The Best Technology Tool Ever- BubbleSheet

I found this gem today in the iTunes App store. Who says technology doesn't revolutionize education?

Here's the description from the App store site:

MasteryConnect is a web-based system that allows teachers to assess and monitor student performance of the Common Core and state standards, share common assessments, and connect in an online professional learning community.  With the BubbleSheet app, teachers save time in grading student assignments and assessments as scores are automatically populated in the MasteryConnect’s scoring system.  

I came up with this:
From the makers of DigiRoll the computerized Wheel comes BubbleSheet.  Paper and Pencil is so old fashioned, why not add some critical thinking and analysis to your assessment by enhancing it with technology. Twenty-first century learning just got easier.
 

Think you can create a snarkier description than that?

 (Here's a link to the site if the screenshot quality is poor)

Technology: How important is it?

Prologue:  Is a prologue allowed in a blog post?  I guess it is now.

After writing and rewriting the post below in response to my colleague's Thursday afternoon post I'm still not happy with it.  So here's the short of it.  It's irresponsible to ignore the value of technology in education--AND--it is irresponsible to overestimate the value of technology in education.  That's pretty clear isn't it?  You've read this far, you might as well read the rest to see if you can figure out what I'm trying to say any better than I can.

About ten years ago (but only lasting a few) our school administrators included integration of technology as a part of teacher evaluations.  Serving on a teacher advisory committee for the school, I remember discussions about what it means to "integrate technology" in the classroom.  I argued at the time that simply showing a video clip to the class using the online video service "United Streaming" was no better than pushing play on the VCR or Laser Disk player.

I used United Streaming frequently, and found it much better for me, the teacher, than bothering with videotapes and laser disks.  But, I didn't agree that in a given class, me showing a video clip online made me better instructionally than another teacher showing the same clip on VHS.  Ultimately, United Streaming allowed for easier selection of relevant clips and allowed for smoother transition in and out of video presentations but it certainly wasn't a "game changer."

Technology should be an integral part of instruction, and I believe this has always been true.  It can be a powerful tool for reaching students in ways that can't always happen in traditional ways.  Here in the basement of the Teaching Underground, we witnessed this just last week.

Our colleague in the basement teaches an elective called "Issues of the Modern World."  In the fall, his class conducted an interview with an participant in the Arab Spring movement in the middle east.  After hearing from him, the students were able to formulate questions to ask him again this spring.  Through these interactions, students had access to a living primary source for history in the making.  They were also able to see the evolution and change of a movement and the demeanor of one of its participants in real time.  Twenty years ago this would have been a monumental task if not impossible.  Today, an internet connection and a Skype account are all that are needed.

My question is still the same.  This isn't critical of technology.  I am impressed with this teacher's learning activity.  It was innovative and forward thinking.  His students engaged in a learning experience that they will likely remember forever.  For my AP Psychology class, I frequently invite a graduate student from the University of Virginia department of neuroscience.  These doctoral students share with my Psychology students some of their ongoing research on the brain.  They even bring in a human brain for students to see and hold.  Which experience is better?  Skype or face-to-face.

Answer: neither!

I don't think I need to really explain this.  This teacher couldn't have conducted this experience without Skype.  For me, Skyping with a guest located three miles away wouldn't make sense.  For sure, we should recognize this use of Skype in the classroom for its novelty and innovation.  We should also recognize that in this case, technology brought a living primary source into the classroom in a way that couldn't be acheived without technology.

But, the underlying pedagogy is still the same.  Exposing students to primary sources in the Social Studies engages them in the process of social science instead of simply requiring them to memorize names, dates, facts, etc.

I think that most educators in the classroom recognize the power of technology.  When it allows us to do something more efficiently or better than we could do without it, we embrace it.  When it allows students to learn in ways that are more lasting and impacting, we embrace it.

Remember all of the modes of technology that have changed teaching and learning: mass printing, chalkboards, overhead projectors, filmstrips, television in the classroom, computer labs in schools, computers in classrooms, presentation software, streaming/digital video, computer access for most/all students, social networking, online course delivery.....

Quality teaching and learning can take place in the absence of any of the above.  There is a bit of a paradox when it comes to my attitude toward educational technology.  It is at the same time one of the most important factors/tools for learning and also one of the least necessary factors/tools for learning.

Whether they articulate this idea or not, I think that most teachers get it.  Some still avoid technology altogether, and others couldn't function without it.  Usually both types carry a sense of moral superiority about what they do.  In reality, they're both missing the point.

We should use technology resources available to their full extent insofar as they benefit the teacher and/or student and make learning more efficient or effective.  We should seek out new technologies that might benefit our classrooms.  We should not overestimate the power of technology for effective education or expect the technology to solve the complex problems facing education in the 21st century.

Post-logue:  Why not, I've already included a "prologue."  Thanks to Mr. Giordano for sharing his classroom experience with Skype.  If you're interested, he's also a recent convert to "Juicing." (The diet kind)  Read about his "juicing" experiences and related revelations about the human experience of eating at Sausage Boy Goes Green.

Technology: Friend or Foe

Many folks in the blogosphere have addressed the role of technology in education.  Views on the subject run the gamut and opinions differ for a variety of reasons.   We here at the TU find technology the frequent topic of conversation. And, we talk about its role in more than just education, discussing how and where it has altered the landscape significantly in the last five years.  We've written about the issue a half dozen or so times but it keeps coming around and a recent lunch conversation made another post seem warranted(type "technology" in the search box to the right to take a peek).

Technology is and has always been a creation intended to improve the human condition.  Whether saving effort with labor or making work easier and more productive, it is supposed to help.  Perhaps our development and reliance(some would say unhealthy dependence) on technology is what has allowed us to emerge as such a unique species.  From our earliest attempts with stone, bone, and wood, technology put us in a position to master our world and empowered us to do more things not possible before.  The purpose was to aid humans.  Constant innovation would periodically revolutionize our way of life.   Reshaped agriculture, transportation, communication, medicine among other areas touched almost every aspect of human life.

But we also have a funny way of forgetting the less desirable side of technology.   Once we started with tools and then farming, it likely didn't take long before we were developing things as a means to destroy stuff or people we didn't want around.  That you can usually see coming.  More recently the effects of technology are more subtle but arguably harmful as well.  It is these unintended results that bring the discussions about technology full circle.  Too often new becomes synonymous with better.  In particular those of us who work with young people are keenly aware of how intertwined they become with the newest technologies.  They block out the outside world with earphones and rarely say a simple "hello" while busy staring at the screen of their smartphone. (perhaps this isn't unique to young folks)  These gadgets quickly eradicate basic elements of civility.  Their efforts to "connect" with each other and the world virtually often leave them out of touch.  People are emboldened by perceived anonymity and do and say things they would never actually do or say face to face. Overall I'd say the greatest concern I have is that too much technology can be harmful.  Which bring me to the topic of education. 

Education's relationship with  technology is no different than other areas of society.  What is different is how powerful people embrace it and then take a paternalistic approach to how it ought to be used.  The change from the outside point of view revolves around "we know how to fix schools and we will do it with technology."  As a case in point take a recent post we did on Khan Academy.  The approach here  is using simple online recorded lectures with some included visuals.  The accessibility and ability to repeat and duplicate are great .  They offer tremendous advantages but couldn't a student or teacher just record a lecture?  How can anyone in their right mind think they are better than having an quality teacher?

The answer lies in our love affair with technology.  In the hands of decision-makers, the ideas of group-think do-gooders quickly become misguided and produce a vastly different product than envisioned in the conference or boardroom. In some ways, interacting face to face is the same as online.  In many ways it is not. The economic downturn has led to the laying off of teachers and cutting of valuable programs to save funds; all while funds are used on technology which fails to benefit everyone.  Computers, smartboards and technology that ultimately have a limited shelf life are  purchased.  Sure they are very useful, when their role is understood the right way.  So really technology is neither a friend or a foe, it is the instead how we view it that proves problematic. 

Most teachers are not technophobes(I even stand near the microwave when cooking).  We embrace what helps us do our jobs.  We are also wary of becoming too dependent or reliant on technology.  This is a positive trait.  The "paperless" classroom might not be all it is cracked up to be.  Most good educators realize how technology can help, but know that it can't replace people and relationships in education.  We are not talking about assembling something on a production line.  We are talking about young people.    Tech can be many things but it cannot do what humans do in education.  This dogmatic view of the role technology in our future does a great disservice and ultimately could worsen things in many ways.

Defenders of technology infusion would say "we are not suggesting that at all." But that is happening.   Rather than empower and improve our lives, new technologies often alienate and isolate.  While we have instant access to information, we often fail to internalize the importance of what we learn and how to use these tools.  Leaving it to someone else, say Wikipedia, to set that mindset for us.  If everyone was taught by the same teacher with the same approach it would be fair to say quality would suffer. I read once that getting information off the internet is like drinking from a fire hydrant. Makes sense.  You can get a lot from the internet, mainly information.   The benign marketing of technology that shatters the "one size fits all" school model misses the reality that varied instruction provides a rich environment to learn.

We end up isolated since we carefully self select our networks and thereby restrict views that may differ from our own.  This can be problematic.  Having students who don't learn the same and don't always get along actually provides a real world experience.  Freeing up the teacher and online collaboration sound great but what lies beneath that is less obvious.    Imagine if you will a toddler seated in front of a large screen with the alphabet along with some morals and values are imparted to them from some distant source.  Technology can convey knowledge and content.  But it can't really help teach responsibility, judgement, character, how to treat each other and it doesn't provide any wisdom.  I'd prefer to have my own children learn form a good person as opposed to good technology. 

The simple question is do people learn better using technology or using each other?  The answer is a complex one. Some would seek to produce a study using a true valid measurement to prove this, one that any experienced teacher won't be able to poke full of holes in 30 seconds.  They miss the point.  People learn from other people in so many ways and entertaining the idea that technology is anything but what it started out as, a simple tool would be a huge mistake.  Let's stop all the revolution talk and just try to find ways we can help our young people. As importantly let's be aware that anything we do should never have the potential for doing the opposite.    

Thoughts in closing.
A friend is someone you trust, not something you trust.  
 "Technology accelerates at a relentless pace.  Anything not moving forward, is moving backwards."  This is a quote from a 2013 Lexus Commercial.     I would respond that while it is certain technology can make us faster and able to do more, the one thing technology will never create is more time during the day.  So by doing more aren't we just getting busier?

For demonstration purposes lets just watch this commercial and see if you pick up the potential bad things(hazards)of new technology.

Digital Footprints Prove Costly

Few of us give much thought to life before digital communication permeated every facet of our lives.   Social networking is now so woven into our society it is difficult to remember life without it.  But the existence of Al Gore's internet and Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook have changed things in ways we could not even imagine just years ago.    Online has become the place we buy things, connect with our friends, research illness and read the news.  Education is no different from the rest of the world and having an online presence is now an effective way to engage and reach out to your students.

I attended a seminar put on by our division at the start of this school year for athletic coaches, many of whom are not teachers.  I think the goal was to have those less familiar with  the dynamics in education reflect on the appropriate use and also the pitfalls of social networking and E-mail when working with kids.  As both adults and youth increase their virtual presence we all struggle a bit to keep up with the impact on our professional and personal lives.  The attorney presented myriad examples of staff who were dismissed for all sorts of things.  Some were pretty dumb and were clearly warranted while others crossed into a much more nebulous area.   One thing I took from the session was that in today's interconnected world, there is no separation between your personal and professional lives.  

Which brings me to the curious case of Ashley Payne.  She was the 24 year old Georgia teacher who 2 years ago was pressured to resign after an "anonymous" parent complaint about a photo she posted on Facebook.  The photo in question was from her European vacation showed her drinking alcohol and was far from offensive or what most level headed people would consider questionable.  She also had commented on her profile page using some objectionable language referencing a trivia contest.  None of which was open to the public even though claims were made Payne had "friended" her students.   Nor was Payne "friends" with any of her students.  Nevertheless she was abruptly forced to choose between being suspended or resigning. 

As usual there's more to the story.  A local reporter determined the "parent" E-mail complaint was likely sent by an anonymous individual and received less than 2 hours before Payne was confronted by her principal.  The sender was never identified and the most plausible explanation is that an adult sent the E-mail to get rid of Payne for reasons unknown. 

What this curious case reveals is that privacy as we once knew it no longer exists.  We have virtual footprints that remain in place despite our efforts to the contrary.  Harmless things now can return and cause trouble for us down the road.   No matter the specifics it brings into question issues my colleague covered to some degree in his earlier post "Free Speech and Ultimate Education Taboo".   Any good teacher recognizes they are role models to some degree and behave accordingly when in public.  This world where lines get blurred between public and private makes all of this more complicated. 
   
Educators know all to well how kids can lose perspective and common sense when they plug into the virtual world.  It brings to mind how we need to educate our children about what is OK and what is not OK when online and how important it is to use good judgment.   Cases like this make such tutelage difficult as it seems to me Payne wasn't doing anything that would even raise an eyebrow in many instances.  I had the opportunity to cover some of these issues with a group of students some time back and my message was simple..."don't be an idiot."  That was actually the title of my talk.  I stressed the need to stay safe,  keep personal information private and finally remember when you put something online...it is no longer yours anymore and is likely public forever. 

I find the lack of fairness and degree of haste used by the school division in dismissing Payne troubling.  Maybe she was a bad teacher and a crummy employee.  If so she could be let go for that.  But in this case it appears she lost her job because she drank a beer on vacation and used objectionable language.  Not in the presence of her students, not at work...but online. Could this same standard apply to a restaurant?  Doubtful. 

The legal case involving Payne has yet to be resolved 2 years later and as far as I could tell she is not currently teaching.  A state standards board investigated the matter and said there was no cause for any sanctions against Payne.   So we are left with the reality that what is acceptable is "muddy" at best and most districts likely are playing catch up when developing policies.  They likely include broadly worded guidelines under legal advise.  So we have to always watch even more what we do and say as no doubt others are.   The new Barrow  County superintendent perhaps said it best:
“I always encourage our educators to recognize that the network is a public forum and that we need to always set our professional image and standard for how we are depicting ourselves for our students and community.”  So in a sense the internet is the same as your classroom.    

 I think most teachers realize you are not just a teacher between 8 and 4.  You are a teacher 24 hours a day.  That's generally a good thing.  The practicalities of being a teacher  usually means you will have some sort of online presence.  In doing so we must not forget to use good judgment. Even if those people who expect us to do so do not follow suit.

Are Teachers Anti-Technology?

Are teachers anti-technology?  I don't think so.  One of the primary responsibilities of teaching is to relate to students in your classroom.  If you think those earbuds in your student's ear are plugged into a magic little box that creates music out of the ether, well, you might not make it as a teacher.  My four year-old demonstrated the other day that he knows enough about computers to exit the Word document that I've failed to save in order to find his favorite games website for a little "Uphill Rush" in the afternoon.

My point is that a teacher who doesn't get technology is akin to the teacher who lets ink stain his or her shirt pocket, the one who still says "that's the bomb" when they want kids to think they're "hip", the male teacher who still wears mid-thigh shorts in the summer time.  Teachers must understand the world their students live in.  This doesn't mean yielding to every fad or fashion of the day, but if we are not at least involved enough to understand what influences our youth, we're likely not concerned enough about them to teach them well.

Still, we aren't the trendsetters.  Kids aren't taking their fashion cues from us.  Several years ago, students started prefacing every statement with the phrase "not gonna lie."  It was the new "like."  I thought it would be cool to start my own trend so I started saying things like "NGL, this is going to be the hardest quiz you'll ever take" and "you've got a low B right now, but NGL, if you get a good grade on this test it might bring you up to an A-."  I think they made fun of me for that.  I tried to tell them that everyone was saying it now because "not gonna lie" just took too long to get out.  They didn't believe me.

What does this have to do with anything you say?  Well, as a teacher, I must be immersed in the culture of technology as much, nearly as much, or maybe slightly more than my students.  If I'm too far ahead of the curve, most of them aren't going to follow.  A few months ago, I laughed with a colleague over the fact that when we were in high school, shorthand was still a class.  Our last post mentioned the Apple IIe from the 1980s.  Most adults, even as young as twenty years old, can look back with a little humor at how far we've come with technology since their high school days. 

So are teachers, anti-technology?  I don't think so.  I think most teachers are very willing to engage learners in new ways, taking risks from time to time for the sake of better teaching.  I think we're a little put out when our leaders promote the myth that technology will save money and solve so many of our problems in education.  We get tired of seeing that money is always available for new technology, but scarce in other areas.  We don't jump to use technology that just does what we've always done, except maybe a little faster or fancier.

Teacher/blogger, Larry Ferlazzo wrote a piece for Education Week earlier this week suggesting a checklist of sorts for whether he would consider using a particular technology in his classroom.

1) Does it take me less than one minute to learn the basics on how to use it?

2) Will it take less than one minute -- with guidance -- for my students to learn to also learn the basics on how to use it?

3) Does it provide a value-added benefit to student learning over a similar activity using basic classroom tools?

4) Is it a tool that I believe can be used regularly in class?

 

5) And, lastly, though being able to answer yes to the previous four questions usually outweighs a negative response to this one -- Can it make my life a little easier?

I like it.

How to Not Be a Terrible Teacher

OK so that title apparently got your attention. The picture helps as well(this is too easy). In that sense we at the Underground are as traffic hungry as some media outlets but much more ethical in our quest to attract readers. Since you were unfortunate enough to find your way here you might as well read a bit.

When I was new to the job I should have been let go. In fact, I was...three separate times, when I received my reduction in force letter(RIF). For reasons I still cannot fully explain I kept coming back for more and was rehired each August. During that time a more experienced teacher once said to me "Get better or get out." OK...I made that line up but I wish someone had said it. Because that's kinda how I feel today. Despite what seems a coordinated and organized effort to demoralize America's teachers we stick around. And despite what you hear, many of the problems in our schools can't be just written off to "bad" teachers. Certainly a nebulous and political charged label in today's climate. The "good" teachers, the people I respect the most at my school, share a common trait, a continual desire to improve things and do better. So how does one go from surviving as a new teacher to really growing as a professional? Admitting I have much growing left to do, this is not a discussion of the growth-model value-added data driven edujargon reform currently proposed and supported by individuals who will never ask about what I have learned in teaching. Take it or leave it, here's some advice:

PERSONALITY MATTERS-A great deal of research tries to point out that in fact anyone can be a good teacher...and at least in principle I agree. I also believe strongly that as in any profession, when you expand the pool of people you hire, you also acquire those less able to perform. Like most places of employment, we've got those that work hard and make things better, and well, then we've got those that don't. One factor in that is personality. Teaching high school is unique. In how many other jobs do you interact with a hundred or more people(ones you see regularly) in more than just a minimal way? There are a few that come to mind and with them I know personality matters. Many other jobs involve very limited and simple interactions. In teaching you engage with many more folks in greater depth.

STEAL-The old re-inventing the wheel line still applies. While flashy PowerPoints and technology integration contribute, in most subjects it is still about content and basic lesson. White boards and markers work as well as a Promethean board. Why can't people get that? The digital age has ushered in many changes and as schools go 1 to 1with computers, I hope people recognize how that could potentially complicate what might otherwise be simple. Computers are great, until they start designing and building themselves. Yikes. I digress. Older teachers have more stuff, so steal from them! Resources, ideas, unit plans, etc. I did in fact have a more experienced teacher once tell me "teaching is sharing". That stuck with me. Remember to give and take.

KIDS BEFORE CONTENT- Remember you are teaching people, connect to them and make them matter. You never know when something you say can change the direction of a day or even a life. Smiley faces, positive comments, casual conversation before class all help create connections. Think about their lives and reach out(not on facebook), maybe even try to make their experience a positive one....

ARRIVE EARLY, LEAVE LATE-This is pretty much the norm but you need to put in the legwork to succeed. Yeah your family and relationship will suffer but hey you are a teacher...stop complaining. No one one in a position to do anything about it seems to care.

DO SOMETHING BESIDES SITTING IN THE CLASSROOM-Find other ways to get involved, sponsor stuff, coach, stand in the hall, volunteer. Speaking and Interacting with kids in a different setting can be as rewarding as anything else you do.

FIGURE OUT WAYS TO DO SOMETHING BETTER-Reflect and do things better in the future. You don't need data to accomplish this. I know for a fact that my 1st period classes might get short changed because it is the first time I attempt to do stuff. When 4th period rolls around my delivery is polished and fluid. I've worked out the kinks. Practice makes perfect.

ASK KIDS FOR FEEDBACK-They are brutally honest. If they all say you stink. You probably do. Consider appealing to their interests and changing up to something that works.

INVOLVE PARENTS-Parents are your best ally or worst enemy and sometimes both. Which would you prefer? E-mail updates about the class can go a long way in helping people feel connected. Include what the class has been doing, upcoming assignments and even some info about the school as a whole. It only takes a few minutes I get more thanks for this than just about anything else.

SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT HAVE TO PUNT-Don't be scared to use a movie once in a while. Use that time to grade or get ready. Just be sure you make the movie useful and relevant or the kids will see right through the effort. Another way of saying this is some teachers make the mistake of feeling like they need to be up in front "teaching" for things to get done. Mix it up.

RED DOTS MEAN SOMETHING-Grading is not always a science and there isn't a rubric for everything. When listening to a song you know within the first 10 secs whether something is good and student responses can be much the same. Once you realize its good...Use red dots. Provide the needed feedback and move on. Example: 1 essay x 140 students x 5 mins each essay = 11+ hours of grading. Good luck with that.

THERE ARE NO SHORTCUTS-You may work really hard and still not be any good. Welcome aboard!

TREAT STUDENTS LIKE THEY ARE YOUR KIDS-They are the most precious thing in the world to someone. Most young teachers don't yet have kids. Imagine entrusting your kid to someone else you barely know. You have to live up to that responsibility

BE A LEADER-Schools need competent, concerned and involved people or all the those that bash our schools will be proven right.

STAY MOTIVATED BY MOTIVATING OTHERS-There are few professions where each and every day so many depend on you. No you are not a pilot, nurse, surgeon, soldier or saint. But you are important. Find ways to make that mean something each and every day. Easier said than done. But fear not, for now most systems still have this thing called summer. :) Then you can just call your friends and gloat.

AVOID BURNOUT-Worry about and focus on one of the few things you can actually "control", your classroom, Don't worry about all the other stuff. If it deals with education don't watch too much news, read too much of the paper, attend too many meetings or read too many blogs(except this one).

In appreciation for our low morale we at the Teacher Underground are considering a series of posts to lighten the mood.

In the meantime share some of the tips those of you out there have picked up?

Innovation in Education: The Missing Link

I predict that “innovation” will soon become the newest addition to the famous Lake Superior State U list of “Banished Words.”  So confident that I just submitted it on their website and I encourage you to as well.  I do not oppose the idea, indeed I embrace it, but I think we’ve exhausted the word's usefulness to our lexicon.

Despite my misgivings, I must use the word here to describe why in education, true innovation is so rare.  A recent TED Talk by TED Curator, Chris Anderson helped me gain a better appreciation for innovation and led me to think about why this sort of innovation is so elusive in the world of education.

Anderson coined the phrase “crowd accelerated innovation,” but in his talk he argues that innovation has always been a group process.  The difference today lies in the internet’s ability to ramp up the group process to a level never before achieved.  So for Anderson, innovation requires three elements—a crowd, light, and desire.  The crowd is a community of individuals with a shared interest or purpose.  Light refers to the need for each member of the community to be visible, to see what every other member is up to.  Finally, without desire, no motivation exists for creativity or moving forward rather than taking satisfaction in the status quo.

On the surface, all of these elements appear to be in place within the world of education.  We have no shortage of community, countless parents, teachers, administrators, and even business leaders are committed to elevating the level of education in the community and the nation.  A ready supply of desire exists few causes more noble than preparing young minds to reach their full potential in life.  I contend that light is the missing link in true innovation of our profession.

Light requires individual connection and the visibility of all members of the crowd.  We have a façade of light in the world of education, but we still lack the true connection and visibility required for effective innovation.  In Anderson’s talk he gives several examples of how internet video has sped innovation in several areas. 

One example refers to a Unicyclist.  Today, a unicyclist may watch his or her community of cyclists perform various tricks and stunts on YouTube.  Rather than passively watching, the cyclist may then take the ideas seen in the video, practice them, make them better, then share the innovation with the community where other cyclists may repeat the pattern, thus accelerating the rate of innovation among Unicyclists worldwide. 

A more sober example refers to scientific procedures caught on video which serve to make replication of such procedures easier and more accurate versus the traditional method of pouring through pages of text and making assumptions in order to confirm scientific findings.

In both cases, the practitioners of the discipline openly share their ideas and practices with the community.  This open sharing facilitates crowdsourcing as everyone in the community is now free to take these ideas, shape them into something new, and share the results back to the community.

So what’s stopping this from happening in education.  First is the drive toward standardization.  We have standardized tests from common standards leading to a common curriculum.  The myth that arises from this is that we can have standardized instruction.  With other types of innovation, the crowd is free to adopt what works, adapt it to their situation, and share successes or failures.  The more we expect standardized instruction from teachers, the less freedom they will enjoy to experiment with what works and what doesn't in their classrooms. 

We bemoan the effect of teaching silos, but when innovation is more top down than lateral, innovation is not really innovation.  It is a manager with an idea expecting his or her employees to make it work.  Teachers do have opportunities to avail themselves of each others expertise in order to benefit from crowd accelerated innovation, but it gets harder by the day.

Time has become a great issue.  Under the auspices of economy, teacher workloads have increased across the nation.  I suspect though that economy is the scapegoat for this action.  Political and educational leaders alike pay lip service to teachers with general statements about their hard work and ability, but their policies and agendas treat them more like assembly line workers than artists.  School districts must provide teachers with the space for reflection and innovation rather than working them non-stop while expecting others outside of the classroom to be the innovation minded.

Just in the last three days, I've been able to watch my fifth grade son engage with his classmates on "Edmodo."  At lunch I shared the story with a colleague.  By the end of the day he was showing me how he had begun to integrate it into one of his electives and the useful features that I hadn't even noticed while watching my son work.  While showing me this, I talked about some ways that I had been using my blog to supplement some of our class activities and he explained how certain features were more suited to the "wiki" spaces that he had set up for another project.  Later, over this weekend I showed my wife how to create a Prezi presentation for a grad school project.  I got the idea when another teacher sent several links to resources that she had used successfully in her US Government classes.

All of this took place with no more than one hour of interaction at the most.  I would love to take all of these resources-- the blog, edmodo, wikispaces, and prezi-- for the next month and really integrate them into instruction to find out what works, what doesn't, and what is worth pushing on to my colleagues as we collaboratively engage in the process of innovation.  As a teacher, I will take all of the isolated minutes that I can scrap to engage in the collaborative process of innovation.  I would ask from the public, politicians, and especially the educational leaders who directly make decisions to protect this space for classroom teachers, and facilitate innovation in education by allowing us to become a greater part of this process.

Images: 

http://www.cooltownstudios.com/images/crowdsourcing-cartoon.jpg
http://www.extremeunicycles.com/Unicycles.jpg

What if...

...while moving away from educating students to take their place in a manufacturing economy we've inadvertently begun to educate them to take their place in a consumer driven market.

I was born and raised in a factory town.  My father, grandfather, and every uncle on my mother's side work their lives in them.  My first job was on the assembly line in the factory.  As a child, at least six major Bassett Furniture factories operated within ten miles of my house.  Today, none are left.  When people talk about the changing economy, I've seen first hand how quickly entire regions can be left behind.

Rightfully so, educators fear sending our children into a 21st century economy well equipped with 20th century skills.  So many of us are using the factory metaphor to drive home the point that the old way of thinking is dead.  Our students no longer leave school to enter a manufacturing economy. 

Unfortunately, much of what drives our economy today is consumption.  Remember the tax rebates of 2008.  The administration knew that people needed to spend more money to spur the economy.  I remember the announcement (maybe around 2005) that iPods would have video; the folks at Apple introduced a product for which they needed to create a market.  Unemployment is up, tax revenue is down, schools are struggling to find funding, but technology and consumer products still have a market. 

I remember the factories used to offer good wages to high school students.  Often, these wages were good enough to make us think that we could make a really good living from the factory-- unless we looked at the wages earned by folks who'd been there for 20, 30, or 40 years; unless we could see by the end of the 1980s that an economy based on manufacturing wouldn't last through our working careers.

I hope that as educators we aren't fooling ourselves with progress.  What if instead of producing a productive labor pool for the manufacturing economy we are simply switching cogs and moving to produce effective consumers to drive the economy of consumption?  What if instead of public education being the "farm system" creating obedient and responsible workers for business owners we are now becoming the "farm system" for the new entrepeneurs who need a market for their products?

Are we teaching students to be productive and responsible citizens of the 21st century world or domesticated, obedient consumers in a global economy?

All You Had to Do Was Ask

The title of this post alludes to a trend I think is more and more common in schools. Increasingly reformers are asking for "data" on kids to determine how they are performing and in the process too often becoming oblivious to the voice of experience and wisdom. Data does indeed have a place in reform but is it becoming too important? My school system could be a case study in this folly of innovation and reform, but then again that is just my opinion and no one is asking for it. So according to all this effort and all this testing how are my kids doing? I already know.

Recently our division signed on with a slick corporate Student Information System. With lots of bells and whistles it is a powerful tool that integrates records, grades, testing, curriculum, attendance...you name it. Now it does not do any of these things particularly well and I have come to feel it was actually designed by folks who never thought to consult teachers, counselors or school administrators. Frankly there are numerous issues with basic functionality. So in a way it seems a perfect tool for the current wave of reform. As we "work out the kinks" it becomes apparent that all too often this "solution" with which we have been provided only creates more problems and makes simple tasks much more complicated.

The obvious problem is that this platform was not really designed by or for teachers. Taking attendance, properly calculating grades, printing a transcript, all are among the major issues. I cannot imagine the experience for a more seasoned teacher who might be less comfortable with technology. I don't think this is really a tool for me. It was implemented to make us more efficient and to measure and improve performance. The worst part is it currently does nothing to help me teach.

On the front end I can give an online test. I was doing that eight years ago. Creating and setting up these tests is like going to the DMV or the dentist for a root canal. It is a painful and laborious process which takes way too much time, something I am already lacking. Point being that once I administer this "benchmark assessment" I will be able to identify which kids are under performing in any specific curriculum strands.

Here's the rub. I already know that. This is just a way for someone else to look that up and then measure a specific teacher's performance. This system tells me what my overall grades already show. So "grades" no longer seem as valuable in the realm of data driven decisions. Where I am having trouble is finding ways to use this which allows me better serve my students. Worse yet, the people who are paid money to create, run and improve the system have yet to make it clear how that will happen.

Teachers are the first to get on board with technology if it is easy to use and helps them do their job. Maybe that's why I can't find too many folks around here who feel that way about this particular technology. All I can find are people who feel the opposite. We have to input our questions, share our resources, populate it with materials and only then will we be able to actually "get" something from it. Where it is most sorely lacking is that in the race to be fancy, integrated, web based and flexible it has missed the main point of effective education reform. It does not help kids learn and it doesn't really help teachers teach. It just says which individuals among those groups are not doing well. To accomplish that all someone had to do was ask.