Ubiquitous

TedTalks have become clichéd. But I still watch them because once in a while, I come across one that profoundly moves me.  Dr, Zimbardo's talk on the psychology of evil was one such talk. Watch it if you have the time. He explains what a powerful class experiment taught him about the nature of evil.

Recently, I've run across another. Michael Wesch, like Zimbardo, is a college professor. He posits that in a world in which there ubiquitous computing, ubiquitous communication about everything from everywhere at unlimited speed on all kinds of devices we need to shift our education goals from making students "knowledgeable" to "knowledge-able". That might seem too cute a first glance. But it really struck me. I had a light bulb moment. I've articulated thoughts like this in this blog more than a few times. But I've not heard it put so perfectly or pithily. Anyway, watch and enjoy.  

Most Likely to Succeed

Last night at +Holy Child Academy Drexel Hill,  I saw the third of what to my mind is a trio of education movies, all of which highlight High Tech High School in San Diego. This film, Most Likely to Succeed, is largely persuasive in pointing out the futility of the traditional "factory"  model of education. It rightly points out that our model started a 125 years ago when the Committee of Ten pushed for a standardized learning system. I'd argue against the movie's point that the committee wanted to create compliant factory workers, indeed the factory model of education was in part supplanted by the Committee's suggestions of sorting learning into disciplines and separating students by age.  However, I agree with the film's larger point that the Committee's model now no longer works.
    This brings me to my other problem with the movie's premise. It still posits school's goal is to

create "successful" people. It still equates learning with "work" and success. It is a larger, socio-economic and political truth that wages no longer keep up with productivity. It explains the anger that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are channeling.  The skills traditional education teaches students no longer helps them "compete" in the modern economy. I agree. The film instead suggests that "soft' skills such as creative thinking will let kids succeed in the new economy. I don't buy it. Yes, it will work for a few. Yet, how many creative jobs will there really be? If we define success as wealth accumulated as an adult, the vast majority of our students will not be successful whether they come from a traditional school or a school like High Tech High. How many visionary, creative CEO type jobs exist? Not nearly enough.  What we are going to do with a now idle workforce is something society is going to have to figure out. It is a problem that needs a solution bigger than anything schools can provide.
    The film is most successful when it challenges basic tenets of traditional education. To people who argue  that kids need to know content, it devastates that position by pointing to studies that prove that students-across academic disciplines-forget 90% of content within 3 weeks of taking the test. Truly, what is the point of testing for mastery of facts? Why do we give final exams in June based on the mass recall of facts when these facts will be forgotten by July?
    The film is also effective in showing the power of metacognition and that students learn through self-reflection. I like that the very model of High Tech High makes this type of thinking central to what students to there. It also effectively argues that this education is more "sticky" than the fact-based model. Students at High Tech High do better on standardized tests than do the kids who go to schools which explicitly prepare their students for standardized tests. Perhaps progressive educators can have their cake and eat it too.
    I appreciated the film's honesty in saying that whether schools like High Tech High actually work better than traditional schools, at least according to traditional measures, is unknown.  We don't have long term longitudinal studies.
    Go see the movie.
Click here to view trailer

Ten Minute Teacher

Having teachers teach teachers is something schools should do more often. Often, schools don't properly utilize the talent which exists inside their walls. For example, schools usually bring in outside experts to lead in-service. Yes, it is right and good to bring in experts. But what about the experts within our buildings?

I fear that many teachers still see tech as an imposition, another thing brought from "outside". Other teachers feel that while it may be important, it is an add-on. A goal for me in my role as tech-integration specialist is to normalize technology.

In my ed-tech role, I've seen some terrific things in classrooms this year. Yet, most teachers don't know the great things some of their colleagues are doing both with and without technology. We need a way to celebrate these successes and highlight technology's successful use. We need a way to see what others are doing.

Borrowing an idea from +Keino Terrell, I've implemented a "10 Minute Teacher" program in the high school in which I work to address the concerns I list above. What do we do? We start every faculty meeting with a 10(-15) minute presentation by a teacher to other teachers. The presentation can be about integrating technology, but it also can be about a great lesson which does not include technolgy. We can talk about teaching writing, writing report card comments, or conducting a parent-teacher conferences. It also can be a forum for teachers to share information and resources that they may have discovered at a recent conference. Making each presentation not about technology, I believe, actually normalizes technology.

My plan is to film the presentations, archive the work digitally and tag the tools highlighted in each presentation. My hope is that in several months time, we will have the beginnings of a rich resource created by and for teachers. More importantly, we will be celebrating each other.

Day Two

I borrowed and modified an activity that Peter Pappas posted to his website. The purpose and premise of the activity is to promote discussion and foster collaboration. Kids played detective and after given different clues were able to find solutions. I stressed the point that we all bring different pieces of the truth to a discussion. The solution to a problem requires multiple truths being heard. I really want to get the kids to work with each other. Hat tip to www.peterpappas.com Peter Pappas for a good activity.

The Fire Hydrant

In preparation for my new position which will call on me to advocate for the use of technology, I've really tried immersing myself in technology. I'm learning, or re-learning, that learning doesn't happen in a linear progression. Instead, I bumble around barely figuring things out and then a bunch of things fall into place at once and I get it. Also, the more I know, I realize the less I know. The metaphor of drinking from a fire hydrant has been used to describe what it's like keeping pace with the tech revolution happening around us. It is an apt description.

I'm also appreciating all things google more and more. Sometimes, I view google as an evil empire of sorts. I get leery of how much info they've accumulated and monetized. But for ease of use, google rocks. Tweet