I love spring in Christchurch - over the weekend I walked through the botanical gardens with my wife and enjoyed the acres of yellow daffodils growing among the mature trees. We began discussing what a wonderful vision it was that the founding fathers of the city had to plan for such a large area of public park area and gardens right in the middle of the city - so that here, 150 years later, we are able to enjoy the sights, sounds, smells and general atmosphere of this place. As walked we came across this sign:

It explains how all of these daffodils got here, and is an inspiring story of collaboration and foresight (note the use of this word in the final sentence).

Today I visited a local secondary school that is in the midst of a significant “makeover”, with almost every part of the school being re-built! I was asked to share with them some of my thoughts about the role of technology in the future of education, and its links to the curriculum etc. Discussions inevitably led to sharing ideas about ubiquity, and the need to ensure that school buildings have the appropriate network infrastructure (cabled and wireless) to support students gaining online access anywhere, at any time and with any device.

At the end of my presentation I was told that this school will find it difficult to provide such access for its students, for, despite the fact that it is having so much work done on it, there is apparently no provision for a robust fibre backbone and classroom cabling in the plan. Why? Because, as a ‘re-build’ (as opposed to a new build), the codes and specifications don’t allow for it. Where is the foresight in that???

Future Learning is a new blog set up by the Secondary Futures project. Apart from some quirky behaviours in the way the blog is constructed, the content and intent makes it worth a visit - and contributing to. A browse of the comments that have been posted reveal that there may still be a lot of talking required before we can reach a point of agreement on many of the important issues.

At a different level I found it interesting interacting with this blog (as compared to many other blogs I read and comment on). One of the hallmarks of the web2.0 world I’ve become accustomed to is the ‘personality’ of the blog poster (or posters) that emerges through the style of writing, the identity of the poster listed with the post and through my ability to read their profile online. I found it interesting that on the Future Learning blog each of the entries has been posted anonymously, and there are no links to the original contributors apart from the about link which refers to the four guardians of the project, but does not specify whether they are the ones generating the discussions or not. The cynic in me wonders if this is an attempt to employ a web2.0 approach by someone who is not familiar with how it all works? The graphics an interface are attention grabbing - if not reminiscent of a previous century of education rather than the future (and I’ve been trying to figure out what that blind does) - but some of the expected functionality isn’t quite there.

Despite this I’ll certainly be reading this blog regularly to see what sort of discussion it generates.

Chris Betcher is all fired up on his “BetchaBlog” with a recent post titled “Enough Excuses“. He finishes his post with the following:

…it’s time for those teachers who have not accepted ICTs to shit or get off the pot. I’m tired of accepting excuses. Technology is, and will continue to be, an absolutely integral part of the lives our students will lead. The work we are doing in our classrooms to prepare them for this future must contain a significant amount of access to, and understanding of, this technology or we are failing them as teachers. To be a technologically illiterate teacher in the 21st century is unacceptable, unethical and unprofessional. To hold students back from using the tools that they need to be literate for the 21st century is, quite frankly, immoral.

Seriously, if becoming technologically literate is too hard, or you don’t think it’s “your cup of tea”, then get out now. Quit. Let someone else take over and do the incredibly important work of educating our young people using the tools they deserve.

The frustration expressed by Chris in his post is something I hear from many of the people I work with in the field of professional development re ICT in education, and from an increasing number of parents and employers who are increasingly expecting students with these sorts of skills to front up to work. While the ways in which these people give expression to their frustration may not be as blunt as Chris has been in this instance, the frustration is there all the same.

Of course, there’s always another side to the story - and I can hear the counter arguments now, about the wider purposes of school, the importance of (apparently) non-ICT related subjects in the curriculum, the in ability of our school systems to provide the level of access to ICTs in the first place, and the higher priorities we must give to issues such as the “long tail” in literacy and numeracy to name just a few. Several of these point’s of view are well represented in the responses to Chris’s blog - providing for a very robust discussion which I recommend you read.

Of the responses I do like the one offered by Terry Freedman (whose article prompted Chris’s post in the first place). Terry simplifies the arguments by stating…

The key issue for me, which I don’t think has been touched on in any of this (or at least, I missed it if it has) is that all of the arguments about leadership, time, incentive etc are all irrelevant in the light of some simple questions that any teacher should ask him/herself:

1. Would you feel OK about not being able to read?
2. Would you feel ok about having to ask someone else to count up your loose change?

For me, using a computer is a pretty basic skill these days.

But even more important, why do these people feel so proud of their lack of ability??!

But even more important than even that, we should be educating kids for their future, not our past.

Terry’s last comment uses a quote that I’ve used as the title of some talks that I’ve presented over the past year or so - which probably exposes where I sit on the continuum of the debate! Our challenge as educators is how we will choose to respond - as individuals, at the school level and at the government/policy level.

Another excellent presentation from Sir Ken Robinson, this time featured on the Edutopia site, and were recorded on April 10, 2008, at the Apple Education Leadership Summit, a gathering in San Francisco of more than one hundred school superintendents from around the world. In this he poses three propositions and challenges educators to respond:

1. We are engaged globally in a revolution - the things that are shaping this revolution have no precedent so we have no way of anticipating the outcome.

2. In order to meet the challenge of this revolution we have to thing differently about our use of resources.
3. We have to do something in our education system, not to reform it, but to transform it.

The key to this, Robinson argues, is creativity. He argues that we must move to make this the centre-piece of our educational endeavours, considering it in the same way as we do for literacy and numeracy etc. He defines creativity as “the process of having original ideas that have value”and claims that everyone has this capacity - it’s just that in our school systems we stifle it.

Enough from me - watch and listen yourself. There are some extremely important messages here that, while they may make us uncomfortable and perhaps even overwhelmed, deserve our attention, debate and action if we are to have any chance of seeing our education system develop as it must to meet the needs of the 21st century!

Final day in Austin today - last evening I had a chance to go out with Joel Greenberg, Director of Strategic Development at The Open University to listen to some music and chat about developments in the eLearning space at the Open University. A key interest of Joel’s is how we can harness the opportunities afforded through the whole social networking paradigm for the sake of education. At the OU they are actively working on creating online educational environments that resemble things like facebook, myspace and bebo etc.

It was with interest then that I read this morning on Jane’s blog about SuperCool School, a Facebook app that makes online learning social by democratizing the learning process and empowering everyone to demand, create and participate in live and interactive online classes. I haven’t had a good chance to look around it yet, so can’t really comment on what it is like - however, what appeals to me is that this is indeed evidence of what I think we’ll begin to see more of as people look to de-construct our current paradigm of classroom-based education and look for ways of democratising the experience, creating opportunities for more personalised learning to occur, where learners themselves are able to take responsibility for determining their own learning goals and tragectories, and where they may also be recognised for their expertise as ‘expert learners’, taking a role of guiding others in their learning.

I spend a lot of time speaking to teacher groups, principal groups and others with an interest in the education of our young people in early childhood centres, schools and tertiary institutions. The topics I am asked to speak on include things such as “Educating for the 21st Century”, “Visioning the future of Education” and other such grandiose titles. The common themes involve change, educational reform, pedagogical shifts etc., and generally focus on the impact of technology, societal changes, vocational changes and so on.

I’ve only occasionally been confronted by someone in the educational system who doesn’t accept that we need to change what we’re doing in our schools and how we’re doing it. Generally, there is a high level of acceptance that the world is changing, and that our students need to be prepared for it in ways that are different to the traditional ways we’ve done things in our educational institutions.

The problem occurs, of course, in shifting these ideas from our head (our understanding of the situation) to our hands (actually doing something about it.) Some would argue that there is a third dimension that is often missed out - the heart, from which flows our sense of passion, driven by belief and a sense of vision. In visiting a large number of schools now around NZ (and overseas), plus the experience of my own five children as students at school and university, I can only say that there is a huge degree of variability in terms of how successful we (as a profession) are in realising and responding to change.

Thus it was with interest that I read this morning of a report just released by Education Sector, a national independent nonpartisan education think tank, titled Waiting To Be Won Over: Teachers Speak on the Profession, Unions and Reform. The report contains the findings of a survey of over 1000 teachers in the USA about their views on the teaching profession, teachers unions, and a host of reforms aimed at improving teacher quality. It examine teachers’ opinions and attitudes toward teacher unions, teacher unionism, and a range of current district reforms, including those aimed specifically at improving teacher quality.

The survey itself asked specific questions about the work teachers do and about reform proposals that are currently being debated in the US. It also examines the views of new teachers and those who have been in the system for some time. And, when possible, the survey discerns trends by asking some identical questions from a 2003 national survey of K-12 public school teachers and comparing the responses.

While the context is the USA, the findings ring true for us in New Zealand as well - and are worth considering, particularly for those of us who are working in the area of challenging the existing paradigm and seeking to bring about changes at all levels from policy to practice. Some of the trends and findings that stood out for me…

• Concerns from teachers who feel ‘locked in’ to teaching, with no real options for doing something else if they feel they’re past their prime. “Too many veteran teachers who are burned out stay because they do not want to walk away from the benefits and service time they have accrued.”

• Well over half of the teachers surveyed (55 percent) say that in their district it is very difficult and time-consuming to remove clearly ineffective teachers who shouldn’t be in the classroom
• A strong feeling that their experience of appraisal (teacher evaluation) was ineffective, not providing any worthwhile sort of feedback for growth or recognition of work well done, or in identifying and dealing with poor performance. Most saw this as just a formality.
• When responding to a question about what sort of school is best for students teachers were unanimous in talking about providing flexibility and dispensing with unnecessary rules and restrictions.

When asked to identify the things that would contribute significantly to change in schools, teachers responded with…

• making appraisals and teacher evaluations more rigorous and meaningful
• Providing financial incentives, including for teachers who work in ‘tough’ areas or poor performing schools
• De-emphasising the use of student test scores as a key measure of teacher performance and basis for financial rewards.
• Providing more time in the school day for teachers to carry out planning and preparation work as a way of attracting high quality people into the profession.

No big surprises for me here - but the detail of the report reveals some interesting perspectives that were shared, and to be honest, disappointed me from the perspective that, frankly, I can hear these same perspectives echoing in my mind from numerous meetings and staffroom conversations I’ve been involved in over my 30 years of teaching.

Yes - this report is useful as a benchmark or ’state of the play’ - but for goodness sake, where is the innovative, “outside the box” thinking that will truly energise and refresh our whole approach to education - that will ensure we are educating students for their future - not our past??

Sorry - but I just don’t buy it.
Jane pointed me to Chitch.at, described as an educational network where teachers can share real course content, make free class pages, and develop interactive online assignments. Here’s a video which explains more about it.

Now the concept of a ‘lightweight’, flexible way to create, post and share course content sounds appealing - but the underlying design points to a pedagogy that I have problems with. Notice the section that begins… “The Web is great - in theory!”, and goes on to argue that while online environments such as blogs and wikis capture our (and our students’) imaginations, they are difficult to ‘teach’ because we can’t easily assign tasks, collect submissions or effectively grade student work etc. In other words (their words) these social web applications don’t “fit” the traditional classroom.

All of this sounds like a great justification for why we might want an online environment like Chitch.at- but hang on… if these applications are (as they claim) so good at developing critical thinking, engaging student interest and creating a sense of wonder etc, shouldn’t this suggest that we ought to be looking to change the nature of the “traditional classroom”??

The focus here is entirely on a pedagogy of setting tasks for students to complete - presumably tasks that essentially invite students to “guess what’s in the teacher’s head” since the implication is that there’s a specific response on which they’re then graded! A clear case of the pedagogy of assessment driving the pedagogy of instruction.

In 1915 John Dewey wrote in his “Constructivist Pedagogy” that effective learning occurs when…

• Student autonomy and initiative accepted and encouraged

• Teacher asks open-ended questions and allows wait time for responses
• Higher level thinking is encouraged
• Students engage in dialogue with teacher and each other
• Students engaged in experiences that challenge hypotheses
• Class uses raw data primary sources, physical and interactive materials
• Knowledge and ideas emerge only from a situation in which learners have to draw them out of experiences that have meaning and importance to them

In my experience these are exactly the sorts of learning experiences that many of these emerging social web applications enable and encourage. Have we really not learned anything in the past 90-odd years??

Some of my work recently has been with groups of teachers and principals thinking about how they may plan for and design schools that prepare students for the future, so it was with interest that I read this publication titled Learning Technologies and Schools of the Future (pdf) published by the British Council for School Environments. The introduction sets the scene for considering the role of ICT as a part of the changing school environment:

ICT is increasingly described as the fifth utility, the point being that we pretty much cannot live, work or learn efficiently or comfortably without an ICT infrastructure. National expectations of the social role of schools are also changing; hot-housed in climate of concern about youth disaffection and family breakdown.

The publication provides a succinct and useful overview of the characteristics of the Net Gen (or GenY) and the social context for change that is impacting on education, before exploring what this all means for schools:

Discussions on the digital divide tend to be concerned with (home) access to broadband connectivity. However, if scientists are right and cognitive processes are influenced by regular creative engagement in the online environment, our schools need to address the quality of online provision they make. An aspect of tackling the digital divide will be to ensure that all young people gain access to and guidance on the use of more sophisticated tools.

and quotes the BECTA target for 2008 for all learners to have access to a
personalised online learning space with the potential to support e-portfolios.

The document addresses a range of ways in which schools might address these ICT issues, and canvases the role and use of VLEs, PLEs and Web2.0 technologies - as well as the impact of mobile technologies and changes in the very nature of the learning process itself (for which it provides a useful table that contrasts 20th Century Pedagogy with what it calls 21st Century ICT-enhanced pedagogy.)

For those familiar with what has been developing in this space over the past few years there’s nothing particularly new in the document, but it does provide an excellent and very accessible “Big Picture” view of the issue that could usefully inform many school charters and curriculum plans.

Still on the topic of the Future of Schooling - I was also reading the question Elliot Maisie posted on his blog regarding the classroom of the future, in which he invited readers to describe what will the classroom of the future look like in 2008? The lengthy list of responses makes for some interesting reading. There’s a worrying emphasis on describing the addition of a whole heap of technologies, with fewer descriptions of changes to pedagogical practice. Perhaps it’s the sort of response the question invited, but it does concern me in many forums I’ve participated in that as soon as we begin asking about what the classroom of the future might be like we focus on the technologies that may be introduced, as if somehow these on their own are going to transform what happens. Reminds me of the introduction of video conferencing technologies into a number of NZ classrooms over recent years - in a number of contexts I’ve observed all that occurred was that the style and nature of teaching that was occuring in the face-to-face classrooms got transferred to the video conference environment. Further, video conferencing was regarded as the primary medium of instruction, rather than one of a mix of technologies that can be selected from to suit the pedagogical intent.

In his reply, Gregg Festa, Founding Director of the ADP Center for Teacher Preparation & Learning Technologies at Montclair State University, points to an article describing the development and use of some innovative learning spaces in his school district, and also points to a YouTube video that takes you for a tour through these spaces. While the classroom you are taken on a tour through is essentially another (rather barren) oblong box, in the commentary at least it reflects an attempt to address the diversity of teaching and learning activities that may occur within it, and the variety of technologies that may be selected from to enable that to occur.

Somehow I still think we need more fundamental discussions on the nature and purpose of schooling, its role in a 21st Century society and the needs of 21st Century learners before we get too heavily involved in imagining what the classroom of the future might look like. Perhaps the sorts of reflections and discussion that Sheryl has on her 21st Century Collaborative blog might be more useful in this regard?

In the meantime, the Learning Technologies and Schools of the Future publication will be useful in the hands of the many principals, BOTs and senior staff in schools who are wrestling with creating policies and curriculum statements that reflect the increasing use of ICTs in their school.

In preparation for my attendance at the upcoming Digital Summit in Auckland this week I’ve been re-reading Don Tapscott and Anthony William’s book Wikinomics which I reviewed earlier in the year.

I’d like to quote some parts from the introduction that have caused me to think again about a digital divide that is appearing in our education system.

Throughout our history corporations have organised themselves according to strict hierarchical lines of authority… While hierarchies are not vanishing, profound changes in the nature of technology, demographics, and the global economy are giving rise to powerful new models of production based on community, collaboration, and self-organisation, rather than on hierarchy and control.

Small companies are encouraging, rather than fighting, the heaving growth of massive online communities - many of which emerged from the fringes of the Web to attract tens of millions of participants overnight…. Indeed, as a growing number of firms see the benefits of mass collaboration, this new way of organisaing will eventually displace the traditional corporate structures as the economy’s primary engine of wealth creation.

Companies that engage with these exploding Web-enabled communities are already discovering the true dividends of collective capability and genius.”

These comments are not simply the suppositions of a couple of digital optimists. They are based on the evidence of several large scale research projects costing several millions of dollars and involving a number of the world’s most successful commercial companies.

But what has all this got to do with education? In a sense our education system is simply a large-scale corporate body, focused on outcomes, growth and wealth creation. It is also an example of bureacracy that is extremely hierarchical - like all government departments. So what is happening in our education system to embrace or adopt these new forms of online technology, and to participate in and engage with others in these Web-enabled communities?

Well, on the plus side is the example of the massive amount of collaborative effort that went into the co-construction of the new NZ Curriculum - reportedly around 15,000 teachers contributed their time, knowledge and collective wisdom to the development of this document - all within an online environment. It will be interesting now to see if the same level of collaborative effort and sharing will be facilitated to assist with the implementation of the document and the professional development of teachers to do this as the teacher unions quite rightly point out will be necessary.

Of course, this is arguably an example of an online community that has been constructed and managed within the bounds of the hierarchy itself , and while I see a real benefit in this sort of participation, it only goes so far in enabling the development of a deep understanding of the power and transformational potential of these online social networking tools and environments. Within the MoE, as with most government departments here and overseas, staff are discouraged from (according to some, not allowed to) having their own blog or wiki where they can express thoughts and ideas as a part of the broader social network. In some cases this even applies to leaving comments on other people’s blogs etc. The concern is that the opinions shared may not reflect the view of the government department, and may place the department at risk if it is read widely and interpreted as policy for instance.

At a recent Educational Leader’s Summit I was asked to speak about the impact of these technologies on our education system for just a few minutes. It became evident that among the group of around 100 educational leaders present, only a handful professed knowledge of the sorts of things I was referring to, and even less actually had a blog, flickr or del.icio.us account of their own. An online community was established where participants in the event could go to review presentations and to actively participate in the discussions following the event. To date less than 10% of those who attended have activated their account.

This is in stark contrast with the hundreds of teachers attending the ULearn conference held recently who have returned to visit the conference website, and the many dozens who have expressed their ideas and ‘new learnings’ from the conference on their personal websites or wikis.

Reflecting again on the Wikinomics quotes, I have a concern about the impact of these web-based technologies within our education system. Sure, there are dozens of new examples appearing weekly of these technologies being employed by classroom teachers to achieve some wonderful learning experiences for and with students - but all too often I also hear stories about firewalls preventing access, and students not allowed to participate in activities using these tools.

My concern really is that it appears to me that the very people in our education system who should be experiencing these technologies in an ongoing and profound way aren’t. These are the various leaders, decision makers and policy developers who work at the school and national level. Their experience of what is happening in these communities must be based on more than reading about it in the media, or briefly visiting a site - they should be immersed in the experience and involved in reflecting critically (as a part of a community) on that experience and the value they see arising from it.

Sadly I don’t see this happening. As a result, we have policy decisions made in ignorance. Safety decisions made through fear. And decisions affecting learning dominated by concerns about risk mitigation.

I fear we have a way to go yet before we see education systems as systems realise the benefits outlined in Wikinomics. Oh well, we can live in hope….

In an email this morning Mark Treadwell alerted me to the release of this document from the US (PDF download here). The State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA), the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), and the Partnership for 21st Century Skills are leadership organizations that have come together on this national imperative with a unified vision, agenda and action principles for stakeholders. Together, they represent dozens of leading U.S. companies and organizations, six leadership states, education technology directors in all 50 states, 85,000 education technology professionals and 3.2 million educators throughout the country.

They assert that It’s time to focus on what students need to learn–and on how to create a 21st century education system that delivers results. In a digital world, no organization can achieve results without incorporating technology into every aspect of its everyday practices. It’s time for schools to maximize the impact of technology as well.

The document is a relatively short, easily digestible read, with plenty of summarised points and useful diagrams. It provides another timely piece of contextual reading to accompany the new curriculum document released yesterday. Its content reflects a lot of what has been emerging from many quarters of the debate in NZ (the Knowledge Wave, Digital Summit etc), and provides some compelling arguments for the pivotal role of technology in our future education system.

This will be a useful backgrounder also for the NZ Secondary Futures project when they come to examine their fifth and final theme on the Role of Technology.