most teachers who integrate technology already love sharing what they are doing and helping along. Find them and use their energy.

2. Get a preservice teacher. They are likely to take courses in tech integration so they can bring ideas and another set of hands when trying new ideas is always good.

3. Get professional development. EdCamps, Workshops, conferences and excellent grad courses are all places to learn with others about the possibilities. Short PD can motivate, but only long-term support will truly help you get going and keep moving.

Three things to do immediately:

1. Find out what resources you and your students have.

2. If you have only a few devices use them as part of stations or rotation. Do not use them as a reward! All students need to learn about and through technology.

3. Use technology for short bursts of formative assessments using Kahoots, Socrative, Google forms, or Plickers. Short activities with some planning would get both you and kids going without imposing too much on your instructional time.

The three things I tell my sons every morning before school

It is a new school year, and my four boys are back to formal learning. Two are in college and do not need a drop-off. But most mornings I drop off Oren (11) to Middle school and Itai (9) to elementary. I try every morning to send a message and say:
Be brilliant, work hard and be a good friend.

1. Be brilliant- for me is about daring to think and create, daring to share original thoughts. I want to encourage my boys to go beyond the minimum, beyond compliance, so school becomes a place of intellectual engagement and original thinking.

2. Work hard- an effort is crucial and regardless of the subject matter we all hit frustrations. The reminder to work hard is to remind my boys that hard work is critical. It is easy to rely on "smart" and things you can do easily and then get discouraged when things are not this easy.

3. Be a good friend- friendship and social interaction are some of the most important things you learn in school. Many of these become lifelong relationships and a pattern for later relationships. Being supportive and yes, nice is critical. Being a good friend is more than having friends it is about the way you interact with everyone around you.

I don't know if my kids hear me or understand what I am saying. I am hopeful though.

My/Your Digital Generation

Summer, we are at the pool, relaxing. My son Asaf (19) looks around the pool eyeing many of adults on their smartphones. Not only adults but many. And yes, it did include me.

He says, "everybody complains about my generation, the way we focus on all things digital. Your generation is worse."

"You adapted every new technology quickly and thoroughly. You are the ones that afforded the first iPhones, tablets, and every little thing that comes out. You are the real YouTube generation because you had a choice, and you chose this!"

I love it when my kids have insights like this. And yes for a long time I have felt this way as well. I hear many adults calling for less use of technology in schools and at home. They reject the role technology can play at school feeling that it is just games, fun and not serious enough. They are afraid that our children will not move, not be creative. I admit that as adults, we have the obligation to protect our children even from the things we are doing/ have done. But at the same time we must remember that personal example is very influential. And so for me two questions remain as we educate the next generation:

1. If we lead by example, then we lead by showing appropriate and balanced uses of devices not lack of use. We must first look at ourselves and our practices. Do they mirror what we want our kids to learn or are we around the pool checking our smartphones?

2. We must ask ourselves what we are protecting our children/ students from? The old data about screen time is out of sync with digital realities and in many ways we still don't know much about the impact of new practices. Some like the American Academy of Pediatrics publishes concerns and limitations. They take the defensive approach if we don't know, let's not do it. This method works well for medicine, not so much for everyday well-being. The two questions that must follow are: what will kids be doing with this time? And what will they be missing if they do not have digital lives? Will they be ready to be citizens of the 21st century?

3. We must ask ourselves if when making an argument about screentime at school we are in fact making a class based argument. It may be that we are saying: "My middle class, son of a professional, student is getting enough digital exoerience and guideline at home therefore he and all other students do not need to spend time on it in school.

My son Asaf looked at me and added: "Yes, it's your generation, but it is especially you." I smiled: "I am ok with that." Later that evening, he was using three screens: A Netflix movie on the TV, a video game on his laptop, and the BBC news on his phone.

I wonder what his kids will do.

The third most important reason to integrate art and exlporation in schools- amateurism

Amateur is a word used often as a derogatory term. The professional mutters "amateur!" I would like to suggest that schools need to encourage and value amateurism in art, computers, geography what have you. While I think there are many good reasons for that I want to focus on the third most important.

Many have pointed out that there is a growing divide in employment with a growing number of workers working in service jobs. Would I like it if everyone could work for a high tech company with a six figure salary? Yes! Is that likely to happen? Probably not. So while we try and educate everyone to achieve we must remember that it may not be possible for everyone to have a job they are passionate about and fulfilled by.


This is where amateurism can come into place. Schools can teach individuals to engage in meaningful activities that make them whole even and especially when they are not linked to their job and profession. It can offer meaningful lives for all individuals regardless of employment.

The lesson for me is that life is about more than a job, income, and even vocation. If we want informed capable fulfilled citizenry we need an army of amateurs.


Schools can help by letting students dabble, try, and express themselves through visual art, video, and music. And this is the important part: we should do it with permission to stay happy amateurs.

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.

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.

Coaching, a Professional Development Lesson from Sports

Ann Donovan WNBA Coach- LA Storm

Coaches are key. This is definitely true in professional sports. Despite the fact that everyone playing is spectacularly talented in their own right, they need guidance, an outside eye and direction. This is what coaches bring in- a game plan, a training regime and vision.

Many of the school districts I work with are using technology coaches as a transitional strategy in a move to one to one device integration. They do that for budgetary reasons and I understand that BUT change is slow (4-7 years) according to research. If we withdraw the support it is not likely to be as excellent.


Why a coach? A coach can get to know everyone, their capacities, and motivations. Coaches can help professionals get to the peek of their performance be it financial physical or in our case educational. If professional sports teams need coaches schools should not be abashed about using them.

My small tiny message here is that maybe we should think about coaches as a permanent part of school improvement and technology integration. In a perpetual cycle of development and adaptation we need someone who can guide, maintain a wider vision and push individuals to perform. Some of that role may be in the building administrator but not all for example this research from ASCD. For coaching to work we know that we need it to be in a low stakes non-evaluative environment that helps all teachers to grow.

Five ways that setting the bar too high can be a bad thing

A district I work with has been focusing on literacy especially reading in the last few years. In multiple ways the district keeps redefining what are can be accepted as grade level achievement. In essence they keep raising the bar. As I was reviewing some of the data fro the district it was clear that teachers across the district are struggling to help their students reach the new criteria bu are slowly making significant strides in their efforts. This is the dream of all those interested in education - successfully raising outcomes by increasing the expectations. It's hard to argue against success but I am going to do it anyway. I am not against raising the bar I just want everyone who goes down that road to be aware of the impact beyond that specific area.

1. Discouraging struggling students. Students who are already behind and struggle with the material as it is are even less likely to meet increased demands. The target seems even farther for them which as they become aware of the demands may actually discourage them from trying harder.

2. No teacher flexible time. If teachers are focusing on new and more challenging goals they will take any available time to make their students are making progress in that area. They will used the most comfortable "surefire" methods. That seems great except that it will prevent teacher from trying new things, whether supported by research or not. Teachers know that when you first try new things you waste time learning new ideas and finding "your groove" often it leads to a temporary drop in results. In a high expectation, high stakes environment they are much less likely to try new things.

3. Other subjects get "cannibalized". If you set a high bar in one area, say reading, teachers and administrators will cannibalize instructional time. They do not do away with other subjects they just give them less favorable times. For example unit studies tend to be pushed to the end of the day when kids are most restless and where the time spillover of the day is most felt. Officially science might have 25 minutes daily but in reality it is 15-18 minutes of actual instructional time. That may not sound like a big difference but over time we are losing a third of the instructional time.

4. New areas get no time whatsoever. You want to add future oriented skills like entrepreneurship? Coding? creativity? Engineering? It will not happen during school!

5. New pressures affect teachers in low performing schools disproportionately. If teachers give up on reaching standards with students at-risk they will move to other schools or leave the profession altogether. This is not because they are giving up on students but instead giving up on pleasing a system that seems hell bent on making sure they will fail even if students reach a grade-level standard.

Coaching Tech Integration in Elementary Schools- Second Year

Dr. Laurie Friedrich (newly minted) and I are back to Rousseau elementary coaching teachers in technology integration. This is one of the most productive ways we can explore working with teachers.

In many ways it is the ultimate low stakes environment. We use our own time and teachers have volunteered their plan time. We pose no demands we just ask, encourage, and explore dimensions of technology integration as we go.

As we work with each grade level team we fit our suggestions and ideas to the style of the team. Each team is different in their goals, the way they interact and where they are on technology integration. What is clear is that now in our second year each team has ideas and internal leadership. They are building on the work done last year and cautiously expanding their integration. The biggest obstacle right now is lack of access to devices that students can actually use individually or in small groups.

I am most excited about the potential for integration in the Arts as it will play out in the Music and Visual Arts rooms. There much promise there, but it is a promise that can be realized only with enough devices so students have access.

As we move forward the low stakes coaching model seems to be a success. Though I might add that the gentle but solid support by administration is an important component as well. In the next few weeks we will start an expanded model in some new schools and so test the boundaries of such a model.

Technology, Creativity, and Windows of Opportunity

At another academic year's end I have much to reflect on so this post is the first of a few that will try to help me think through and share what I've been doing. Throughout my research, visits to schools and teaching I have a growing sense that we are truly at a crossroads. Technology is becoming ubiquitous and schools are embracing it. The working assumption of many early technology integration leaders was that technology will help open learning up. It will help teachers individualize instruction and students to learn independently and follow their own learning paths.
This option is still open but at the same time a second option opened. Technology in schools can be used as a top down delivery of curriculum and assessment that would stymie any creativity from teachers and as a result students. As I watch school districts I see both trends happen. Larger districts tend to be top down using technology to deliver content and increase centralized control. Smaller more agile districts tend to be more open to diverse practices. This week I visited Aurora Public Schools and saw some of that agility. Teachers were creating their own assignments, thinking through steps and allowing their students to do the same.
I believe that we have a window of opportunity, the call for 21st century skills may be enough to make sure that the top down approach does not win. For that we have to act, lead and show the options. In teacher education we must make sure that our future teachers are ready to use technology in ways that will promote creativity. We need to make sure that young teachers joining schools that are often called on to lead technology integration are ready.

Benefits of Gaming

This week I have been thinking of the befits of gaming. It started as Jason initiated a conversation about MinecraftEDU. This was combined with an interest from Ji one of my graduate students. Minecraft is a veteran game that still engages millions around the world. The EDU version allows educators to create a self contained and "safe" environment for students to explore.

As it happened I also presented at NETA fall conference this Thursday and happened to see the tail end of Jason Schmidt's presentation on MinecraftEDU. We had lukewarm coffee right after my presentation and chatted about opportunities to not just do but also research. I am excited.

As Ji and I brainstormed the benefits of using Minecraft we came up with four areas that we think would matter greatly to our students growing up in the 21st century.

1. Collaboration- to be successful students must learn to work together toward common goals, coordinate and learn to create a code of conduct. We also expect distributed practice and cognition. These are key skills and Jason suggested that he has already seen it at work.
2. Problem solving- since mine craft is a Lego like world with it's own rules any task requires some creative problem solving to reach goals (both ones you set for yourself and one set from the outside).
3. Engagement- we expect that incorporating Minecraft will improve attitudes toward school and engagement in school activities.
4. Creativity- The open ended nature of the world and the tasks can naturally lead to creative thinking and solutions.
5. Language- we expect that students will develop a community of practice that will distinguish itself using specific jargon and develop efficient ways to communicate.

By Megx see here

6. Democracy and control- Minecraft rests most of the control in the hands of students teaching them about decision making and creating opportunities for learning social skills and tolerance.

Our biggest challenge:
How do we measure impact?

We are currently collecting literature on these issues BUT we are thinking of designing individual and group tasks using Lego and
Keva Planks. More to come...
Comments and ideas welcome!

Classroom in Conditional Tense

Last Tuesday we had our summer Tech EDGE conference. It was a great day with excellent presentations, great conversation and participation. We have been playing with formats for a closing section. This time we tried out an "Imagine" session. A forum to ask questions and generate ideas for collaboration and collegial support between university, district, schools, and teachers.

I am still not this session was successful and I think our follow-up next year will tell. I would like to respond more thoughtfully to a question posed during the session. Mary, one of our cooperating teachers asked what classrooms of the future look like. I responded at the time with- I don't really know and by the time I do it will change again.

Later when I had time to reflect I came to understand her question differently: What should/could our classrooms look like now? Now, that is a question I can address and wish I did then.

I first would like to point out that technology is just a small piece of what a great classroom space is and should be. There needs to be enough room for all kinds of real world activities. Virtual is great but it complements and not replaces painting, sculpting, outdoor spaces, a vegetable garden, animals, musical instruments and more. As far as technology I still think the device is a tablet and right now an iPad. The device should be individual (1:1) and students should be able to take it home. This way you can flip your classroom, communicate with parents, and assign digital homework without thinking whether our students have access at home. Classroom technology should  add a few desktop machines with large screen for applications and websites that are not currently optimized on tablets. For example Google Earth is great on mobile devices but some features appear only on computers. Finally the ability to project in the classroom.

The real clincher for me is actually in the availability of software/apps. Not everything teachers need is currently available but needs are going to emerge as we experiment and develop ideas. While districts like creating app packages I would argue that teachers need some flexibility in trying out and downloading apps with a great fit to their classroom and curriculum. I truly believe that our power s schools is through the diversity of experiences we provide to our students and then share with our colleagues.

This is very simple, and actually doable. To make it work though we need two things: room for students and teachers to experiment and ERR. And professional development that focuses on long-term collaboration.
The main obstacle is implementation like this requires trust- community to trust schools, administrators to trust teachers, and teachers to trust students. Can we?

Dragons and the Curse of the 99₵ App

As I sift through hundreds of apps for our iPad in the classroom podcast I am occasionally surprised by quality apps. In our TechEDGE conference yesterday Rob McEntarffer from Lincoln Public Schools showed me DragonBox. In this brilliant app (see geek Dad review) students learn algebra in a way that "sneaks up" on them. It teaches them algebra principles through a true game environment (bringing Gee's vision to life) . Such brilliant apps are rare because they are brilliant. But in effect most of the educational apps have limited learning value. Most have limited content and focus on drill in ways that leave the educator in me cringing and hoping for more.

The problem though may be that the app store set the income margin too low. Right now an app for 5.99 is expensive and gives purchasers pause. The dominant modes are free and 99 cent apps. I just wonder if developers can create and maintain quality educational apps at these prices. I have gone through more than a thousand educational apps in the last year and I can answer with a "not yet". There are some great apps but most fail even my basic criteria to be useful.

I believe that mobile devices with an emphasis on tablets are going to be dominant in education in the next decade maybe even longer. Apps are an important part of this ecosystem but to be useful we need a bigger pool of great apps that serve students need to learn.

The lesson from the print news industry is that new pricing models connected with technology seem to create changes that are irreversible. Some companies are trying to buck this trend by creating educational subscriptions e.g. Footsteps 2 Brilliance and BrainPop.
This is an interesting direction that I hope can be successful but here I want to identify here other possible solutions.

As we discuss flipping classroom I would like to suggest flipping the curriculum and professional development equation. That is, providing the materials for free (or for a nominal sum say 99¢) and charging for backend services such as professional development and data services. This is a concept I have written about before and I think can potentially be viable. The Dynamic Indicators of Basics Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) seem to have successfully followed this model providing the assessment for free but charging for training, data services and optional assessment materials. While it is a not-for-profit organization it still proves the concept.

An effort like this may benefit from a partnership with a university combining the entrepreneurship of start-ups and the educational know-how of university faculty. This combination can make excellent products for the educational market that mesh gaming concepts and excellent content that lead kids to learn.

Finally, states and districts can choose to partner with universities and invest in creating digital materials to replace the commercial curricula altogether. Such efforts would require upfront costs but may actually reduce the dependence on commercial products and save districts significant amounts of money that can then be invested in professional development and emerging learning technologies.

Home Literacy Environment in the Digital Age

Recently I have been working on home literacy environment and came across the Home Literacy Environment Questionnaire (HLEQ) by Griffin and Morrison. The measure was designed in 1997 and addresses paper based print only. In only 15 years the measure has become less and less relevant.
This brought me back to an observation that Berliner, perhaps my favorite educational thinker, made in an Educational Researcher piece. His claim was that some social research is very time dependent and has an "expiration date" [my phrase].

The rapid changes in what it means to be literate and the ways literacy plays out in a media rich digital world have made a large variety of research and practice tools irrelevant. Surveys and interviews that are paper centric in reading and writing miss whole potential worlds of engagement that exist parallel to the print world. In today's world access to magazines newspapers and libraries is paralleled to websites, applications and online newsstands.

It also means that publications cycles for research must be shorter if they explore new tools. These tools need to be comprised of modular pieces that can be removed when they become irrelevant and added to as new technologies become relevant.

Some examples can include: Adding to "How many hours of TV watching does your child do daily?"
"how many hours does your child play video games?" "How many hours does your child spend online?"
In addition to "how many books do you have at home?" We could add- How often do you use e-readers/ tablets to access magazines or books?"

I am working on such an instrument right now and will report some results soon!

Revisiting iPads in the Reading Center

I am spending another summer in our Reading Center. Graduate and undergraduate students are working with a wonderful group of striving readers and writers trying to get a leg up on the next schools year. This is the first summer that we are incorporating our own set of iPad 2 (last year we did iPad 1).

We are trying to study this year, how, exactly the iPads are being used. Anecdotal data collection already shows four patterns.
1. iPads for teacher use- teachers are using the iPads to record student work for assessment, track their own interaction, store lesson plans, and record student assessment and teaching notes.
2. iPad games as a reward/brain break- 60 sec of angry birds can motivate students for quite a while. While this is useful we are trying to steer everyone to focus on games and apps that have literacy related educational value.
3. iPad for student use in Reading/writing apps- using specific apps to practice a skill or strategy (e.g. using iCardsort for word sorts).
4. Co-use: Finally students and tutors use the iPad together to get more information about content. They are using dictionary.com, Google search for pictures to illustrate the meanings of new words etc.

As I am trying to negotiate a tablet policy in our program. One of the administrators asked me if it has to be an iPad. My answer is both no and yes. I have no special allegiance to Apple, Steve Jobs is not my personal savior, and I am writing this blog on my Dell (last in a long line of laptops). I think tablets are the present (not the future- they are here) and are making a daily impact on education as well as every other aspect of life in the US. So the NO boils down to: I am open to other options since I believe that it not not really based on a specific device but a concept.

At the same time I cannot with a straight face say there is any other serious option outside the iPad and its iOS ecosystem. For example when looking at the web traffic on our own website about 20% was on mobile devices last month. Out of that 20% over 95% were from iOS devices. Clearly our mobile clientele has voted as have most k12 schools entering the tablet era.

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?