What if we had a 1:1 Newton Initiative?

When I started teaching in 2008, I inherited a number of tools once labeled "cutting edge" and some were even called "indispensable." Things like the overhead projector (who could possibly teach without one?) and the laserdisc. Throw in the zip drives and floppy disks (of the 5.5 inch variety, of course... although I've heard tales of larger, less capable floppies) and you've got a real blast from the past.

I'd often pondered the rate of technological change and what it means for education, but having read The Nerdy Teacher's recent post it made me think: What tools do I have now that need to be retired? What are we using now that will be retired in the near future, even though now we can't imagine teaching without them? What's coming later on?

The Obsolete:

- White Out (not because I don't make mistakes, but because I don't print anymore)

- Staples and paperclips (if I need to print something, it's probably really important, warranting its entrance into a three-ring binder or other professional-looking dossier)

- Post-its (nothing says "clutter" like small squares of paper all over my monitor and desk)

- Copy machine (Do we really need MORE paper floating around?)

On Its Way Out:

- Desktop computers (there will be a rare need for a desktop computer to perform tasks that tablets or laptops can't)

- Scanner (simply put: there's an app for that)

- Document camera (There are still a number of uses, so it's not completely ready to go, but mobile devices are catching up FAST)

- SMART board (you heard it here first, folks. This teacher-centered instruction mainstay won't be here much longer.)

- Attendance software requiring manual input (Praise your deity of choice...)

On Its Way In:

- Internet-connected mobile devices (incl. cameras) for every student and faculty member

- Location-based attendance and/or scan-for-attendance (possibly including facial recognition or fingerprints?)

- Truly paperless environment (distribution, completion, submission, assessment all without needing Ctrl+P)

- Explosion of modeling/AR/VR environments bringing a new dimension (no pun intended) to tactile learners

What do you see happening over the next few years?

--Greg Garner

Perceived Value in the Classroom

Why is it that some activities have the rapt attention of your students but as soon as you switch to something else, you've lost them?

Why is it that your monologue on SOHCAHTOA doesn't seem to be as interesting to your students as the latest search results on Google Images or the social life of the person sitting next to them?

Why do teachers text/email/talk during professional development sessions?

It's a matter of perceived value and interest. We pay attention to that which is unique, outstanding, bizarre, different, valuable, and/or useful. We ignore that which is too far removed from its direct application in our lives.

So, re-read the previous questions but this time, take out the negative prejudice you held and ask if what (or how) you're operating could be adjusted to change the perceived value of your content. What if the Industrial Revolution were seen through the eyes of a 12-year-old employee? When something becomes real, its perceived value just increased. When your colleagues around you are bored in their next professional development meeting, ask yourself what could be done to increase the perceived value of what you're learning.

Why else should we gather into the same room for an extended period of time? Do we have anything better to do? Or is our time together the most important thing in the world at that moment? What is our perception of that time together?

Truth isn't nearly as important as the perception of what is true.

--Greg Garner

Digital Citizenship: Where Did We Go Wrong?

This is cross-posted on the EdReach Network. Also, check out the most recent EdReach Show for more on digital citizenship.

Let's be honest: In the area of digital citizenship, as educators, we are not doing our jobs.

Sure, there are pockets of excellence and teachers here and there that are raising this issue, but overall, it's just another buzz word that we read about in the headlines, right next to "cyberbullying" and "blocking/filtering." But why does it feel like a ghetto? It's as though digital citizenship has been relegated to the bottom rungs of curricular society, clearly taking a backseat to a student's ability to identify the hypotenuse or bubble in the answer "B" for question 23. 

- Digital citizenship is not someone else's job. It's your job. If you interact with children under the age of 18, it IS your job.

- You don't have to know ANYTHING about computers to teach digital citizenship. Any argument otherwise is like saying you need a law degree to teach what it means to be a good citizen in our society. We can grasp some basic tenets without needing to understand JavaScript.

- Stop thinking that the "technology teacher" is supposed to do it or that they're better at it than you. In an era that is increasingly tech-ubiquitous, relegating the term "technology teacher" to just one person is offensive. We should all be using AND TEACHING with and about technology as it is the layer through which our students understand the world around them.

We've spent enough time worrying about our kids being online, it's time for each of us to step up and actually do something about it. Be creative! Work it into your lessons! Start small, maybe a discussion about appropriate times to use cell phones (hint: anything with a cell phone is instant engagement) and then work your way up. For example, later this month, my 8th graders will make instructional videos for elementary school students, teaching them how to be safe online. Look for ways to incorporate these ideas into your lessons. Digital citizenship doesn't teach itself and no, they won't just "figure it out." 

Our students have at their fingertips some of the most powerful and capable inventions known to the history of the world. Are we really going to withhold the instructions from them?

--Greg Garner

Learning in a Vacuum

Show of hands, who is guilty of the following phrases?

"Worry about yourself."

"Focus on your own work."

"Don't bother your neighbor."

"No talking."

Naturally, there are times when these might be appropriate, but I think they are often overused. It's as thought we're teaching to students who are learning in a vacuum, completely isolated from their peers. If you think about it, isn't that the way the educational system has been designed? Our instructional design is intended to meet the individual goals of each student. We ignore the social learning component, dismissing it as a "distraction" or "unnecessary."

The assumption is that each child is responsible for their own learning and has the tools and capacity to learn the lesson as given by the teacher. Further, it is assumed that class size, demography, or other variables should have no impact on learning (nor instruction) since it is about the individual student. In effect, we have created a system that, in theory, should be able to teach each student as effectively and efficiently as any other. We have standardized learning.

Or so we think. More and more we are opening our eyes to the truth that each student is unique. Each group of students will be different from any other combination. We are beginning to realize that giving the same prescription to each patient without properly diagnosing is a bad idea. We are beginning to think that giving students with different strengths, weaknesses, abilities, and disabilities the same test in the same format with the same questions doesn't give an accurate reflection of whether or not that student mastered the content. 

Consider this a challenge. Don't be satisfied with standardized learning. Treat each student as a unique, whole person with gifts and talents that are different from anyone else in their peer group. Open your mind to the notion that maybe your students need to spend more time interacting and learning from one another instead of silently filling in blanks on the worksheet. Maybe the next time we're tired of dealing with students that are talking, we should try to leverage their desire to interact with an interesting, engaging topic that could change their life. And change yours.

--Greg Garner

When Incompetence Meets Authority

I don't envy middlemen. They have the greatest opportunity in the world to be a game-changer. However, they have even more opportunity to get it wrong. They have two parties they have to please in any given transaction. Think about the last time you bought something from Amazon that was actually being sold by a third party. Amazon was just the middleman in that transaction. Generally speaking, though, they do a great job at it and so we keep going back to them. But what about that time when a friend "knew a guy" that could hook you up? How'd that go over? More than likely, you were disappointed.

But where was your disappointment directed? At the other guy who couldn't deliver? At yourself? Or did you press your friend to find out why they couldn't deliver?

We've all heard the statistics about teachers that leave the classroom within the first few years and one of the most common reasons given relates to a "lack of support" during their time of employment. It seems many schools and systems have interpreted "support" to mean "training" or "professional development." And so they give you extra workshops to attend, more books to read, and check in on you frequently to see how things are going. This is their version of support.

What if "support" actually meant "resource-sharing"? What if teachers really need ideas for what to do with what appear to be gremlins in their classrooms? Why does the gray-haired teacher down the hall seem to have it all together and here I am busting my butt but only spinning my wheels? Perhaps more importantly, what if "support" meant "consistency"?

Maybe what teachers (no matter their experience level) really need is for those around them to just be consistent. When there are rules in place, we are all going to follow and enforce them. Imagine the difference in your school's culture when there are no gray areas as far as expectations are concerned. Now extend this idea up the food chain. 

Enter the middleman. They have to balance the expectations of their bosses with the teachers they are over. The tricky spot, of course, is when those expectations aren't aligned. Or the signals get crossed. Or when a failure to take responsibility turns into finger-pointing. In a worst-case scenario, the middleman exerts their authority to deflect their own incompetence onto their subordinates. Suddenly, the middleman's failure becomes the teacher's fault.

This is a problem. This is an abuse of power and the exact kind of scenario that results in teachers complaining about a "lack of support." Consistency is key.

--Greg Garner