Are Standards an Outdated Approach?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rapid development of new content area, new technologies, and new insights the kind of standards we have now are simply outdated by the time they find the way into classrooms.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...

Five ways to help students find the Sweet Read

Today is Read across America day. This morning I watched my son Oren (11) read right after he got up. He is rereading for the ??th time the Percy Jackson series. It made me think about a book or a series of books that becomes a second home to readers- a Sweet Read. It is about the power of returning to a favorite book where the charaters are like old friends that you have known for many years.

When I was Oren's age I had Asimov's Foundation series and later Lord of the Rings. For Erez (now 20) it was Harry Potter, Asaf (now 18) had David Edding's Belgariad. Even as adults I find that Sarah and I are returning to favorites and redefining what is our literary home.

This is an experiece I would like all students to have- a sweet read- that is yours. Here are a few completely unoriginal ideas to help students find the Sweet Read:

1. Read outloud to them. Reading outloud connects readers and listeners to the books in a way that helps new and struggling readers reimagine what the reading experience should be.
2. Provide choice. I learned the hard way that what you love and find a home in does not necessarily mean that others will as well. We all must figure it out for ourselves.
3. Do not judge. The Box Car Children can as much of a literary home as Boewolf. It is after all about comfort and joy.
4. Share you experiences. Share your passion for books, not so they can read the same books, but so they can feel the emotion and excitement in your voice.
5. Library often. (shouldn't library be a verb?)

Full disclosure: In the last five years or so my Sweet Reads are A Hundred Years of Solitude and Bitchfest.

What should Classrooms look like?

Last week I had the chance to speak at the E N Thompson Forum as a warm up act for the inspiring Milton Chen. I decided to talk about what creativity looks like and can look like in Elementary classrooms. To start off I asked my audience to draw what classrooms should look like. The results (I am attaching examples of work in progress) were very interesting.

What was very clear from the work is that most of the people showing up thought classrooms should look very different than they do now.

The question that occured to me was: if there is a growing concensus that classrooms should be more open and integrated why aren't we trying to do something about it? The example of Pegasus Bay in New Zealand sticks in my mind as an option for new schools but I believe that there is much we can do inside older buildings as well.

I believe that with a bit of ingenuity we can do a lot. It is NOT a replacement for excellent teaching but it provides an environment that encourages teacher and students to learn and teach creatively.

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.

Generation D- the impulse to re-engineer

I was playing a quiet game of Candy Crush yesterday and my 8 (soon to be 9) year old son Itai came and sat next to me. For me, casual games like Candy Crush are a great way to pass a few minutes and do some problem solving. Itai, however, is generation D (digital) child and reacted to the game in a very different way.       

As I was olaying Itai was making suggestions about moves and figuring out how the game worked. Finally he said: "Wouldn't it be great if you could design your own board and could decide where the jelly and chocolate went?" He continued musing: "you could design your own special candy like a cross between the fish and chocolate". His stream of ideas went on as I was playing and I cannot remember them all, but what I do remember is how easily he has focused on the creation side. 

This of course is not accidental. I have been observing in schools and at home the impact of games like Minecraft and Little Big Planet. For adults they are games, but I argue that for kids they create new ways of thinking. As a result generation D maybe growing up the most creative one yet, a generation that has a creative instinct. A generation that idenftifies a problem and doesn't just want to solve it, they want to re-engineer it. The question for us is how do we design schools that cultivate and support this world view?

First Reflcetions on our China Tour- Common Ground

Photo Op in a First Grade Classroom Linzi, Shandong, China

We came back from our China Tour two weeks ago. It was a whirlwind tour focused on Linzi in Shandong province and Chengdu in Schizuan province. In each we visited elementary schools that are integrating iPads with our support. There were many lessons to learn and I am still thinking through much of what we saw. In addition we visited only three schools and observed instruction in only two. There is no way for me to know how representative this ample is so please read with great care. This, however, are some of my observations:

There are many differences between US and Chinese schools. For example Chinese classrooms were much larger (over 40 students), and the stakes to students future are higher (high stakes in China is much higher stakes for students not teachers. What struck me though were the similarities. When we observed teaching, our Chinese partners and us were often in agreement about high quality instruction and what it should look like. In our last school after three days of work the principal asked to see me privately. She sat opposite me with her four assistant principals (one each for instruction, professional development, organization, and discipline) and with a tense expression asked for my opinion on the instruction we saw. I laid out a step by step analysis of the lessons (I used LessonNote to annotate lessons carefully). At the end of my exposition she was visibly more relaxed. Smiling she asked: "Do you think it is possible to integrate technology into our traditional lessons?" [translation].

Earlier in our visit I thought traditional meant a focus on memorization and recitation, but at this point it has become clear to me that she was referring simply to the existing curriculum. This is the same question/ concern I often encounter in schools. Teachers and administrators interpret our effort in professional development as an addition or even substitution of the existing curriculum, the reality is that we see it first and foremost as part of the curriculum already taught with some extra skills integrated when they are relevant (e.g. digital citizenship). I carefully responded that yes I thought there could be such integration that would benefit students and help instruction as well as 21st century skills. I went back to the SAMR model as a core foundation to move forward and for the first time since we entered the school we were on the same page.


At the heart of the matter was the fact that both sides did not understand how close our positions were. We were seeing the same instruction and evaluating it in similar way but all of us were also hung up on cultural differences not wanting to assume common ground that was actually there.

Losing Faith in Journalism- a response to "Can Students Have too Much Tech?"

My dean directed me toward an opinion article in the prestigious New York Times by Susan Pinker. The title was "can students have too much tech?" Who can resist this title? Of course you can have too much tech- thinks the person reading this on her iPad seating at Starbucks on a staurday morning. Kids these days all they do is play video games and waste their time texting.
A closer read of the article actually disproves the main thesis quite clearly. I expect more from a published author and a psychologist by training! I almost never comment on writing like this. In this case, however, I am mostly because we all expect better from a publication like the New York Times.

I would like to say that I agree with some of the premises in the article namely:
1. It sucks to be poor. Children raised in poverty have lower outcomes on standardized tests.
2. Devices are no magic. It depends what you do with them. Duh.
3. We still need teachers to teach even if we have devices.
4. Putting crappy devices in students hands without support will do very little to improve academic outcomes (sorry Sugata Mitra I am not a believer).

While we definitely need to be careful about technology use and balance in this just like any other facet of our lives a careful of the article and the sources cited bring a totally different picture.

Here is what is inflammatory, cherry picked, and untrue:

The story starts with the Obama initiatives on free and open Internet and providing access. Both policies are crucial for long term success of our educational system and social justice but are also completely unrelated to the evidence cited later. The critique is mostly about tech use at home

(where they gathered some correlational data) but the implication is that the president¹s agenda in this area is wrong.

The main concerns I have about the data presented (you can read the report here):

1. There is no consideration that technology is an area of literacy that is just as important than any other. Without computer/Internet literacy students are behind (if you can't conduct an excellent Internet search for research- how good is your research paper going to be?).

2. They basically point to an interaction between poverty and home access to technology. Does that mean that all kids are better off without access at school or even at home? Is she advocating letting middle class students have access at home but not for African American boys? Really?

3. The data is old and it predates smart phones, high speed internet, and the wide array of educational resources avaialbale and required in education (for example GAFE). Smart phones are now ubiquitous and most students from mid school up have them- including children growing up in poverty. That means that access is already there all that is left to schools and parents and to try and channel the activity to educational benefit as well as social and entertainment.

4. Now for the main source of data. The report is from 2010 the data is from 2000-2005 (what tech did we have then?). The report is by two economists. They actually claim: (1) that students that always had a computer actually improve over time (2) some students do better after they get a computer and finally and 

5. Most importantly their effect sizes are all in single digit % effect size that is for them an effect size of .02 standard deviation is fairly large. In educational research any effect smaller than .40 (that is 20 times higher than that reported). This effects are considered  small and not educationally meaningful.

The clearest part of this is that the author has failed at critical reading and thinking. She does not (want to?) understand that the devil in any report is in the details and in complete reporting including the context of a decade old study. It is legitimate to have concerns, it is also legitimate to question the ways technology can be used. Support for the argument should be based on a reasoned argument, and facts that are relevant to our current context. 

Aurora 1:1 or what I learned this morning

Today we had our 13th TechEDGE conference. We spent the whole day with brave teachers in Aurora Public Schools who are integrating technology in a 1:1 iPad environment and agreed to let us come in and observe.

It was great. It was also the first conference that I have participated in (let alone organize) that happened during regular school time with authentic teaching presented.

Here are my three takeaways, not new, but refreshing to hear from teachers:

1. One to one integration does not mean all tech all the time. Teachers integrated analog and digital across lessons

2. Social media is encouraged. I have heard multiple teachers start with "as you saw in my email" or "please post to twitter with the hashtag...". One teacher declared: "it is my job to model digital citizenship on social media. I let them know if they misbehave online.

3. Teachers need to know that what they are doing is special and of high quality. The school admins said that the conference was a great efficacy boost for their teachers.

The Top Ten most watched videos on the Tech EDGE Channel

A quick look at our most popular videos for 2014 shows that the topics of Apps for English learners is consistently at the top of the list and we will try and add additional ideas that address this topic. The second topic that received attention was App Smashing both in our regular show and from our Tech EDGE conference.

I hope we will have even more success reaching teachers and answering the specific needs of our viewers.

Tech Edge - Episode 38, English Language Learners

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Episode 133, Apps for English Language Learners

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Episode 110, App Smashing

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Trailer

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Episode 49, Top Free 

Apps for a One iPad Classroom Part 1

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Episode 111, Apps for Elementary Classrooms

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Episode 94, Real Time Collaboration

Tech Edge Conference 10: App Smashing 101

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Episode 115, Apps for Creativity

Tech Edge, iPads In The Classroom - Episode 125, Note Taking Apps Part 2

I'm No Bo: On Striving, Humility, and Democracy

By now Bo Pelini and his rants are public knowledge. The thing that struck me the most about his complaints was the idea that he did not know the expectations every year. I just happen to work for the same institution. I get paid much less and interview a lot less. I am not sure how I would fair under public scrutiny but I do know something about being judged annually by "higher ups".

I often do not agree with my "higher ups" but I do know that we have a shared goal of improving the lives of Nebraskans starting with our students and expanding beyond it. So while we may not agree on the how we can agree on the what and judge our efforts based on outcomes. The bottom line is that every year I need to strive to be better. After reflecting on what I need to improve I make a plan to pay attention and improve a few aspects of my work, be it teaching, research, or service. I do not need someone to tell me that I am not perfect (though many are happy to point it out) I know what I do well and what I do not.

In the last three semesters I have worked hard on building a classroom community through integrating democratic practices. The idea was to present a learning environment that would model a possible educational model that is different from the one my pre-service teachers see enacted in schools. Every semester I have been just a bit better about building a classroom community allowing students to participate in decision making including classroom rules, grading and participation.

Am I there? NO. My students are still struggling to see how these practices can be translated into classroom practice BUT I can say without any doubt that I am a better teacher than I ever was. I can say that my students know more of what they need to teach reading and writing in the 21st century. The community we built in the classroom was built on shared goals, shared responsibility and an understanding that we are in this together. So if I had to have a goodbye speech to my students it would be about their potential to change the world not how the world is against them (or me).

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Four things we should do using Technology in Education to come to terms with Privilege

By User:Sargoth (Own work) [Public domain]

It is impossible to avoid thinking about Ferguson these days. But I approach the topic with great trepidation. I am not offering solutions nor explanations just some thoughts about what can be different using the affordances of technology and the power of teaching.

1. Let's not let the moment slip away- once in a while a moment emerges that is an opportunity to discuss equity be it poverty, privilege, race or sexual orientation. Katrina was such a moment but soon national attention drifted away and it was no longer attended to. My lesson from Katrina is to discuss it with my students here and now, leverage the event as it unfolds. The beauty of technology here is in the ability to access events, media, and opinion. As future teachers my students need to learn to pay attention, process, and find ways to integrate meaningful learning about social topics as they arise.

2. Let's be critical. Once students start exploring an event they can explore different narratives, consider point of view and learn to be critical. They can use this critical stance to take a look at their immediate environment and then follow up with action.

3. Let's teach technologies allows everyone to tell their story. Social media tools allows multiple stories to come out and prevents any one channel from telling a unified simple story (that is never true). Encourage your students to use social media to increase the impact of stories that matter to them, encourage them to create their own digital stories.

4. Let's act. With our students we need to make a difference in the real world using physical actions. Then let's document the action and make sure that it has a digital echo as well. For example we are building a family literacy program that builds on family strengths rejecting a deficit stance.

Let's not let this opportunity to discuss things that matter deeply slip away!

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.

Bob Calfee- A Mentor

Robert Calfee 1933-2014

Bob died last night. Bob was my mentor, the kind that sticks in your head long after you moved out of state. I remember the first time Bob spoke inside my head. It was 1999 my first AERA in New Orleans. I went to a session about early reading acquisition. Mid presentation by one of the leading researchers in the field I heard Bob's voice and unique cadence "It's articulation stupid".

Bob has taught me to think about variance, his metaphor of variance as a sausage still lives whenever I teach a methods class. Probably more than anything else Bob showed me how you can manage multiple projects and ideas by switching mindset. I remember watching Bob make the switch. Our meeting time was 30 minutes and when the time was up Bob simply moved to the next thing. We were still there in his office finishing the last details but he has already moved on.

I never accounted really for just how much I've learned from Bob, his analytic approach, his passion, his ever present mentorship.
A colleague just wrote me a note saying we should have our mentors forever. My first thought was, we will.

Finally I remember Bob giving me and Sarah money for dinner at the Mission Inn on our anniversary in those day of graduate school poverty. I would say rest in peace, but that too was not Bob's way.
He voice will always be with me.

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.

Five Ways My Kids are Growing in a Different World

Some people always call for back to basics. Decoding memorizing facts and old technologies (for example cursive writing). As the day No Child Left Behind predicted will be the day of 100% of students at grade level have come and gone we are left to wonder if the effort was the right one. We cannot deny, however, that kids today are growing up in a world that is changing while their progress is still measured in very old ways.

Watching my kids and students in elementary schools I can immediately see the transformation:
1. They judge the environment by access to wireless bandwidth. My son was asked (10) what was his favorite place for vacation. He answered: "Israel" (we spent a month there this summer). "Why Israel?"I asked. "They have the best internet connection..."

2. Information and entertainment are on demand. One day my 8 year old Itai came back and saw his brother (10) watching an epic episode of Phineas & Ferb. "Are you watching TV?" he said incredelously. The answer was of course, no, it was Netflix. Kids are used to able to access information and entertainment on demand- as they need it and at a touch of a button. They are information privileged but that demands a whole new way to be in the world.

3. They are global. Kids play games with players look at websites from all around the world. They use social media of different kinds with kids next door (sometimes in the next seat) to those across the globe.

4. Their lives are often defined by information overload and not information scarcity. The new information age is not actually more about abundance than scarcity making the old economic rules less successful in describing reality.

5. Reading and writing are no longer limited to print on page. There are rich multi modal compositions that are accessible to all kids (in connected societies).

These differences make growing up today very different than any other period in history and requires us to reconsider many aspects of modern education. Not because it has failed but because using old ways of thinking will privilege the few that already have full access to this new world.

A Note from the Minecraft Underground- Expertise, Mining and Music

  by  Andrew Beeston 

We had the TechEDGE 12 conference on campus two weeks ago. Rick Marlatt presented about Minecraft. He was excited about the presentation but I was secretly worried that very few will come to his presentation. Most of the participants teach or plan to teach in Elementary schools and I was not sure they will be excited about minecraft. Well I was utterly wrong. The session was full of faculty current and future teachers.

In conversations with my students afterwards I got the gist. For example M said "students talk about Minecraft all the time I have to at least find out what it is. They take turns reading the few Minecraft books we have".

Ann Brown called young students universal novices, at the same time we all strive for competency usually stemming from our areas of expertise be it football, brain science, or Harry Potter trivia. Minecraft provides a niche of expertise. Compared to most adults even fairly beginning Minecrafters have expertise. Minecraft has a rich vocabulary that includes complex words like bedrock, obsidian, and creepers to name a few. Jargon flies whenever students get together. And practice, practice, practice, hours of effort go into it.

This is very similar to what happens to students as they learn to play an instrument. They practice, get better, and with others get a sense of growing expertise. At the same time they watch others play with new eyes and new understanding. Slowly they learn new vocabulary and can communicate in ways that others not privee to this domain will not understand. Finally they get the experience of "being in the orchestra" a sense of collborating and sharing with your peers sensing a whole greater than the sum.

The worlds with their unique construction and opportunities allow students to become experts and learn not just about skill and  citizenship but also about what it feels like being an expert.

Game based Mechanics at School

Last week I went with my kids to their school's "fun night". The fun centers around a fair like set of activities that generates funds for the school. My kids love the little games and winning all the nearly worthless little prizes and punches on their cards. This time the organizers decided to simplify things by taking the stuff and punches out of the activities.

I was watching my son Oren walk around trying to decide what to play. "Why don't you play this one?" (pointing to bean bag target game) I asked. He looked at me and said "You can't win anything so what's the point?". The organizers have definitely simplified the organization of the fair but they completely missed the game mechanics. To keep humans motivated and in this case creating enjoyment the game has to have a point. The point can be a prize, points, a leaderboard or boasting rights but it has to have a point.

I think this is the point that people miss when we talk about how our understanding of games can inform education. It is not about making educational games. Instead it is about importing the idea of feedback and rewarding incremental progress. Education has always been very good about long term rewards- semester and course grades, GPA and even entry to college. We are considerably less adept at rewarding incremental progress and specific achievements. The only example that I can think of in recent years is the work in RtI (Response to Intervention) on reading fluency. In it students receive weekly probes and chart their progress. This has worked almost too well encouraging students (and teachers) to focus on rate too much. This however highlights the enormous promise in using feedback on incremental achievement progress. Badging anyone?

Cognitive Flexibility, and Devices in 1:1 Environments

This week I visited a new 1:1 integration at a local school site with some of my colleagues. The site chose a "convertible" laptop that claims to be a laptop AND a tablet. It really isn't, it is more like a laptop with a touch screen but that is not the point I would like to make here.

In the course of discussion about the use of the devices I pointed out that some of the advantages of the laptop, stability and a keyboard, are also its limitations that truely limit mobility.

Justin then raised the idea of having a diversty of devices in the classroom. To be honest I have been so fixated on the idea of 1:1 with the same device that I have not really thought of the potential benefits of different devices that answer very differnt needs.

Don Leu repeatedly observed that the only constant in this area is that it keeps changing. As Kristin Javorsky and I presented recently in a Reading Teacher article the key to teach students to deal with the ever changing environment is to teach cognitive flexibility. Then why not do that with choice of device? The late Steve Jobs repeatedly made comparisons between vehicle and device diversity- fit the tool to the job. That can and probably should start in school, where else can you learn to be flexible, experiment and learn to match the tool to the task?

Education is about differentiation we can do that with devices as well.

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.

Four things your students can learn from watching Minecraft videos

My two youngest kids have been playing minecraft for quite a long time. For those who are not familiar with minecraft think of a game platform with lego like blocks of many kinds that allows you to create or explore worlds created by others.

This summer, however, my kids got hooked on YouTube videos documenting the adventures of of others online. An example can be the Dumb and Dumber videos for an example click on the pic to the right. 

In the beginning I thought this was just a way to pass the time when they did not have access to Netflix or were not allowed to play (we have restriction on play time). Soon I found out that they sometimes prefer to watch the videos over other shows. This is something that is hard for me to understand. I like playing games but watching somebody else do it? That's something you do when you run out of quarters...

The phenomenon intrigued me. Why watch someone else play? Well I started with the obvious and asked my kids what they liked about it. Their answer was simple, we just like it. When I watched carefully I discovered a few ways that the videos afforded a great learning opportunity.

1. The video makers usually play in pairs or even three and a majority of the video centers around their collaboration. This model of collaboration has actually helped my kids learn to collaborate while playing and I even hear them produce a banter similar to the ones online.

2. In the videos that are usually in survival mode and require the players to solve many challenges. Since audio is a huge part of the attraction they actually produce something akin to a think aloud while engaged in problem solving. This model helps viewers get a window into complex problem solving.

3. Following different videos and finding new ones are part of information literacy skills that my kids who usually spend very little time on YouTube developed rather quickly.

4. The videos often share the creativity of the creators by sharing approaches ideas and actions. They provide a great model of divergent thinking and the joy of creation.

In short the videos provide a model for engagement with 21st century skills. As adults struggle to provide relevant 21st century models finding worthy individuals willing to share what and how they engage in creative activities provides exceptional learning opportunities.

Motivation to Innovate- or five reasons to risk failure

The lens I most often use to view motivation is Bandura's concept of self efficacy. The idea is that we are more likely to succeed when we believe we can be successful. There is quite a bit of empirical work supporting this construct. More than that self efficacy is the best motivational predictor of academic success.

Recently, however, I've had read personal narratives of failure from teachers who are innovating in their classroom and school. The thing that immediately emerged is that self-efficacy cannot be the prime motivator because they actually do NOT always think they will be successful. Often they actually say "I don't know if it's going to work". In my work on democratic education I actually said "I don't even know what it looks like but I think it is important to do."

So what are some ways to think about the motivation to innovate despite the high probability of failure:

1. Value- while self-efficacy is important we also have to consider the value of our actions. If the value is high enough we may be able to consider failure and the potential personal fallout from it.
2. Long term success- while we may not believe that we have it figured out right now we have a belief in our ability to work it out through trial and error. This is closely connected to the idea of grit or stick-with-it-ness/stick-to-it-ness recently highlighted.
3. Self delusion- you can have self-efficacy that is completely unjustified. Sometimes it is better to believe that you are going to be successful despite best evidence to the contrary.
4. Identity- when individuals assume the identity of an innovator (or even entrepreneur) makes self efficacy for a specific action less important than your sense of competence as an innovator. You believe not that you can do the next step but in your ability to overcome the odds and problem solve.
5. A community of innovators. The knowledge that peers around you will support your efforts, share your experiences and appreciate your willingness to dare.

For me it comes down to "surfer attitude" (temporary name)- this is what I am calling it now. It is the deep understanding that to gain expertise you have to fail, since you are constantly pushing the envelope without quite knowing your limits or whether you can hang on. For me it is all five previous aspects wrapped into one. It is what keeps teachers innovating despite not knowing if they will be ultimately successful.

It's good to be back blogging.

Telling Stories

This week we held our annual iPads in the Classroom workshop. Laurie and I used last year's work as a foundation but added many new components. Most importantly like many other iPad academies around the nation we kept things open and let our learners guide much of the work. It is very interesting to start the week by asking everyone to set their own goals. In interesting ways we got a lot of "what do you want us to do" during the first two days. Then everyone settled into the routine and expectations and did an outstanding job learning and extending.

You can take a peek at the work we all did here.

The week of working with teachers has reinforced the ideas that have been guiding my work in the last year. Mobile devices are the perfect tool to enhance identity and literacy through shared story telling. We envision families recording oral histories, creating in vivo memories, and composing personally relevant texts. Using the affordance of the digital device itself and specific apps within it can create rich personal tapestries with fairly low user knowledge.

We now have a chance to try it out in Nebraska and perhaps within the year in a parallel project in China. I am excited!