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."

FoF (Fear of Facebook)

At NETA I met many great teachers all interested in finding new ways to integrate technology into their instruction. It was great seeing so many familiar faces, especially since five years ago during my first visit I did not know many of the participants.

One of the teachers who stopped by our poster on thursday afternoon confided: "I know I need to use some of this for my students. I have a facebook page but I never post. People get fired over facebook posts." This comment is not new, I actually hear it quite often from teachers who seem paralyzed by the fear of technology. I actually have even discussed it before on this blog. Thei frustration seems to grow as they seem to be afraid but also pushed to integrate technology. They feel between a rock and a hard place- and thus frustrated.

This time I just got curious about the phenomena and whether there really was an epidemic of social media firings. I used Google to try and ferret out exactly how many teachers have been reported being fired because of social media activity in the last year. For all the media and teacher hype I found very few actual cases of full time teachers fired.

1. In Smithville Ohio a teacher got fired over a post on Dairy farming. He was let go by the local school board but reinstitated (with back pay) after a short court battle. More here and here
2. Texas teacher from Duncanville resigned over an inflamatory tweet here. It was quite extreme and she resigned.
3. Ashley Payne resigned over facebook pics. See here. The main point was that she has resigned and was not fired (unlike most of the headlines)

There were a few cases of substitute teacher "firing" mostly over posting of student photos.

So is there room to worry?
I would argue that anyone needs to be careful about social media and be a good citizen (not just digital).
But
1. Given 3.4 million K12 public school teachers around the country and with most on Facebook the incidence of firing seems to be extremely small.
2. Teachers should not resign without legal council
3. Read your district guidelines especially about posting photos of students

Consult this page from the NEA

Remember that as a prospective teacher you need to excerice more caution.

Do not let this stop you from participating in thoughtful technology integration your students will be missing out.

Fear Factor (iPad edition)

I see this in many districts I work with. As new devices are brought in, someone has the "talk". Do not break them, if you take them home and they break you will owe us. Do not use it for anything personal. They talk about insurance, cost and consequences. They want everyone to take the devices seriously

Every meeting with a new batch of teachers I have a few admitting that the combination of their fears and the threat of insurance has caused them to leave the device in the box, or attached to the charger on their desk.

I am here to say that that talk is destructive and counterproductive. Especially early in new adoption of devices. So e of the educators who are introduced to devices are scared before we say anything. Driving the point home with any kind of threat (percieved or real) drives the teachers on the fence about integration to avoid the new devices. And devices not used are not any better than broken ones.

I understand the concern about costly devices. Three years ago when we got 30 iPads and I gave them to students I was worried. Lost some sleep, but I decided that I will take personal responsibility and try not to scare them off. It paid off big time, with one exception everybody used their device. I am pretty sure that had I started the iPad discussion with a stern warning half of my students would have left them at home (they actually told me that). Recently I worked with teachers on iPad integration and once again half of them did not get them out of the box. Why I asked? Because we do not have insurance yet! Turns out that insurance was to take it out of the building but too late, the fear factor already worked its magic.

So if you can influence this- with students and teachers: make rules but do not scare, do not strike fear, we need these devices in our students lives and ours it is their future and thus our present.

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.

Are Standards an Outdated Approach?

The standrd movement and the Common Core that emerged from it have been with us for so long that we only ask what standards and not whether we should have content standards at all. I am ambivalent about standards. In theory I understand the intent but in practice it often gets diminished to a set of alessons and assessents. The main problem is that a series of standards takes a few years to develop perhaps with the rapid development of new content area, new technologies, and new insights the kind of standards we have now are simply outdated by the time they find the way into classrooms.

I suggest that we need a much more flexible framework of standards perhaps more like the new science standards a framework of principles instead of atomized skills. Yes it'll be harder to show that students reach standards but then again all learning that is worth it is hard to measure. 

Many voices call for mastery learning. I want to challenge that as well. Mastery is not enough, with many skills fluency is the next step. The point is that fluid performance "in the zone" or Flow is the key for expertise. Our goal should be not just for students that can do it, but for ones that can do it efficiently. It is a complex demand especially when discussing 21st century skills that can be demonstrated in so many alternative ways.

I am not calling for abolishing standards but I am calling for continuing to challenge our assumptions and consider our alternatives.

Almost There- Reading Rainbow and Beyond

A few weeks back I had a chance to hear Dr. Twila Liggett discuss her work in the development of Reading Rainbow. In a wonderful walk down memory lane she described some of the more significant moments in the shows history. She recalled shows about incarcerated parents and a post 9/11 show with students from PS 234 (video below). These are great examples of public television and what it can do to help kids and parents understand the world around them and open up to new ideas, concepts, and events.

Reading Rainbow has since shifted to the iPad in a great App but I would argue that Reading Rainbow and other shows like it (few I admit) are not the format going forward. In this age of interactive cheap media we no longer have to wait for someone else to make shows for us. Any child, teacher, classroom, and school can create their own video, show, or review without needing big budget or complicated equipment. In fact most of us have everything we need in our pocket (smart phone) or at hand (iPad, laptop with webcam).

Liggett remembered these emotional moments and how wonderful it was to be within the doing. All of us can be producing not just consuming. All students can feel the emotional well being of creating together, having an audience, and performing to a potential global audience.

Sir Ken Robinson talked about the incredible feeling of being in the orchestra. The modern tools allow every child to be the star of their local Reading Rainbow like show. In fact maybe the future of such shows is like the present for TED talks with local TEDx. Yes we have the main event, but each school or locality can create their own show in the image of the original.

Dr. Liggett  did not draw that conclusion. To be fair it wasn't that kind of an event, she was asked to talk about the past and that she did. It is up to us to seize these lessons from those who have led ed media in the past and make sense of them for our times.

Reading RainbowX challenge anyone?

Measuring Long-Term Impact of 21st Century Learning

I was traveling with my kids this weekend across two states and the majestic views of the plains and the west. If measured correctly at the end of the drive, or even the end of the year, I am sure that there is no measurable impact on their standardized test achievement. Does that means they should stay home? Or conversly that we shouldn't teach 21st century skills.

The same question can be asked about any field trip, shadowing, or performance students are exposed to. Does that mean we should not do them? If the answer is no, we should continue doing these things as a part of a whole child education What then is our verdict about the quality of most of our educational research?


If we focus on short-term simple effects right after an intervention of any kind, we may well be missing two things: the long-term impact (or lack thereof- what Calfee called the poop-out effect), and exploring the impact of hard to measure meaningful activities.

How would we measure the impact of Day of Code, Read Across America, or Project based Learning?

I would argue that we need new paradigms, new instruments, and a vivid imagination exploring what outcomes of note can be. The relationship between researchers, teachers, students, and community members should change. The goal of research should change and become a cooperative endeavor that requires different structures than we have now. For example, a school can have a resident researcher who teaches and conducts a design experiment that serves school goals, as well as increasing our research knowledge. This is especially true of digital and other 21st century skills one's we know very little about. Still thinking about it...