A Question about the iPad

Flickr CC photo by madichan

In the near future I am going to have an opportunity to be present for an iPad demonstration. I am looking forward to it very much.  My spouse and some of my very good friends have essentially replaced their laptops with iPads. Observing them invites me to think that students could benefit or even thrive with them as compared to equipping them with other devices. The possibilities are exciting, but of course putting one in every student's hands raises all kinds of instructional and technical issues, not to mention the kind of disruption such a major change naturally makes. 

But this post concerns one major question.  Hang in there with me as I explain:

Like many schools which have been in the vanguard of educational technology, we have selected powerful laptops and expensive software for classroom. We have then watched as only a portion of our staff and students really utilize more than the very basic features of the devices and applications. Growth has been gradual, but slow in terms of robust use of these powerful tools. Many teachers still profess a real need for more training with these tools.  From what I understand from my friends in other schools, this is common.

The iPad presents a very different challenge and role for the instructor.  The 140,000 apps that are available for the iPad are perhaps its most attractive feature. An astonishing number of these are useful or powerful tools for learning. Better yet, they are inexpensive and are relatively easy to master quickly.  Consequently, specific apps can be deployed for specific courses at specific times.  This allows the teacher more freedom to innovate and explore different ways to use the iPads. 

But will they?

On the one hand, it seems as though selecting apps for one's own course would be strong motivation for learning the technology.  Or would the range of choice and the dynamic nature of mixing and matching the apps actually work against tech integration?  If the teachers did not exploit the variety and nuances of the apps, one of the great advantages of the iPad would be lost. I personally don't like the "one size fits all" of expensive application suites. But at least training for the apps can be uniform too. 

I don't know how I can really know something like this before implementation. 

The Crisis of the American Intellectual (part 1)

Recently, I came across an interesting blog post by Walter Russell Mead,  titled The Crisis of the American Intellectual.   He blames the demise of the American intellectual on three factors.  The first cause is the devotion to the “redistributionist and administrative state” which permeates corporate, university and intellectual thought. This struck me as relatively unoriginal, but the two causes arrested my attention-- A) our intellectual guild economy and B) the detrimental effects of “galloping credentialism.  

I found these topics so relevant to the plight of educational reform that I have divided my reflections into two posts-- this one and the next. 

First, take a look at what Mead says about modern guilds:

Too many of the very people who should be leading the country into a process of renewal that would allow us to harness the full power of the technological revolution . . . are devoting their considerable talent and energy to fighting the future.

 Most intellectuals today still live in a guild economy.  The learned professions – lawyers, doctors, university professors, the clergy of most mainline denominations, and (aspirationally anyway) school teachers and journalists – are organized in modern day versions of the medieval guilds.  . . . The culture and structure of the learned professions shape the world view of most American intellectuals today, but high on the list of necessary changes our society must make is the restructuring and in many cases the destruction of the guilds.  Just as the industrial revolution broke up the manufacturing guilds, the information revolution today is breaking up the knowledge guilds.  

From my little viewpoint as one who has been straining to pull educators toward a new learning design, the guild metaphor is quite valid.  Among many educators there is an attitude of “if it’s not broken why fix it” about the system they went thrived in as students and then entered as apprentices who would then move into tenured positions.  This creates a terrific amount of certainty among teachers that not only are their methods tried and true, but new ones should be viewed with a high degree of skepticism.

To make matters worse, we teachers tend to suffer anxiety about our professional status.  At times we feel treated like clerks and baby-sitters.  It's not uncommon for administrators or parents to talk down to us.  Feeling disrespected and unappreciated makes us even less receptive to new ideas, particularly if we feel that we're being told to get with the times and move away from our professional comfort zones.  On more than one occasion in my professional development sessions, I have stepped on these tender toes, and the "guild" has let me know their feelings about it!.

In my next post, we’ll take a look at what Mead calls, “credentialism”.

Old School

Our school's interdisciplinary pilot CBL project has produced a number of unusual issues. Like any first time enterprise we would certainly redesign aspects of the program a second time around.  But I think some of these issues point to broader education challenges. One in particular grinds me: A recurrent gripe that students in an art class (or French or Biology) should not be working on a cafeteria challenge, nor should they be graded on matters like group work, video production, or slide presentations.  This complaint has come in some small, but continual measure from parents and students.  In my professional development sessions, it is reversed.  A minority of teachers wondering how the problem solving, technology, publishing, etc. can "fit" into their course plan.


I think this kind of thinking is becoming more outdated by the day.  These ideas are grounded in the faith that knowledge can still be packaged through courses and delivered to students by subject specialists as they move along the K-20 conveyor belt, yielding the "educated person" at the end of the line.  To me it seems patently obvious that anyone who is merely teaching a "subject" is very replaceable.  The educational system desperately needs teachers who are generalists, hungry to learn about the world as it flattens and we become less dependent on vertical institutions to parcel out expertise as we climb the ladder toward PhD.


I keep wondering how students are going to learn to collaborate, problem solve, take initiative, and learn new technologies if they do not experience this throughout their school experiences.  Some of my colleagues have wondered hopefully whether or not students might not be prepared with these skills in a special ninth grade course.  Even if some kind of magical "course" could impart some of these skills in a meaningful way, isn't it pretty obvious that training in some of technology that is ubiquitous now, will be outdated before the students even leave high school.


In making some of these complaints, I feel like a hypocrite because all of my own innovation has taken place within the department course system.  Even though our school administration is trying push for change in the school culture, the very structure of the curriculum signals to all stakeholders that the way to get an education here is to ride down the conveyor belt just as we did when we were kids and our parents and grandparents before them.  

I can't complain about how far we've come this year in our quest for culture shift. But I can't help fantasizing about shaking off the department/course shackles and teaming with a group of students and teachers who wanted to reshape the curriculum across subjects and take a walk across a school year's wire without a net.


-------------------------------
Flickr CC photo by alandd

A Grand In-Service Adventure

We are venturing outside of the box for today's all-staff professional development day.  Inspired by the "big ideas" we generated in our cluster groups last month, we are going to start the day with two minute "pitches."  Those giving the pitches are passionate about an idea they wish to turn into a cross-school challenge project.

These "elevator pitches" will be followed by a Challenge Based Learning "Open House" where those making the pitches can discuss their big idea with prospective teammates.  Who knows how all of this will turn out.

But up to this point in the agenda, the day promises to be  pretty much no-lose.  Whether she attracts a large team or not, a teacher may proceed with her project.  Those not interested in any of the pitches can quietly resume the CBL work which was started in their departments in August. Though there has been some confusion about all the options, I have tried to position the pitches as liberating opportunities, and indeed,  many of us are excited about the day.

The rubber meets the road after the teams have formed.  They will then be tasked with asking some tough questions about their big ideas.  Then the afternoon will be spent wrestling with answers to these questions.  I'm hoping that leads to some great conversations about education.

The counselors and administrators are going to drop in and out of the groups as "facilitators", serving as sounding boards or urging the teams to get back on track.  All the teams are going to meet in our media center so that transparency and networking have a chance to flourish.

I am sure there will be some hiccups-- Such is the nature of true collaboration.  Those of us guiding staff through the day are trying to model the very process we are hoping staff will try with students, so we'll be giving it our best shot!

---------------------------------------------
Flickr Creative Commons photo by Adam Swank

Innovating, Failing, Disrupting, and Creating

I find myself returning now and again to a recent op-ed piece by Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, called Erasing Our Innovation Deficit. It reminds me to keep pushing myself to open up my classroom and to urge my students to think outside of the box. Here are some excepts that really hit a chord with me:

*We can no longer rely on the top-down approach of the 20th century, when big investments in the military and NASA spun off to the wider economy. . . . The ideas that power our next generation of growth are just as likely to originate in a coffee shop as in the laboratory of a big corporation.

*Innovation is disruptive and messy. It can't be controlled or predicted. The only way to ensure it can flourish is to create the best possible environment -- and then get out of the way.

*Risk-taking means tolerating failure . . . Show me a program with a 100 percent success rate, and I'll show you one with 0 percent innovation.

*Right now, somewhere in the United States, someone is working at a kitchen table, in a dorm room or a garage, developing an idea that could not only create a new industry but could also just possibly change the world. If we provide the right environment, she'll do the rest.

--------------------------------------
"Break Through Flickr Creative Commons photo by a o k

Best of 2009: Shakespeare & Me -- An Amicable Separation

I am re-posting favorite entries from 2009. This one first appeared in June, but I have included this new, cool jpeg.

"No, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more.
Well, I try my best
To be just like I am,
But everybody wants you
To be just like them.
They say sing while you slave and I just get bored.
I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more."
-- Bob Dylan

My 32 year relationship with Shakespeare class has far surpassed the average length of a marriage in this country. So without apology, he and I embark on a trial separation. Because some of our children (former students) are startled, I'll offer a few words of explanation. Divorceguide.com has helped me sort out the reasons:

Cheating
I don't think I ever cheated my students, but this year I cheated on the Bard. I had the sense in class that I was performing. All modesty aside, these were good performances, but I could almost see myself teaching as I taught (not good). Though I continually vary the plays, after teaching some 60-70 sections of the class some of the genuine excitement of sharing is gone. It's not Shakespeare, it's. . . .
Boredom
I'll admit it. I am tired of teaching literary papers and truly sick of reading them. I'm not proud of this, but it's hard work, and I have paid my dues. It's better to adjust than to simply become altogether bitter and cynical.

Commitment problems
Well , as I cataloged in Making Headway, I have been busy-busy with technology and connective learning. Throwing over the Bard for such a thing has penalized me among our mutual friends (see Shell Shock). And I admit to losing focus on day to day teaching but only because I have been more focused on learning. (And as the world "flattens", won't the better learners be better teachers?).

Change in priorities
I love all my courses, but right now I am fixated on revving up my AP American Government & Politics course with vlogging and a digital anthology. I needed to trim my preps to give this proper focus.

I'll be going to see Macbeth at Stratford in a couple of weeks, and I will still be using that play in Lit into Film. So William and I are still friends. The course will be in great hands with Mike G. And who knows, I might find my way back to Shakespeare class some day. But when I've separated from other great loves in my life like coaching basketball and teaching Dickens, I never went back.

I need this kind of change as a teacher. I'm not remotely burned out-- and after 34 years, I still don't complain when September rolls around. So farewell, Shakespeare. It's been great.

--------------------------------------------
"Shakespeare" Flickr Creative Commons Photo by damozeljane

Best of 2009: My 21st Century Stimulation

As 2009 comes to an end I am re-posting some my favorites. This one first appeared January 11.

I began teaching American Government in 1993, and my Congressional simulation has been with me for the entire ride. The idea came from a product called, "Committee" by Interact, but from the beginning I made modifications. It evolved slowly from semester to semester with two enormous convulsive changes along the way. One year I completely updated all the legislation, and another year I recreated and expanded the entire cast of 35 imaginary characters.

Most students love playing "The Game" as they usually call it. And every semester a few will journal about it and mistakenly refer to it as a "stimulation". I still chuckle.

I have recently conducted another radical revision due to the convergence of three factors:
1) "The game" is getting a little stale for me.
2) I have never liked having the players' roles and goals prescripted for them.
3) I've found some great Google tools that will help me and open up the game and make it far more dynamic.

The latest version of the game will revolve around Google Docs and Google Sites. This will provide students with the easy ability to use templates to build their roles and goals. The sites will allow students to post and share some work. I will also be able to make the project 75% more paperless (See Red Herring and Black Book Bag).

Check out the latest '09 Version of the Game. I'd love to have some feedback. And feel free stop by and observe the interaction when we are hip deep in the next semester. Wish me luck!

---------------------------------------
Screen Shot of Audrey's Google Site project --- Phil Herbert, White House Director of Legislative Affairs

Drive-thru Triple Play

Three recommended short, sweet, and recent blogs.

From "Adaptation Is Not an Option":

If we continue to define our profession by what we do and where we do it, we're on our way to joining the iceman, the farrier, lamplighter, pardoner, summoner, and the canon's yeoman.

From "21 Things that Will become Obsolete in Education by 2020":

School buildings are going to become 'homebases' of learning, not the institutions where all learning happens. Buildings will get smaller and greener, student and teacher schedules will change to allow less people on campus at any one time, and more teachers and students will be going out into their communities to engage in experiential learning.

From "Twitter Reveals Most Discussed Topics of 2009"

Technology
1. Google Wave
2. Snow Leopard
3. Tweetdeck
4. Windows 7
5. CES
6. Palm Pre
7. Google Latitude
8. #E3
9. #amazonfail
10. Macworld
--------------------------------------
"Triple Escalera de Caracol" Flickr Creative Commons Photo by P Medina

Embracing Failure

As I have reported from time to time in this space, I the centerpiece of my American Government students is "The Game" -- a legislative simulation played toward the end semester. Last year I developed a full fledged online edition, requiring each student to create a web site for the character she portrayed in the game. Going high tech produced a number of successes and failures which I reflected upon in Web 2.0 Simulation Post-Mortem.

My biggest error was unwittingly putting myself in the middle of far too much web activity. I allowed the game and project requirements bombard me with emails and force me to go back to the student web sites again and again. After launching the game with great enthusiasm in all three sections, I barely enjoyed any of the cool things that came out of it. Each night I would respond to numerous student emails and and check dozens of student web sites. Playing the game in three classes simultaneously proved to be overwhelming.

So, here I am again, launching three simulations, simultaneously. But I've learned from the school of hard knocks, instituting three major changes to shift or share more responsibility with the students.

1) Last year I asked students to email me the url of their web sites so that I could post them for the class. Pretty stupid. Utterly confusing and inefficient. This year I created a wiki and listed all the students' names on a page. I asked the students to request an invitation to the wiki which are easy to accept at the Wikispaces site. Students are then required to link their sites to the wiki. It took about five minutes in class to show them how.

2) I am recruiting students to evaluate each other's sites, determining whether the required "stuff" has been posted. This can be done through a blind process (students of one class will check the "characters' sites of another). I am awarding a bit of extra credit for the service. Having those eyes and ears poking through the sites will be a major relief. This year I should be able to look each site over once.

3) Students will complete a check list self-evaluation which they will submit at the end of the project. This is intended to improve responsibility and also relieve me from going on wild goose chases, looking online for artifacts that don't even exist because the student missed a deadline.

I suspect that I will be noting some new failures in my next post-mortem. But it's hard to keep moving forward without having some choice mistakes point you in the right direction.

-------------------------------
"epic fail :)" Flickr Creative Commons photo courtesy of anna

Precious Time

Here's an intercepted comment by Terry Kaminski to one of Will Richardson's posts. I jumped out of my seat with a, "Yes!" when I read it:

Don’t give me more money, give me more prep time!!! If I taught 3 hours per day and had 3 hours per day to prepare my courses, attend webinars, read the latest research, plan new innovative, engaging and creative lessons I could really do a bang up job.

Teachers often feel like hamsters on a wheel. We are running like hell just trying to keep up.

. . . .Teachers need time to be creative and innovative. We need time to team plan with our colleagues.

Education is on a very slippery slope right now. I see so much potential for really good things to happen. Will they happen? Only time will tell.

Amen! I am trying to innovate and be creative this semester, but nearly all the new wrinkles were planned over the summer. Each school year, regardless of how organized I am, after 6-8 weeks I often find myself moving from moment to moment. There is a remarkable amount of clerical work with teaching, and at our school, others think nothing of dreaming up extra tasks for "advisers"-- our version of home room. (We collect money and administer a variety of paper shuffling tasks. Frequently we are ordered to provide courier service for matters like ballots running ballots or empty collection envelopes to the main office. Really.).

The two unscheduled periods during my day get filled very quickly.

Last year, during the first semester, I had the relative luxury of one extra free period designated for pursuing technology integration. It is no coincidence that those few months were the most inventive stretch in my professional life. In my neck of the woods more money is invested in hardware and software than curriculum development. The latter requires time freed from a full teaching assignment.

When do presentations to other teachers, the first question they always ask is always, "Where do you find the time....?" Well, unfortunately, often I don't.
----------------------------------------

"Waste of Time" Flickr Creative Commons photo by der_sich_den_wolf_tanzt