Tech Ed-dy

I have just finished reading a really fascinating article called How David Beats Goliath: When underdogs break the rules.  The main gist of the article is that throughout history underdogs have had unbelievable success when they decide to compete on their own terms rather than conventional terms.  In the David vs Goliath battle David

hastened and ran out from the lines toward the Philistine

rather than battling toe to toe with Goliath.  Of course, he also chose to fight with a sling and stones rather than swords.

The article then goes on to describe a breathtaking array of examples where the underdog won for two main reasons (the two parts of the insurgent’s creed): being willing to go against the conventions of society (do what is “socially horrifying) and being willing to work harder than anyone else (which takes courage).  In the end victory in these examples came down to effort.

Effort can trump ability – legs … can overpower arms – because relentless effort is in fact something rarer than the ability to engage in some finely tuned act of motor coordination.

Threaded throughout the article is a story about a middle school girls basketball team that enjoyed incredible success despite being inexperienced and not very skilled.  Their secret was the full court press.  In short they tried harder than the other team.  When there was a turnover they didn’t run back to their side of the court to defend, they tried to get the ball back.  They didn’t bother covering the person throwing the ball, instead they focused their energies on getting to the ball before the other players.  They played by their own rules and had incredible success as a result.  The article goes on to describe the career of a college coach called Rick Pitino who went on to use the full court press to win championships with teams that didn’t have many all star, potential NBA, style players on them.  It was obviously a very successful strategy, but it was never widely adopted because it took too much work.  Pitino described his workouts this way:

The players are moving almost ninety-eight percent of the practice.  We spend very little time talking.  When we make corrections they are seven second corrections, so our heart rate never rests.  We are always working.

The implications for how I run my classroom seem obvious.  It’s really such a simple observation that effort and motivation are the keystones of effective learning that I wonder why I don’t always see it?  I can get so caught up in either the content or the particular output that I want them to produce that I am not always asking myself what I am doing to keep them motivated.  Sometimes I am guilty of assuming that if I badger them enough they will somehow find it in themselves to be truly interested in what I want them to learn, when deep down I know that the only really useful thing I have to teach my students is a love of learning.

If we don’t treat motivation as intrinsic (or something that can be turned on and off as a result of badgering my a teacher), then we can start to explore the things that really motivate in a classroom.  I can come up with three:

1. Control.  As I understand it, if our students don’t feel in control of their learning their hypothalamus  has been triggered.  They are in some sort of fight or flight mode.  When this happens information gets backlogged in their “primitive brain” and never makes it to their cortex for processing.  So whatever I teach them will never stick.  Conversely if students feel that they are being listened to and have some control of the process then it stands to reason they will be willing to invest more in the process.
2. Choice.  This is linked to control as having choices helps students feel in control.  Cathy Nunley does a brilliant job with this in her Layered Curriculum Model.  I taught Science with this model for a few year and was amazed at how motivated my students were, I couldn’t stop them working!
3. Value.  In order for effort to be valued there needs to be a reward linked to the effort.  Of course we have grades, but often grades are a mystery and if the direct path from effort to reward is not obvious then how can I expect grades to motivate?  Using rubrics and being clear about grading schemes can obviously help here, but even then grades have very little intrinsic value.  They are all about getting something;  for example, if you get good grades you can go to university.  Portfolios and exhibitions are a lot more work than just giving grades but it seems to me that the social aspect of the feedback received in these situations carries a lot more value than grades.

Finally, I wonder how all this will play out as more and more courses go online?  In my experience online courses are wonderful for students who are already motivated and willing to put in the effort.  But if I don’t physically have the student in my classroom, what can I do to motivate them to buy into the “full court press”?

Photo by Sebastia Giralt on Flickr

Today I was telling my wife about my previous blog post on an article I was reading called Compensating for Computers.  As a social scientist and something of an expert on social learning she immediately cut to the chase with this great quote:

You have to give them roots before you give them wings.

This got me thinking about something else Monke mentioned in his article about how he felt when he taught his students about the internet.

I was about to give my high school students more power to do more harm to more people than any teens had ever had in history, and all at a safe distance.  They could inflict emotional pain with a few keystrokes and never have to witness the tears shed.  They could destroy hours of work accomplished by others not because of ill-will, but simply because the files of these poorly protected network users provided convenient bullseyes for youth flexing their new found muscles.

This may be a little overstated but I think there is some truth in this.  I am a real believer that in today`s global society it is very important that I as a middle and high school teacher use web 2.0 social networking tools to extend my students reach further than our small school on Vancouver Island.  But I`m not sure I believe this is true for elementary school children.   In fact I`m pretty sure that exposing children to social networking tools at a young age in NOT the best way to educate good digital citizens.  They need lots of exposure to lots of tangible experiences that help them become good citizens first, before we add the “digital” part.

I`m starting to wonder whether there might not be an interesting case to be made for an elementary curriculum designed to give our students ROOTS that dovetails into an middle and high school curriculum that gives them social networking WINGS.  The roots would be lots of non-virtual things like a sense of place; a connection with nature; social skills; group work skills; conflict resolution skills.  I know that all these things that are already done in elementary schools but in order to prepare students for a world in which they will need to apply these skills in a virtual setting I think that the roots become even more important so that they have a foundation for when they get older and are given their wings.

Aside #1: I am a big fan of the Lifelong Kindergarten group at MIT.  Their mission in to extend the kindergarten style of learning so that learners of all ages can learn through designing, creating, experimenting and exploring.  They suggest that we have slowly done away with this kind of learning in order to get kids ready to take tests at earlier and earlier ages.  I wonder if we might be in danger of doing this same thing with technology.  As we start to use it more and more in the older grades the temptation is to say `Well, if we can just get them doing this with technology at an earlier grade then just think what they will be able to do when they get to high school.`  But their are lots of skills they need to be good digital citizens that can`t (or shouldn’t) be taught using a computer.

Aside #2: After writing this post I was directed to this interesting article from Zone’n Workshops.  It’s definitely a fairly alarmist article, but there was one part that I think is worth reproducing:

Each individual would benefit from discovering their “just right” level
of technology to promote academic and workplace achievements, but also
understand how to balance this technology with activities that promote
physical and mental health.  Children obviously need help with managing
this difficult task.  Achieving this balance will promote optimal brain
efficiency, while maintaining a place on the world stage as leaders in
advanced technology.

I think this is our role as educators in the 21st century.  To figure out what the “just right” level of technology is at all age levels and help our students develop the discipline to use technology and not be used by it.

I’m reading an essay by Lowell Monke from the Alliance for Childhood called Compensating for Computers and it is making me think.  Here are some of the bits I’m going to be mulling over for a while:

Preparation does not necessarily warrant early participation….quite often preparation involves strengthening inner resources – self-discipline, emotional control, moral judgement, empathy etc. – before the opportunities to participate arise.

Seems to me we should be thinking carefully about this in the context of teaching about and using social networks in the classroom, especially in elementary schools.  As much as I do believe that children can develop valuable social skills in an online social networking situation it makes sense to me that first there needs to be a solid foundation of skills based on face to face interactions.

Good preparation for working in this highly abstract, symbolic environment was not lots of computer practice, but an immersion in firsthand experiences and relationships that would give depth and meaning to the knowledge students had to depict and interpret on the screen.

He quotes a 2004 study from the University of Munich that showed that the more students had access to computers in school and at home, the lower their overall scores on PISA interanational tests (not sure what these are).  Similar results were found in a recent study by the Children`s Digital Media Center.  To me this reinforces how important it is that the way technology is used in the classroom has a sound pedagogical basis.  If it is just used as a way to replace face to face interactions (which is a very tempting option that I am guilty of sometimes) then it is no surprise that the results are less than impressive.  I wonder how many of the schools in these studies had invested time in teacher training and careful lesson design, or were they all just jumping on the technology bandwagon.

If the 20th century taught us anything at all, it should have been that technology is a very mixed blessing.  Children entering elementary schools today will have to wrestle with the mess we leave them because of our own lack of technological wisdom: global warming, increasingly lethal weapons …. addiction to automobiles, overuse of pesticides and antibiotics …

This one really made me think.  I am a die hard advocate to technology in schools and can see so much potential if technology is used in an appropriate pedagogical environment.  But I wonder whether we are capable of looking into the future honestly and identifying the long term impact our increasing reliance on technology is going to have on things like social relationships and health.

So this all leaves me wondering whether the ideal Elementary Curriculum for preparing students for a Technologically rich middle and high school experience should actually be technology free.  Monke suggests that the following activities should be essential experiences in the lower grades:

• Close, loving relationships with responsible adults
• Outdoor activity, nature exploration, gardening etc
• Time for unstructured play
• Music, drama, puppetry, dance, painting and other arts
• Hands on lessons, handcrafts ….
• Conversation, poetry, storytelling, and books read alound with beloved adults.

Photo by Jimee, Jackie, Tom & Asha on Flickr

I have been struggling all week to figure out how to frame an answer to this question that doesn’t get bogged down in fancy words and jargon.  I am feeling the need for some clarity regarding the skills that I need to make sure I am teaching my students, the classroom structures and processes that are best for teaching these skills and finally, the best approach for changing my classroom practice in a productive way so that I am really teaching 21st Century Skills (in other words, what are the best first steps?).

It all started with a great post on 21st Century Pedagogy written by Andrew Churches.  In the post he has a great Cmap (one of my favourite mind mapping tools) diagram illustrating the key features of 21st Century Pedagogy.  They are,

?    building technological, information and media fluencies [Ian Jukes]
?    Developing thinking skills
?    making use of project based learning
?    using problem solving as a teaching tool
?    using 21st C assessments with timely, appropriate and detailed feedback and reflection
?    It is collaborative in nature and uses enabling and empowering technologies
?    It fosters Contextual learning bridging the disciplines and curriculum areas

This is a great list and I agree with all the features, the problem is that there are too many.  In my busy day to day classroom teacher life I don’t have the energy or brainpower to figure out how to incorporate all of these features into my curriculum.  However, it seems to me that I actually only need to focus on project based learning and the rest logically fit into their appropriate place.

For the last 4 years I have been lucky enough to teach the IB Middle Years Program Technology Curriculum.  This is a curriculum that is very well suited to project based learning and has really opened my eyes to the power of this approach.  As a busy classroom teacher I believe that if I make it my focus to use project based and inquiry based learning effectively in my classroom then I will also be building technological, information and media fluencies, developing thinking skills, using problem solving as a teaching tool and fostering contextural learning (after all a project by it’s very nature is based on real challenges that cross curricular boundaries).  It is also collaborative in nature.

This still raises the question what good project based learning looks like.  I’m no expert but the elements that have to be there for me include:

• Using the Design Cycle explicitly.  In my classroom this means that we take the time to break down what it means to really INVESTIGATE – PLAN – CREATE – EVALUATE an end product.  We take the time to break down each of these steps into concrete actions and we agree on assessment criteria for each step before we begin (ok, if I’m being honest this doesn’t always happen, but I’m trying).  I like what Andrew Churches says about assessment:

Students should be involved in all aspects of the assessment process. Students who are involved in setting and developing assessment criteria, marking and moderation will have a clearer understanding of: what they are meant to do; how they are meant to do it; why it is significant; why it is important.

• During the INVESTIGATION stage I take the time to teach my students the skills they will need to be successul in their project.  Often this includes exposing them to knowledge, facts and information – the traditional classroom stuff.  This gives them the base they need to jump off into higher order thinking activities.  This is also where I often end up incorporating lessons on building technological, information and media fluencies.
• During the PLANNING and CREATION stages I have found a critical element of success to be the creation of Checkpoints and Milestones that groups can use to measure their ongoing progress.  I am always so busy that this is a real challenge for me, but when I do manage to structure ongoing feedback during a project the end product is always vastly superior.  Again from Andrew Churches:

Linked to assessment  is the importance of timely, appropriate, detailed and specific feedback. Feedback as a learning tool, is second only to the teaching of thinking skills [Michael Pohl].

In the funny way that these things happen I was just sent this edutopia link today about a school in Pennsylvania that is using project based learning as a vehicle for teaching 21st century skills.  They include the following excellent suggestions:

• Connect to Standards – don’t be distracted by the flash of the technology
• Plan, Plan, Plan – projects are complex, so a carefully planned framework is essential
• Expand Your Audience – using web 2.0 tools to expand the reach of students is motivating and gives projects context
• Walk a Mile in Their Sneakers – try the technoloigy yourself first.  It often takes longer than you think.
• Keep it simple (this is my biggest challenge)
• Be on the lookout -stay connected to a community of professionals.

A fairly comprehensive list of project based learning resources can also be found here.  So what have I missed?  Are there any skills or knowledge that can not be taught using a problem based learning model?  Are there any other key elements of project based learning that are essential to it’s success?

I have just finished marking my student’s reflections from last years Digiteen project and am feeling a need to write my own reflection on the project.  In general I was happy with how the project went in my class.  My students learned a lot about web 2.0 communication and collaboration skills, and in some areas their thinking was challenged and learning took place.  In other ways, however, I felt like they were just going through the paces and weren’t authentically engaged in the experience.  When I read through their reflections an obvious thread is that they found the Ning networking experience to be very engaging and empowering, while the Wiki editing experience was not as fruitful.  I have been thinking quite a bit lately about the power of Personal Learning Networks and how they could be introduced in my classroom and I have started to wonder whether there might be a place in the Digiteen project for the Ning to be more front and center in the learning process.

I keep coming back to a recorded breakfast conversation between David Warlick and Steve Dembo that I recently listened to on the way to work.  In it David refers to students needing to learn how to ‘mine the conversation’ and suggests that teachers today need to be ‘master learners’.  These sound bites have really stuck with me as more and more this has become how I learn.  I follow Twitter links and scan my rss reader to find parts of the conversation that relate to my needs and interests and when something catches my attention I drill down deeper bookmarking sites in delicious to come back to and taking notes using google notebook or by pasting them into a wiki.  This has been the most powerful learning experience of my life.  Could we replicate this in a classroom setting using Ning?  If we did it might look something like this:

• Before starting the project all the teachers involved teach their students about tags, rss and get them set up with a feed reader.
• Each student is then assigned the task of becoming an expert on one of the  9 elements of digital citizenship.
• Each expert must review and post a summary of maybe 3 different resources to their blog and tag the posts with tags related to their summaries so that they are searchable.
• Each student then subscribes to feeds from the experts that they think will provide them with the information they need to help them with their final presentations.  There could be an expectation that students comment on each other’s blog posts so that they all get peer feedback.
• There could also be a discussion group started for each topic and the experts on that topic could be assigned the task of starting a discussion thread and moderating the discussion.  The groups could be where students  go to post
  questions in the discussion forum.
  These questions could then be the start of a richer discussion about the
  different aspects of each topic (especially if teachers also join in once in a
  while) and hopefully that these richer discussion would lead to more balanced student perspectives.

I’m thinking I ought to try this within one of my classes to see how it might work.