AL DíA: Online Interactive Tools

It has been suggested that the use of active learning instructional strategies, both in traditional face-to-face classrooms as well as online courses, enhances learning and results in better learning outcomes. . .[Online Interactive Activities include] multiple choice, “drag and drop” matching exercises, and video and traditional case discussions, as active learning strategies to reinforce course concepts. This study examines whether the inclusion of these activities significantly improved learning outcomes as measured by
performance scores on two required exams. 

The findings that emerged…online interactive tools used as an adjunct to a course can enhance student performance …these types of online supplements hold promise for students who are not performing well in the course.

Source: Can Using Individual Online Interactive Activities Enhance Exam Results?

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

Advertisements

AL DíA: The Maker Movement Danger

Great overview of making in schools…however, there is a danger that edtech enthusiasts should be aware of:

Making and building can foster learning in a variety of ways that mesh with long-established theories of how learning unfolds…Kalil (2013) defines makers as ‘‘people who design and make things on their own time because they find it intrinsically rewarding to make, tinker, problem-solve, discover, and share what they have learned’’ (p. 12).  

 …the history of the adoption of computers in schools suggests a lurking danger: a seductive, but fatally flawed conceptualization of the Maker Movement that assumes its power lies primarily in its revolutionary tool set, and that these tools hold the power to catalyze transformations in education.  

Given the growing enthusiasm for making, there is a distinct danger that its incorporation into school settings will be tool-centric and thus incomplete. In my view, a tool-centric approach to integrating making into education will certainly fail, as it will neglect the critical elements of community and mindset. 

As we consider the promise of the Maker Movement for education, we must actively resist this tendency to oversimplify.

Source: Martin, Lee (2015) “The Promise of the Maker Movement for Education,” Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER): Vol. 5: Iss. 1, Article 4. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1099

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

AL DíA: Interactive eBook approach in Flipped Learning

In this study, an interactive e-book approach is proposed to support flipped learning. It facilitates and bridges out-of-class and in-class learning by providing support for interactive learning contents presented on mobile devices. 

To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, a quasi-experiment was conducted in an elementary school math course. The experimental group students learned with the interactive e-book approach in the flipped learning activity, while the control group students learned with the conventional video-based flipped learning approach.  

The experimental results indicated that the proposed approach not only promoted the students’ self-efficacy for learning mathematics, but also improved their learning achievement; moreover, it was found that the approach benefited the lower self-efficacy more than the higher self-efficacy students. 

The learning record analysis further confirmed that the lower self-efficacy students spent more time reading the e-books before and in class than the higher self-efficacy students did.

Source: Facilitating and Bridging Out-of-Class and In-Class Learning: An Interactive E-Book-Based Flipped Learning Approach for Math Courses By Hwang, Gwo-Jen; Lai, Chiu-Lin | Educational Technology & Society, January 2017 | Go to article overview | ERIC

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

AL DíA: Direct Instruction and Flipped Classroom

Some key take-aways:

• The Marzano Learning Sciences Research Lab (Marzano & Toth, 2014) has recently published a research report (namely “Teaching for Rigor: A Call for a Critical Instructional Shift”), revealing that nearly 60% of the classroom time in schools in the United States is still dedicated to direct instruction. 
• According to the recent K-12 edition of the New Media Consortium Horizon Report 2015 (Johnson, Adams Becker, Estrada & Freeman, 2015), the flipped classroom is foreseen as one of the most prominent educational strategies in this triennium to transform students from “spoon-fed,” passive learners into self-directed, active learners.

Source: Empowering Students in the Process of Social Inquiry Learning through Flipping the Classroom. By Jong, Morris Siu-Yung | Educational Technology & Society, January 2017 | Go to article overview

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

AL DíA: Audio Books and Reading

Source: Salon

For me, the most important part of the study is that the researchers focused on just listening, with no follow-along-in-the-book or other reading intervention added. The impact of purely listening to books is striking. Two notable findings are that students using Tales2go attained 58% of the annual expected gain in reading achievement in just 10 weeks, putting them three months ahead of control students. 

Plus, the study group outperformed the control group across all measures, by three times in reading comprehension, nearly seven times in second-grade vocabulary, and nearly four times in reading motivation. These increases came after students listened for twenty minutes three times per week in the afternoon program at school, and an additional two twenty-minute sessions at home.

Read more as well as review the research study

Note: This is a new type of blog entry where I share information daily about a new tidbit of research. I’m sure we all agree that learning something new daily is awesome. While I usually collect my new insights then blog about them, it’s fun to release them as they happen. Since the venerable Dr. Scott McLeod (Dangerously Irrelevant) has the “Daily Brief,” I’ve decided to call my effort (in a flattering imitation of Scott’s effort) AL DíA, which is Spanish version of “updated.”

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes on Performance-Based Assessment: Reviewing the Basics

MyNotes on Performance-Based Assessment: Reviewing the Basics

• Dr. Patricia Hilliard
• Director of STEM Accelerator
• In general, a performance-based assessment measures students’ ability to apply the skills and knowledge learned from a unit or units of study.
• Typically, the task challenges students to use their higher-order thinking skills to create a product or complete a process (Chun, 2010).
• Tasks can range from a simple constructed response (e.g., short answer) to a complex design proposal of a sustainable neighborhood.
• Arguably, the most genuine assessments require students to complete a task that closely mirrors the responsibilities of a professional, e.
• , artist, engineer, laboratory technician, financial analyst, or consumer advocate.
• First and foremost, the assessment accurately measures one or more specific course standards.
• Normally, students are presented with an open-ended question that may produce several different correct answers (Chun, 2010; McTighe, 2015).
• In the higher-level tasks, there is a sense of urgency for the product to be developed or the process to be determined, as in most real-world situations.
• Below is a simplified version of our planning, loosely based on the backward design process:
• Identify goals of the performance-based assessment.
• Select the appropriate course standards.
• Review assessments and identify learning gaps.
• As a result, we decided to create a performance-based assessment that was also reality-based.
• Moreover, this task would require students to analyze two-way frequency tables along with other charts and graphs.
• Design the scenario.
• This scenario included five key components:
• Setting Role Audience Time frame Product
• Gather or create materials.
• Develop a learning plan.
• Example: Public Comments Session
• Scenario Ashley, an inmate at Texahoma State Women’s Correctional Institution, is serving three to five years for embezzlement and assault. After three years, this inmate is up for parole. Once a month, the Inmate Review Board offers Public Comment Sessions. The sessions are open to all interested parties who want to voice their support or opposition to an inmate’s release from prison. Task You are Ashley’s former probation officer, and the warden requested that you attend the Public Comment Session. You have been asked to review the following documents and present your opinion: Should Ashley be released from prison early or stay for the remainder of her sentence? You have been granted three to five minutes to speak to the review board. Your speech must be short, but detailed with strong evidence to support your decision. Documents Criminal history report Article announcing a new web series on embezzlement Blog post about prison nurseries Letter to the parole board from the inmate’s mother and son Newsletter about the incarceration rates in the state Press release about a prison-work program Research brief on the recidivism rate of nonviolent offenders

---

This note was created from Liner.
By Miguel Guhlin
• Original: http://www.edutopia.org/blog/performance-based-assessment-reviewing-basics-patricia-hilliard
• Highlighted with Liner: http://liner.link/dQBA3

MyNotes: Why Ed Tech Is Not Transforming How Teachers Teach

MyNotes on Why Ed Tech Is Not Transforming How Teachers Teach:

• Public schools now provide at least one computer for every five students.
• They spend more than $3 billion per year on digital content.
• And nearly three-fourths of high school students now say they regularly use a smartphone or tablet in the classroom.
• The student-centered, hands-on, personalized instruction envisioned by ed-tech proponents remains the exception to the rule.
• Case study after case study describe a common pattern inside schools: A handful of “early adopters” embrace innovative uses of new technology, while their colleagues make incremental or no changes to what they already do.
• “If schools take all this technology, and use it like a textbook, or just have teachers show PowerPoint [presentations] or use drill-and-kill software, they might as well not even have it.
• In the digital age, the ISTE standards say, teachers should be expected, among other strategies, to “engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources.
• ” They should also “develop technology-enriched learning environments that enable all students to become active participants in setting their own educational goals, managing their own learning, and assessing their own progress.
• Research suggests that’s more or less the standard distribution of technology use in most schools nationwide.
• The most authoritative national study on teacher technology use was conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics in 2009.
• A survey of 3,159 teachers found that when teachers did allow students to use technology, it was most often to prepare written text (61 percent of respondents reported that their students did so “sometimes” or “often”) conduct Internet research (66 percent), or learn/practice basic skills (69 percent).
• Far more rare were teachers who reported that their students sometimes or often used technology to conduct experiments (25 percent), create art or music (25 percent), design and produce a product (13 percent), or contribute to a blog or wiki (9 percent.)
• Similar findings resulted from a 2010 study of 21 Texas middle schools by private researcher Kelly S.
• The schools had been provided with abundant technology, including laptops for every student and teacher, wireless upgrades for schools, digital curricula and assessments, and professional development, paid for with $20 million in federal funds.
• “In general, teachers at many schools seemed to view technology as a more valuable tool for themselves than for their students,” Ms.
• One big issue: Many teachers lack an understanding of how educational technology works.
• Researchers have found, for example, that even innovative teachers can be heavily affected by pressure to conform to more traditional instructional styles, with a teacher as the focal point for the classroom.
• Newer teachers inclined to use technology in their classrooms can also be deterred by experienced teachers who feel differently.
• And the current test-based accountability system isn’t exactly supporting the transition to student-centered, technology-driven instruction, said Ms.
• One strategy that most researchers and experts seem to agree on: so-called “job-embedded” professional development that takes place consistently during the workday and is tied to specific classroom challenges that teachers actually face, rather than in the isolated sessions often preferred by district central offices and written into districts’ contracts with their teachers.
• “When learning experiences are focused solely on the technology itself, with no specific connection to grade or content learning goals, teachers are unlikely to incorporate technology into their practices,” concluded Ms. Ertmer and Ms.
• Ottenbreit-Leftwich, the researchers who wrote the 2010 paper on the factors influencing teachers’ use of educational technology.
• “The smarter districts use those teachers to teach other teachers how to integrate tech into their lessons,” Mr. Cuban said.

---

This note was created from Liner.
By Miguel Guhlin
• Original: http://mobile.edweek.org/c.jsp?cid=25919801&bcid=25919801&rssid=25919791&item=http://api.edweek.org/v1/ew/?uuid=2F4A593C-0BA9-11E5-8D81-71C9B3743667
• Highlighted with Liner: http://liner.link/VrNN3

Curriculum, Stop Failing Technology

Source: http://ai2020.com/one-thing-at-a-time-singletasking-do-it/

“Education is failing technology.”  Dr. Mark Weston goes on to write, “The minimal effect that technology has had on teaching and learning is a failure of the field of education not a failure of technology.” These are pretty powerful ideas…and given my long-time advocacy of edtech, I am inclined to agree. But do these ideas hold up? I’m not sure.

Students, Computers, and Learning Making the Connection concludes that investments in classroom technology are yielding “no appreciable improvements in student achievement in reading, mathematics, or science.” What’s more, the study found technology to be of little help in “bridging the skills divide between advantaged and disadvantaged students.”
Source: Suzie Boss, Are We Getting Smarter about EdTech?

When I look at the powerful learning that is possible when teachers adopt instructional approaches like these below, I wonder if Mark isn’t right.

If we know that differentiated instruction is effective in improving student performance, while still meeting required performance standards, why aren’t more teachers using it? 

TPACK proposes that thoughtful technology integration occurs when teachers are attuned to the interplay of content (the subject matter), pedagogy (the methods of teaching, both general and content-specific), and technology (both electronic and “traditional”). Considering all three domains together results in a lesson in which all the component parts are aligned to support the learning goals and outcomes of the instructional plan…The power of technology lies in the teacher’s ability to use it for customizing instruction. It helps teachers to address those student variables by manipulating the complexity or level of difficulty of the content, the ways in which students receive and engage that content, their options demonstrating what they have learned, and the circumstances under which they do so.
Source: Inclusion in the 21st Century: Differentiating with Technology.

Why aren’t more of these approaches taken hold?

Source: 6 Components of DI

• differentiated instruction: Differentiation takes place in the areas of content, process, and product. Consider this 2007 resource, Differentiating Instruction with Technology in K–5 Classrooms, that makes very similar points:
• “Technology improves student performance when the application directly supports the curriculum objectives being assessed.” In other words, technology is most effective when integrated with curriculum content.
• “Technology improves performance when the application providesopportunities for student collaboration.” Studies show that paired and collaborative learning in conjunction with technology enhances student performance.
• “Technology improves performance when the application adjustsfor student ability and prior experience, and provides feedback to the student and teacher about student performance or progress with the application.” This finding supports the differentiated instruction practices of coaching and mentoring as well as sharing responsibility for learning.
• “Technology improves performance when the application is integrated into the typical instructional day.” This finding supports classroom and content learning with technology as opposed to lab learning with technology.
• “Technology improves performance when the application provides opportunities for students to design and implement projects that extend the curriculum content being assessed by a particular standardized test.” Student-created products, multimedia, and video streaming are examples of how technology can extend curriculum content.
• “Technology improves performance when used in environmentswhere teachers, the school community, and school and district administrators support the use of technology.” In addition to performance improvements tied to administrative support for technology, findings show that integration of technology with instruction, professional development for teachers, and computer use at home and school with differentiated products and student entry points combine to improve performance.

• problem-based learning (PBL): “uses real-life problems modeled after a contemporary or historical case to engage students as they pursue specified learning outcomes that are in line with academic standards or course objectives” (Stepien & Pyke, 1997)
• cooperative learning: All students work inter-dependently, clearly focused on achieving joint expectations, taking the initiative to innovate on assignment.

One simple answer–“There’s no doubt that effectively differentiating instruction presents challenges to even the most experienced teacher” (Source)–is that it is too darn complicated! That may explain why Dr. Mark Weston, in  Quit Failing Technology, observes that Education’s failure to adopt research-based practices have resulted in the failure of technologists to be successful in transforming teaching and learning.

Successful and sustained edtech implementation requires that good pedagogy must first be in play within the classroom. . .Let’s master pedagogy first. Then leverage the technology.
Source: In Successful EdTech, pedagogy Comes First–Devices Second

In this entry, he makes these points:

1. Education is failing technology.
2. If certain instructional practices are used and specific conditions met then one teacher, instructing a group of students in a classroom, could help the students attain 2-sigma. The practices he identified that make 2-sigma possible include reinforcement, cues and explanations, corrective feedback, and cooperative learning. The conditions include student classroom-participation, student time on task, and classroom morale.
3. The organizational and operational design of most schools exacerbates the teacher-load conundrum. In such schools, a teacher trying to take a classroom of 30 students to 2-sigma must make it happen alone. 
4. Technology has exerted little overall effect on educational settings and the teaching and learning in them. Student achievement test scores remain flat, school completion rates have not declined, and instruction remains mostly teacher-led in classrooms with neat-rowed desks.
5. Teachers…readily admit that in many instances the technology that they do have actually increases their load. Not surprisingly, data show teachers rarely using technology in their classroom instruction.

And, what about Marzano’s work and that of others? Consider Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works (PDF; web site that linked it):

Technology can certainly be used…as a tool for the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of information. Today, students use complex multimedia products and advanced networking technologies to learn interactively and work collaboratively on projects; to gather, organize, and analyze information; to solve problems; and to communicate information…Our experience has shown that most people prefer exploring the instructional strategies first and the technologies that support them second.

So, all that to say something pretty simple–Curriculum Departments, classroom teachers, school systems have failed to adopt instructional approaches that make a difference for student learning. And, until they do, we’re wasting our time trying to blend technology in. Even if you see technology as a way to short-circuit the time-intensive strategies of the past, there’s a real need for pedagogy+technology together, rather than ONE before another.

In fact, it reminds me of achieving higher order thinking skills (HOTS) research…imagine teachers making students march through low-order thinking skills before ever getting to HOTS…unfortunately, so much time is spent on LOTS that HOTS never happened for countless students, especially those who came from a low, socio-economic background.

I’m not sure I agree with these findings…we can’t continue to chant “Pedagogy first, technology second!” and expect to get results. This isn’t crawl before we can walk scenario. If you want someone to embrace technology to transform instruction, then you have to start from the get-go!

“A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still.”

Maybe we need some replacement thinking via Mike Fisher (Get a copy of Mike Fisher’s book, Digital Learning Strategies: How do I assign and assess 21st century work?):

The task of the contemporary teacher is to help students learn to take what is now ubiquitous (knowledge), learn to filter it for relevance and quality (critical thinking), and use it to learn, grow, and demonstrate 21st Century Skills (communication, collaboration, creative problem solving). 

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: Sustained Institutionalization of Initiatives #tribeofbloggers

I remember the first time I encountered the “Factors for Sustained Institutionalization of Schoolwide Initiatives.” It was at a campus meeting, and I immediately snapped a picture of it. Wow, this chart really nails it!

Original image from article by Donni Davis-Perry (check link at start of blog entry for source)

As I look over these factors, I don’t explicitly see relationships and trust, but they are certainly powerful enough to derail any initiative. If I had to fit these two incredibly important items in, it would be in the “Motivators” box…without them, you encounter resistance.

I continue to see this image pop up, but all the examples have to do with instruction, seldom with the blending of technology into instruction:

As I read Davis-Perry’s article, these key ideas jump out at me:

1. These are the factors that lead to successful institutionalization of schoolwide initiatives.
2. Institutionalization occurs when an initiative becomes the universally accepted and normal way of conducting business.
3. The first step in the process of institutionalizing an initiative is forming a planning team that maintains focus and addresses each of the critical components [in the diagrams above].
4. Working through resistance (e.g. Motivators) leads to transformational organizational change.
5. Implementing a new program with fidelity is vital.
6. Schools need to strategically plan for initiatives in order for them to be sustained.
7. The cycle of continually adopting and abandoning new initiatives each year creates cynicism.
8. School planning teams should take the time to ensure critical components are in place over time-typically multiple school years.

In the excerpt of the article that was shared with me by a colleague, I didn’t see what were the “other” or additional steps. Davis-Perry starts with the first step but doesn’t develop this into a list with Step 2, Step 3, etc. We can infer, though, that the next step is to put these critical components in place.

In technology, Dr. Scott Mcleod (Dangerously Irrelevant) shares the formula for tech failure. I’ve flipped it around and written the formula in a positive manner to get the formula for Technology Success:

TECH SUCCESS =
Vision + Infrastructure+ Training +Implementation+Ongoing Support+Willingness to Change

The Technology Success Magic Formula, when lined up against Lippitt, Walter-Thomas, et al model, appears to be missing some critical components. In future blog entries, it would be fun to explore what technology success looks like when you have the factors for sustained institutionalization of initiatives aligned to technology initiatives. And, I’m referring to not only instructional technology but others.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

The Secret Is Out

What a sense of relief, right? I bet that’s what all the edtech evangelists are saying now. I mean, when the truth comes out, you aren’t worried about maintaining the lie, right?

1. Investing heavily in school computers and classroom technology does not improve pupils’ performance, says a global study from the OECD.
2. frequent use of computers in schools is more likely to be associated with lower results.
3. education systems which have invested heavily in information and communications technology have seen “no noticeable improvement” in Pisa test results for reading, mathematics or science.
4. “Those students who use tablets and computers very often tend to do worse than those who use them moderately.”
5. Students who use computers very frequently at school get worse results
6. The results show “no appreciable improvements” in reading, mathematics or science in the countries that had invested heavily in information technology
7. High achieving school systems such as South Korea and Shanghai in China have lower levels of computer use in school
8. making sure that all children have a good grasp of reading and maths is a more effective way to close the gap than “access to hi-tech devices”.
9. what we can do as a teaching profession is to start thinking very carefully about what we really need it for.

Source: BBC’s Computers Do Not Improve Pupil Results

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: Guided Inquiry

Note: These are my take-aways from Carol Collier Kuhlthau’s Guided Inquiry: School Libraries in the 21st Century. from January 2010. Read it online.

Thanks to my Twitter PLN–especially Carolyn Foote (@technolibrary), Leslie Maniotes (@lesliemaniotes), and Jennifer LaGarde (@jenniferlagarde), as well as Dee Dee Davenport (@deelibcoord) for introducing me to Information Search Process (ISP) and Guided Inquiry. DeeDee was kind enough to send me A Model Third Grade Guided Inquiry Unit. (I’ll have to check that out in more detail!)

Source: http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~kuhlthau/docs/websiteGIDFramework.pdf as cited by NEISD

Reflections
This article was written in 2010, based on research the author conducted even farther back; to be blunt, there is nothing here that is “earth-shattering” and new. However, there is comfort in that fact…it means ideas have certainly taken in hold somewhere, if not in practice.

In the article, the author suggests that the partnership involve the teacher-librarian.  One idea that suggests itself is that an edtech coach could certainly play a significant role in this process.

I love the simple 3-step process. A lot of work has been done around these 3 steps, and it’s tough to imagine they could be so easily accomplished. To gain systemic support (step 1), it seems essential to have an awesome team of leaders committed to building support…a PLC, perhaps. An implementation plan and timeline will have to take into consideration a variety of factors. The network required for sharing, well, Twitter or social media can play a part.

Again, how this gets implemented is key.

MyNotes

1. A new way of learning is needed that prepares students for living and working in a complex information environment. 
2. Mobile devices provide instantaneous communication any time and any place. Multifunctional hand-held devices are ubiquitous around the world from cosmopolitan urban centers to remote rural outposts. Web 2.0 tools help us interact, connect and collaborate in new ways. Technological tools that have become part of our everyday life have great benefit for people across the world. 
3.  We need to move beyond teaching how to use technology tools to teaching technology in use for creativity and meaning.
4. Learning all of the bells and whistles of a new device isn’t the hard part of information technology use. The hard part is learning to use the technologies for creativity and enlightenment.
5. Inquiry is a way of learning new skills and knowledge for understanding and creating in the midst of rapid technological change.
6. The underlying concept is considering a question or problem that prompts extensive investigation on the part of the student.
7. Inquiry that is guided by an instructional team to enable students to gain a depth of understanding and a personal perspective through a wide range of sources of information is called Guided Inquiry (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2007). 
8. Guided Inquiry equips students with abilities and competencies to meet the challenges of an uncertain, changing world.  
9. Collaborations with teachers in a team can create the necessary climate for students to inquire, participate, create and learn in an information environment.
10.  If we think of the student’s world outside of school and the student‘s cumulative knowledge and experience as first space and we think of the curriculum as second space, the question arises of how to make these two very separate spaces intersect. 
11. When first space and second space overlap third space is created. 
12. Third space is where the most meaningful, lasting learning takes place. 
13. The teacher’s main challenge is to create third space as often as possible.
14. Inquiry provides the opportunity to create third space and Guided Inquiry enables students to make their own connections within the inquiry process that motivates learning and builds ownership and expertise.
15. Guided Inquiry recommends a three member core team that plans and supervises the inquiry with an extended team of other experts joining in when most needed. 
16. Although two member collaborations between a school librarian and a teacher are common, three member teams provide a synergy of ideas for developing inquiry learning. 
17. Three member teams also provide the additional professional guidance and ongoing support student inquiry requires. 
18. The third member joining the librarian and the subject area teacher may be second classroom or subject area teacher or any of the other specialists in the school, such as a teacher specializing in reading, technology, music, art, or drama
19. The SLIM Student Learning Inquiry Measure (http://cissl.scils.rutgers.edu/) provides assessment throughout the stages of the inquiry process.
20. Five kinds of learning are accomplished through inquiry (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2007, p. 9): 
1. information literacy – “the ability to locate, evaluate, and use information.” Five criteria for evaluating information–expertise, accuracy, currency, perspective, and quality–are applied for making good choices in inquiry learning.
2. learning how to learn – Guided Inquiry enables students to learn how to learn by becoming aware of their learning process. Each time they work through the stages of the Information Search Process (ISP)– initiating, selecting, exploring, focusing, collecting and presenting–they learn the process of inquiry as well as how they personally interact within that process. Guidance is provided at critical intervention points to teach strategies for learning from a variety of sources of information. Inquiry is a fundamental way of learning in the information environment of the ‚real world‛ where everyday tasks require learning from information. Through guidance students personalize the inquiry process recognizing that ‚this is my process, this is the way I learn.‛ 
3. curriculum content – Four common themes in subject area standards are fundamental to Guided Inquiry: 
1. constructivist approach to teaching and learning; 
2. information explosion–too much to learn it all; 
3. focus on broad themes and big ideas; and 
4. meaningful instruction through integration and problem solving (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2007)
4. literacy competence – Students need to go beyond learning to read, to reading to learn. They need to be able to comprehend informational texts as well as understand stories in fiction. Determining importance in informational texts is an essential skill in the information environment in which they live and learn. The basic skills of literacy, reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing, and presenting are enhanced through inquiry learning.
5. social skills  – Students gain the ability to interact with others in situations that require cooperating and collaborating. Organizing small work groups is a strategy applied in Guided Inquiry called inquiry circles (Kuhlthau, Maniotes & Caspari, 2007). 
1. Adapted from Daniels’ (1994) literature circles, inquiry circles are structured work groups with each student assigned a different job. Jobs are rotated to give students an opportunity to practice each task independently. 
2. In Guided Inquiry each task represents one aspect of inquiry that students need to learn. 
3. Eight jobs essential to inquiry recommended in Guided Inquiry are: 
1. word hunter (finds key words and definitions); 
2. evaluator (evaluates the source); 
3. messenger (summarizes big ideas and main points); quiz kid (raises questions); 
4. connector (makes connections between self, texts and the world; 
5. note taker (takes specific notes on content); 
6. image maker (creates visual scheme of ideas); and 
7. interpreter (asks, ‚What does it mean?‚ and ‚Why is it important?‛) 
21. Getting Started and Sustaining Change – 3 steps:
1. First, you need to gain systemic support.
2. Second, you need to develop an implementation plan. You will need a plan with a timeline for implementing an inquiry approach. You can begin by organizing one three member team to collaborate on an inquiry project with one group of students as an example of how it works. This can form the basis for implementing a flexible team approach in your school. 
3. Third, you will need to create a network for sharing stories of success and problems you encounter

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: How and Why Educators Use Twitter

The following are my notes from Jeffrey P. Carpenter’s (@doccarpenter) and Daniel G. Krutka’s (@dankrutka) study, How and Why Educators Use Twitter: A Survey of the Field, published in JRTE Vol. 46, No. 4.

MyNotes

1. As of July 2013, there were approximately 200 million users of Twitter, including approximately 18% of online adults in the United States (Duggan & Smith, 2013).
2. Various scholars have noted that Web 2.0 sites such as Twitter afford users numerous benefits, and Jenkins and colleagues (2009) went as far as to say that the “new participatory cultures” afforded by such sites may “represent ideal learning environments” (p. 10). These tools reduce spatial and temporal constraints on communication and allow users to collaborate around topics of interest. 
3. The “affinity spaces” facilitated by such media encourage sharing and peer-to-peer learning that enable participants to benefit from collective intelligence (Gee, 2004). 
4. Junco and colleagues (2011) have argued that Twitter in particular may be the “social networking platform most amenable to ongoing, public dialogue” (p. 1). 
5. Its brevity, immediacy, and openness can empower educators and students to interact with a variety of people in new ways.
6. Microblogging can be used for one-way sharing from an official school account to keep a school community informed of events, deadlines, or policy changes (e.g., Porterfield & Carnes, 2011). 
7. Kurtz (2009) utilized Twitter to share the work of his first and second graders, thus providing parents “windows into their children’s days” (p. 2). 
8. Twitter can also provide many-to-many communication among administrators, teachers, students, and other stakeholders through the use of a common hashtag or interactions between accounts (e.g., Ferriter, Ramsden, & Sheninger, 2012).
9. Domizi’s (2013) coding of tweets found not only that students in her graduate course benefited from her reminders about class assignments and deadlines, but also that Twitter helped students communicate with each other professionally and socially, even providing each other encouragement. Chen and Chen (2012) reported that Twitter facilitated communication between university students who were otherwise too inhibited to speak directly to the instructor.
10. University-level students in a number of studies have cited Twitter for increasing involvement in and satisfaction with courses (e.g., Krutka, 2014; Rinaldo, Tapp, & Laverie, 2011). For example, after surveying marketing students in several classes over two semesters, analyzing instructor tweets, and conducting focus groups, Rinaldo and colleagues concluded that Twitter has the “potential to engage students with the emerging technology, increase the interaction between professor and students and broaden access to information related to course material” (p. 202)
11. Krutka and his 20 preservice social studies teachers both used and studied pedagogical possibilities for social media use in middle and high school classrooms (Krutka, 2014).
12. Surveys, reflective journals, and field notes indicated that Twitter was the most beneficial of several social media services utilized in the class because of its diverse uses. Class participants indicated that the use of social media fostered a community feeling and enhanced students’ relationships with the instructor, each other, and practicing educators who used Twitter.
13. Research suggests Twitter has the potential to encourage concise writing (e.g., Dunlap & Lowenthal, 2009), and Kurtz (2009) further found that his elementary students were excited to co-construct tweets and analyze language appropriate for the authentic audience of their family members.
14. Twitter appears able to facilitate educators’ professional development in a number of ways. Through synchronous chats or asynchronous tweeting, educators contribute and discuss ideas, as well as sharing and acquiring resources by tweeting links to education-related articles, blogs, wikis, and other websites (Brown, 2012; Lu, 2011). 
15. A handful of studies suggest that Twitter can function as a professional development tool for teachers. Microblogging can offer educators grass-roots professional development that boosts networking and fulfills a “bridging function” as teachers use it “as a way of importing new ideas into their local communities of practice from distant peers” (Forte, Humphreys, & Park, 2012, p. 106).
16. …Others shared how the service enabled them to escape philosophical or methodological isolation within their schools. For example, one math teacher explained, “As the only teacher in my district who is flipping the classroom, Twitter is an invaluable source for working/collaborating with others who are doing the same.”
18. Districts and building-level administrators should consider ways in which they can recognize, tap into, and learn from teacher professional activity in online settings such as Twitter. PD via Twitter could potentially count toward some of the hours of professional development typically required of teachers, and/or be included in formalized professional development plans or processes. 
19. School leaders might also explore ways that other forms of PD might embrace the qualities of Twitter PD that our respondents valued, such as immediacy, personalization, differentiation, community, and positivity. 
20. If provided opportunities to do so, tweeting teachers may also be able to share with their colleagues at their school site some of what they learn via Twitter (e.g., Forte, Humphreys, & Park, 2012).

Image Source

http://goo.gl/G3mna4 available online.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: Salary Reboot for K-12 Tech Jobs Panel at #TxCTOClinic15 #tecsig #edtech

This session, Salary Reboot: Rethinking Pay for K-12 Technology Jobs, was held at the Texas K-12 CTO Council meeting on June 18, 2015. It provided some eye-opening statistics about CTOs and job in the edtech field.

Announcement: Join #etdrive, a Texas wide conversation focused on 3 strands using “push to learn” technology, VoxerChats. Follow these two steps to begin your learning journey now.

About the Facilitators
It was facilitated by the following folks from TASB:

• Amy Campbell, Assistant Director, Data Services
• Ann Patton, Managing Compensation Consultant
• Luz Cadena, Senior Compensation Consultant
• Troy Bryants, Data Services Manager

TASB HR Services

Phone: 800-580-7782

Email: hrservices@tasb.org

Listen to Audio for this presentation 

MyNotes

1. Dice Tech Salary Survey 2014 results | Get full text
2. Out of a thousand school districts, 600 responded. A response rate of 60% statewide, surveying 125 jobs in the survey, 90% rate among districts with 3000+ enrollment
3. Look at market value, as well as non-school market. These give us a good picture of private sector and public sector. Staff can go work in other places.
4. Private sector does not always pay better than education.
5. Average US Tech Salary Change – 5 year trend
1. in 2010, there were very low increases for technology positions.
2. by 2012, they caught up.
3. Texas salaries are a little late to the game. On average, salaries actually dropped from year to year due to the RIF process in 2011.
4. Cumulatively, there’s about a 13% increase nationwide, and only 9% in Texas.
6. Texas Market Values
1. Computer Technician
1. Non school: $21.92 (San Antonio), $20.24(el Paso), $23.56 (Dallas/FtWorth), $23.90 (east Texas)
2. Salary growth 1.5%, and over the last year, -1.1% decrease
3. Employee ratio 2010-2015 has seen an increase of 5%
4. Statewide median hourly rate is $19.77
2. HelpDesk Technician
1. Non School: $20.97/$19.04, $19.61/$27.17 (el paso)
2. Relationship between district size and pay. Hourly rate for 10K-25K, $23.50 for hourly rate
3. Network Technician: 
1. Private/School: $27.85/$21.89 (SA)
4. Instructional Tech SPecialist
1. 10K-25K enrollment: $65,527
2. 44% employee ratio 2010-2015
3. Statewide median salary: $59,923
5. Network Admin
1. $86K/$62K (SA)
6. CTO
1. $162K/$93K (SA)
7. IT Employment Trends
1. Motivators: Percentage of employers who offer incentives. 2009:53%; 2014:66%
2. Primary Motivator for 
1. 17% was increased compensation
2. 12% – more interesting or challenging assignments
3. 12% flexible work locations/telecommuting
4. 10% flexible work hours
5. 3% promotion or new title
8. Changing employers: of 37% of tech pros that anticipate changing employers in 2015:
1. 70% higher compensation
2. 44% better working conditions
3. 33% more responsibility
4. 18% shorter commute
5. 17% anticipate losing current positions
6. 13% relocation (unavoidable turnover)
7. 9% other
9. Hot Tech Jobs in 2015-2016
1. Security
2. Mobile Device Management
3. Network
10. Strategies for Hiring and Retaining Tech Talent
1. Move quickly
2. Separate pay structure
3. Pay differently (pay tech people larger salary increases)
4. Adjust pay (salaries are being looked at annually and revised, as many as 2x a year)
5. Create career pathways (have like 3 levels of tech…need to provide value for this)
11. Instructional Tech vs Traditional Tech
1. Instructional Tech to CTO Path
1. teacher/instructional tech specialist to Director then CTO
2. THe only way to earn more is to become a supervisor
2. Traditional Tech to CTO Path
1. Computer Tech to Network Admin to IT Supervisor to CTO
2. Lot more opportunity to earn in your career
3. you can stay in a role that doesn’t involve supervision until you are more experienced (older)
12. Gender Pay Equity
1. Median Salaries
1. Men: $91,951
2. Women: $95,883
3. CTO count by gender favors males in that role over females
4. Only 4.6 percent of women work in STEM careers, opposed to 10.3% for men in STEM careers.
5. There are fewer female data points in the data.
6. Men in technology hold far more technical positions (e.g. software engineering)
7. Women hold project management, business analyst roles.
8. CTO Median Salary by Gender and Enrollment Group: There is no statistical impact of gender on salary. No correlation was found in Texas.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

Revisiting #OER, #OpenAccess, Plagiarism and Writing

“For democracy to flourish, citizens need free and open access to ideas. In today’s digital age, this means access to information and ideas online.” (Source: The Information Commons: A Public Policy Report)

Source: 9 Minute Open Access Video, Wikipedia

How we learn to write and share in school needs to focus on providing free and open access to ideas. Papers that are written for one person–the teacher or a small group (the captive audience of a classroom)–fundamentally fail.

People learn to keep their ideas to themselves, to not share ideas essential to our democracy. Worse, people who don’t learn to write in a public forum and share their ideas may think their writing sub-standard, their ideas not quite as good as that of others…and so, they must “borrow” them from others. In short, they don’t learn open access principles that take advantage of the Internet as a global, digital “printing press” at little or no cost.

But anyone who writes for a global audience (I do, don’t you?) quickly realizes that sharing his/her ideas online ensures they may be remixed, but not necessarily stolen. Better yet, we have the opportunity to create together, collaborating on refining ideas, a back-n-forth dialogue that spans time and space.

Opportunities to create and collaborate together, to provide access to resources that are mixable, reusable, and free from DRM…isn’t that the promise of Open Educational Resources (OER)?

Open Education “…is the simple and powerful idea that the world’s knowledge is a public good and that technology in general and the Worldwide Web in particular provide an extraordinary opportunity for everyone to share, use, and reuse knowledge.”
—The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
“Open educational resources (OERs) are free and openly licensed educational materials that can be used for teaching, learning, research, and other purposes.” (Wikipedia article)

It’s been awhile since I’ve looked at OER, but I suspect that it’s alive and well. In this 2012 blog entry, The Power of #OER, consider the OER Research web site introduction:

The body of work collected here represents the combined efforts of organizations worldwide. During the last ten years, as the Open Educational Resources movement has grown, so has the body of research being produced on the topic. We invite you to engage with the new discoveries and analyses that this collection has to offer.

As I look at the site, the latest resource is 2009. That’s a long time ago, isn’t it? The reason I share this again is that I wonder if schools are still struggling to create their own resources to share with each other. We’ve seen an explosion of remixable content, creative commons sharealike-attribution copyrighted materials that people enables people to remix content others have created. But has this caught on with our students? For those of us familiar with App-Smashing, it’s a fun concept–grab content that others have made, remix it into something you’ve made, and then make it available for others.

Imagine a school where students don’t learn programming. Imagine a school where no desktop publishing occurs.Imagine a school where advanced image editing is not taught. Imagine a school where video editing, manipulation, remixing has no place. Read More

Of course, I suspect that remixing in this way–which falls, by the way, into the SAMR Model’s Redefinition–still hasn’t quite caught on in schools. Many of us probably have figured out that remixing isn’t the same thing as plagiarizing. In remixing, you give credit to the original creator, then you make an effort to enhance the work, or change it.

A remix is a piece of media which has been altered from its original state by adding, removing, and/or changing pieces of the item. Source: Wikipedia

If you haven’t remixed something online, then you probably aren’t creating much. Remixing lies at the heart of creativity. Consider again this video:
https://player.vimeo.com/video/22591307
Hip Hop Genius: Remixing High School Education from sam seidel on Vimeo.

But remixing maybe isn’t happening in your school. Or, worse, the focus is on stopping plagiarism among students, using something like TurnItIn.
https://player.vimeo.com/video/40676105

Let’s quickly revisit plagiarism and why it is different from remixing:

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own: use (another’s production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft: present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source. Source: The Book Designer

Remixing and plagiarism are manifestly different. I see OER as intentionally creating and sharing content so that it can be remixed by others…and the fact that content is shared widely makes plagiarism difficult to hide.

When I was 10-11 years old, my teachers would give me assignments that could be easily satisfied by going to the encyclopedia, reading what was there, copying it down with slight revisions, and turning it in. Since I had little access to research (encyclopedias), I would work like crazy to copy all the information down so that I could later consider it and work it into my report. After many such assignments, I refined the art of restating what I read in the encyclopedia to give it my own twist and emphasis; it is a skill that served me well through K-16.

It wasn’t until much later that I realized that cookie-cutter assignments teachers give are well…a waste of time. Do I even remember the content of any one of those research papers? No. What was my level of engagement with the research? Zero. I was just doing what I needed to do to survive in school (I made “A” in Reading/Language Arts, but Math was–and continues to be–my weak spot with a “B”). Is it any surprise that children see school as something to be endured, survived, so that they can get to the next thing, whatever that is? Is there any wonder that children are increasingly dis-satisfied with school because it is irrelevant to their lives?

 …as teachers we need to challenge ourselves to devise more authentic assessments, many of which may be performance based, which cannot be faked.Source: Wes Fryer, SpeedofCreativity 

Several years ago, when I saw my daughter–who is now an editor, writer of original content–stuck with doing the same type of assignments–read, regurgitate…or as Bernie Dodge characterized it, “input, output, no transformation”–I have to question the value of assignments. Innovation in these assignments is a matter of how creative one can be to rewrite and revise rather than reconceptualize, collaborate and communicate.

One of the best ways to suppress plagiarism is to come up with creative assignments that are literally one-of-a-kind. Source: David Harrington

Today, we have instant access to information. Turnitin, as well as WriteCheck, are parasites that feed off the old education model of Read/Regurgitate approach to writing research. If you don’t know it already, our children need to be creative, artistic, and that just doesn’t happen with assignments that involve copying out of an encyclopedia, whether paper-bound or electronic. You can be practical and use TurnItIn, but as an administrator, I would look to schools using such tools as an indicator of failure, rather than innovation.

What do you think of this topic?

In the meantime, here’s my list of journals I periodically revisit (pun intended):

Image Source: Wikipedia, Open Access

You can find a list online, and as well as in the Directory of OpenAccess Journals. A few that I visit often include the following:

1. JOLT – Journal of Online Learning and Teaching
2. EPAA – Education Policy Analysis Archives

And, realizing that’s entirely too few, here are some more…

• JiTP – The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy
• Education Next
• Education Online
• Education Review
• International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership

Update: Feedback from +Laura Gibbs :

Miguel, what a fantastic post! Sadly, it applies to higher ed just as much as K-12. Although instead of massaging an encyclopedia article (just enough to fool TurnItIn), students are massaging research articles. Regurgitated research: blech! We need remixes, remakes, revisions! My students all do retellings of old stories for their weekly writing and their semester projects… and it never gets boring: new stories for new times! 🙂http://estorybook.blogspot.com/

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

My Black Notebook: Applying Research to Life

Amazon: Miquelrius Journal

Abstract: Taking notes on laptops rather than in longhand is increasingly common. Many researchers have suggested that laptop note taking is less effective than longhand note taking for learning. Prior studies have primarily focused on students’ capacity for multitasking and distraction when using laptops. The present research suggests that even when laptops are used solely to take notes, they may still be impairing learning because their use results in shallower processing.  

In three studies, we found that students who took notes on laptops performed worse on conceptual questions than students who took notes longhand. We show that whereas taking more notes can be beneficial, laptop note takers’ tendency to transcribe lectures verbatim rather than processing information and reframing it in their own words is detrimental to learning.
Source: The Pen is Mightier than the Keyboard

Since the age of 17, I’ve carried a basketweave small notepad (like this one) to write down stuff; I still carry it when on the go and not at work…it works great for disposable notes, shopping lists (although I try to use Evernote lists for that). I find it helped me make connections between disparate ideas, which is the secret to creativity–the juxtaposition of disparate ideas.

At first, it started out as a place to jot down quotable quotes, then grew into lists of what I needed to do, or thought that I should spend more time thinking about. I’d grown up taking notes in a Memo composition book, and spent many long hours writing and composing but switched to the smaller form factor for portability.

When laptops came out, of course, I immediately saw them as the way to take notes verbatim. In fact, I enjoyed live blogging events because I could type as fast as the speaker. Unfortunately, I began to notice that I was getting disconnected from the ideas. My memory started to fail, and I couldn’t help but wonder, was I just getting old?

Then, when research came out that taking notes longhand actually improves retention and processing of ideas, I decided to use my black journal book (shown above) to jot down ideas/information from meetings with people, even if it was just a casual conversation at work. That is the only kind of information that goes into that journal…and I keep a separate one for personal items.

In the last year that I’ve been doing this, I’ve seen my memory of conversations and ideas improve. If I draft something really fantastic worthy of saving in digital format, I just “evernote it” and it becomes a searchable item in my Evernote account.

While I did dabble with note-taking on the iPad, I found that I disliked the experience. Far better to rely on pen and journal.

Some whom I interact with find it strange that a technology director is resorting to paper and pen, but it’s an opportunity to share the research…and I don’t find myself forgetting stuff as much as I did when I logged my notes in a digital device.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

Research: Brain, Writing and Sci-Fi

Image Source: http://goo.gl/vHNXk1

“Thrusters ahead FULL!” Jane spoke quietly with intense focus. Her crew moved with singular purpose, their move quickly now, wait for next command efforts. “Ready, Captain.” The Reticulean Armada hovered like piranhas in front of screaming victim–The Ventura, the first human ship to reach Langaza speed.

“Spin up the rail guns,” Captain Jane Worth spoke into the silent hush of a space battle. All other precautions had already been put in place. Civilian observers hovered in the space allocated for them.

“They have launched a protonic field, Captain,” spoke her first officer. “Sensors are having trouble identifying the elements employed.” A protonic field captured critical energy, a wave of power that polarized space debris. It could be deadly in certain parts of space, but as a first salvo, it meant little. That the Armada ships had launched simultaneously, now that could be a problem.
“Ready the anti-proton shield modulation,” her first officer spoke as he supervised the helmsman and weapons console.
As the rainbow cascade washed over them, Jane consciously forced herself to relax.

A fascinating, new study analyzes our brain while writing science-fiction. The results are worth reviewing:

As the scientists report in a new study in the journal NeuroImage, the brains of expert writers appeared to work differently, even before they set pen to paper. During brainstorming, the novice writers activated their visual centers. By contrast, the brains of expert writers showed more activity in regions involved in speech.
“I think both groups are using different strategies,” Dr. Lotze said. It’s possible that the novices are watching their stories like a film inside their heads, while the writers are narrating it with an inner voice.
When the two groups started to write, another set of differences emerged. Deep inside the brains of expert writers, a region called the caudate nucleus became active. In the novices, the caudate nucleus was quiet.
The caudate nucleus is a familiar part of the brain for scientists like Dr. Lotze who study expertise. It plays an essential role in the skill that comes with practice, including activities like board games.

I wonder what the brains of bloggers would look like during this analysis in an  “fMRI scanner.”

BTW, I have no idea what I wrote in the first few paragraphs of this blog entry. I did sense more determined brain activity than results from blogging, which makes me wonder if my caudate nucleus perceives blogging as a practiced activity.
😉

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: Best Practices for Professional Learning Communities

Source: Print Article: Best Practices for Professional Learning Communities

MyNotes:

1. A PLC represents the institutionalization of a focus on continuous improvement in staff performance as well as student learning.
2. PLCs entail whole-staff involvement in a process of intensive reflection upon instructional practices and desired student benchmarks, as well as monitoring of outcomes to ensure success.
3. PLCs enable teachers to continually learn from one another via shared visioning and planning, as well as in-depth critical examination of what does and doesn’t work to enhance student achievement.
4. The focus of PLCs is ongoing “job-embedded learning,” emphasizing teacher leadership, active involvement and deep commitment to school improvement methods.
5. The process of intensive reflection and job-embedded includes six steps:
1. Study: Teachers work in collaborative planning teams to examine critically and discuss standards-based learning expectations for students.
2. Select: These teams select evidence-based instructional strategies for meeting the standards.
3. Plan: Teams develop a common lesson plan incorporating the selected strategies and identify the type of student work each teacher will use to demonstrate learning.
4. Implement: Teachers implement the planned lesson, record successes and challenges, and gather evidence of student learning.
5. Analyze: Teams review student work and discuss student understanding of the standards.
6. Adjust: Teams reflect on the implications of the analysis of student work and discuss potential modifications to instructional strategies.
6. The PLC approach:
1. takes 3 to 6 years to fully incorporate into a school’s routine practices.
2. Staff need to have time to meet during the work day throughout the year.
3. Staff need to focus efforts on essential questions about learning, generate products such as lists of key student outcomes, methods of assessment and strategies for meeting goals
7. PLCs work best when schools have:
1. A culture that supports collaboration [so how do you build that?]
1. Articulate a clear, specific, and compelling vision
2. Match tasks and role to staff members who are personally invested in them
3. Expand leadership roles
4. Make coordination easy through online tools
5. Ensure that the intended curriculum matches what teachers are actually teaching.
6. Educators must stop making excuses for failing to collaborate.
2. The ability to take an objective/macro view of school efforts; [whose view?]
1. External facilitator has to assess their way of operating as it relates to school improvement goals.
2. Helps bring school’s fragmented efforts into alignment at beginning of process.
3. Recognize leadership qualities of the principal and extent to which leadership is dispersed in the school and provide appropriate support
3. Shared beliefs and behaviors [whose beliefs?]
1. Failure, mistakes and uncertainty in work are openly shared and discussed
2. Colleagues agree on broad educational values, but accept disagreements that foster new dialogue
3. Administrators support “dispersed leadership” where teachers develop the confidence to select and adapt strategies that drive improvement
4. Relentless commitment to improvement
5. A view of improvement as a team effort for which everyone is responsible
6. An acknowledgement that teacher behavior is key to enhancing student learning;
7. A belief that knowledge is constructed from day-to-day experiences, along with the ability to share those experiences; and
8. A value placed on ongoing learning (continuous learning)

One Sentence Summary: The focus of PLCs is ongoing “job-embedded learning,” emphasizing teacher leadership, active involvement and deep commitment to school improvement methods dependent on schools that embrace a culture that supports collaboration, an objective view of their efforts, and share beliefs/behaviors.

Quotes:

• The focus of PLCs is ongoing “job-embedded learning,” rather than one-shot professional development sessions facilitated by outsiders, who have little accountability regarding whether staff learning is successfully applied.
• PLCs emphasize teacher leadership, along with their active involvement and deep commitment to school improvement efforts.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: Plan-Do-Study-Act Improvement Process

Source: (Print) Article on Plan-Do-Study-Act Improvement Process

Article: Plan-Do-Study-Act Improvement Process

MyNotes:

1. The Plan-Do-Study-Act approach provides a structure for improvement efforts.
2. This structure can be used to guide thinking and actions for improving any situation and may be used by teams or individuals.
3. Components include the following:
1. Component 1: Plan –
1. Select a core school improvement team
1. Identify key stakeholders
2. Identify individuals who support is critical to success of improvement
3. Include individuals with knowledge of the organization
4. Include individuals with knowledge of the improvement process
5. Develop a code of cooperation or group norms to guide behavior
2. Review and analyze all facets of the school’s operation
1. External trend data
2. Student achievement data for summative and formative assessments
3. Student outcome data (e.g. attendance, discipline, dropout rate)
4. Culture conditions and practices
5. Evaluate the effectiveness of improvement strategies implemented in prior years
3. Identify strengths
4. Identify deficiencies and determine root causes
1. Determine root causes
2. Identify driving and restraining causes of the situation
5. Formulate recommendations
6. Prioritize recommendations and set priorities for improving
7. Prepare a list of possible solutions for root causes and define potential impact.
8. Determine professional development needs
9. Identify research-based strategies
10. Develop or revise school strategic plan with 10 components:
1. School wide reform strategies
2. Instruction by highly qualified teachers
3. Parent involvement
4. Additional support for students
5. Monitoring and evaluation of the program
2. Component 2: DO
1. Execute and monitor the implementation of the plan
2. Provide professional development for admin and teachers to build capacity
3. Ensure the implementation of the plan
4. Facilitate ongoing support to the building/district staff members
5. Observe staff effectiveness in implementing the initiatives and research based strategies
6. Conduct classroom walkthroughs
7. Review benchmark and progress monitoring data for improvements in student achievement
8. Identify student/teacher intervention strategies based on formative assessment data
9. Identify additional recommendations as the school implements the plan
3. Component 3: STUDY
1. Analyze evidence of effectiveness-to what extent did we achieve our goals?
2. Review all revised school policies and practices for an impact on student achievement
3. Evaluate the effectiveness of the academic or behavioral intervention(s)
4. Report findings and recommendations to stakeholders
5. Determine recommendations for adjustments to strategic plan
6. Devise additional approach to providing needed technical assistance
4. Component 4: ACT
1. Develop and implement a plan for standardization and establish future plans.
2. Apply lessons from a small scale implementation to full implementation
3. Identify and document what was learned
4. Acknowledge and celebrate success
5. Revise the improvement plan based on what learned
6. Require ongoing monitoring and review
4. “Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance.”

One Sentence Summary: “Proper planning prevents poor performance” summarizes the Edward Demings’ Plan-Do-Study-Act approach, a scientific way of affecting organizational improvement.

Quotes:

• Take time to think, learn, and improve
• Remove barriers to motivation and improvement by encouraging leadership at all levels, teamwork and cooperation.
• Understand the system in which the group operates by seeking clarity of purpose establishing visions of excellence…viewing all work as a process.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: What is Action Research?

Source (print): What is Action Research?

Article shared in print with me. Here are my take-aways from the article.

Source: https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/proflearn/images/actreslg.gif Read more here

MyNotes:

1. Action research describes the integration of action (implementing a plan) with research (developing an understanding of the effectiveness of this implementation).
2. The central goal of action research is positive educational change.
3. Teachers use action research because it can provide immediate results, fosters stronger relationships among staff, and a fresh approach to examining one’s practice.
4. Action research cycle includes asking what if, trying that out in your classroom, observing what hapens, reflecting and then planning to re-use the strategy.
5. The four stages of action research include:
1. Planning
1. Identifying the issue to be changed.
2. Looking elsewhere for information.
3. Developing questions and research methods to be used
4. Developing a plan related to the specific environment (e.g. personnel, budgets, use of outside agencies).
2. Acting
1. Trial the change following your plan
2. Collecting and compiling evidence
3. Questioning the process and making changes as required
3. Observing
1. Analyzing the evidence, collating the findings
2. Discussing the findings with co-researchers and/or colleagues for the interpretation
3. Writing the report
4. Sharing your findings with stakeholders and peers
4. Reflecting
1. Evaluating the first cycle of the process
2. Implementing the findings or new strategy
3. Revisiting the process

One Sentence Summary:

Teachers use 4-stage action research process because it can provide immediate results in response to “What If?” question that innovate on practice, foster stronger relationships among staff, and enable a fresh approach to examining one’s practice.

Quotes:

• Action research is flexible, quick time frame, controls through triangulation
• Action research’s application of results has practical significance.
• Action research provides educators with alternative ways of viewing and approaching educational questions providing a new way of examining their own practices.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: Instructional Coaching #edtechcoach

Source: Instructional Coaching: A K-12 Professional Development Model to Support Implementation of Culturally Responsive Teaching dissertation by Suzanne Wattenbarger Burke, PhD (2010)

Keep up to date on #EdTechCoach topics with the Flipboard eZine:

Read it on your mobile device or via the Web

MyNotes

1. Instructional coaching is a job-embedded professional development model for teachers which is gaining increasing attention in K-12 educational settings (Bloom, Castagna, Moir, & Warren, 2005; Kise, 2006; Knight, 2007; Lindsey, Martinez, Lindsey, 2007; Showers, 1984; West & Staub, 2003)
2.  a culturally proficient coaching model focused on teachers being responsive to diverse populations of students, and they assert that “coaching and cultural proficiency are integrated sets of tools for guiding individuals and groups to meet cross-cultural issues as opportunities and assets rather than as challenges and deficits” (p. 4).
3.  One professional development model that may be considered a process is instructional coaching which is an intensive, ongoing, job-embedded professional development model that advocates propose to support the implementation of proven teaching methods (Bloom, Castagna, Moir, & Warren, 2005; Knight, 2007; Showers, 1984; West & Staub, 2003).
4.  Key components of Knight’s instructional coaching model include: (1) focus on professional practice, (2) job-embedded professional learning experiences, (3) intensive and ongoing support, (4) dialogical interaction, (5) nonevaluative support, (6) confidentiality, and (7) respectful communication (2007).
5. Knight (2007) further posits that in the description of the teacher-coach relationship, having strong communication skills (especially listening skills on the part of the coach), making emotional connections, and taking a partnership approach are key to the development of effective teacher-coach relationships.
6.   in a quantitative study investigating the relationship between student achievement and teacher efficacy, Ross (1992) suggests that coaching is a powerful strategy for school improvement
7. It has been further suggested by Glickman (1986) that the type of feedback teachers receive should be based on their cognitive levels which he identifies as low abstract, moderate-abstract, and high-abstract. Through these categories, Glickman suggests that 
1. teachers with a low-abstract cognitive style should receive directive conferences that identify problems and solutions – which come directly from the coach or supervisor. 
2. Teachers with moderate-abstract cognitive styles should receive collaborative conferences in which there is an exchange of perceptions about problems and solutions are negotiated. Finally, 
3. teachers with high-abstract cognitive styles should receive a nondirective approach wherein the coach assists the teacher in clarifying problems and choosing a course of action
8. Instructional coaches often have complex, multifaceted roles, and they often fill multiple roles simultaneously. Killion & Harrison (2006) suggest the following 10 roles of instructional coaches: (1) resource provider, (2) data coach, (3) instructional specialist, (4) curriculum specialist, (5) classroom supporter, (6) learning facilitator, (7) mentor, (8) school leader, (9) catalyst for change, and (10) learner.
9.  Coaching is conceptualized in varied ways and researchers have described several distinctive coaching approaches with unique goals and methods, e.g. peer coaching (Showers, 1984), classroom management coaching (Sprick, Knight, Reinke, 18 & McKale, 2006), content-focused coaching (West & Staub, 2003), and blended coaching (Bloom, Castagna, Moir, & Warren, 2005), challenge coaching (Garmston, 1987), cognitive coaching (Costa & Garmston, 2002), collegial coaching (Poglinco et al, 2003), and technical coaching (Poglinco et al, 2003).
10. “Instructional coaches partner with teachers to help them incorporate research-based instructional practices into their teaching so that students will learn more effectively” (Knight, 2009, p. 18)
11. Instructional coaching is an ongoing, job-embedded professional development model that advocates propose to support the implementation of proven teaching methods (Bloom, Castagna, Moir, & Warren, 2005; Knight, 2007; Showers, 1984; West & Staub, 2003). Contrary to centralized training and workshops that may be described as “one-shot” or “drive-by” professional development (Sleeter, 1997) through the instructional coaching model, coaches develop partnerships with individual teachers and teacher teams to examine teaching and learning in their classrooms with their students on their home campuses and coaches provide guidance to reach common goals (Knight & Cornett, 2008).
12.  In a year-long study of the impact of instructional coaching on student achievement, Reddell found that standardized test scores on the three campuses (two elementary and one middle school) in the study increased significantly.
13.  Describing the teacher-coach relationship, Knight further posits that 
1. strong communication skills (especially listening skills on the part of the coach), 
2. making emotional connections, and 
3. taking a partnership approach are key to the development of effective teacher-coach relationships. 
14. Additional components of the instructional coaching model include: 
1. focus on professional practice, 
2. job-embedded professional learning experiences, 
3. intensive and on-going support, 
4. dialogical interaction, 
5. nonevaluative support, confidentiality, and respectful communication (Knight, 2007)
15. Instructional coaches utilizing the core components of coaching – enroll, identify, explain, model, observe, explore, support and reflect – have the ability to provide professional learning opportunities for teachers in a job-embedded, campusbased model of professional development.
16.  her belief that: When I walk into a classroom my first thought is, before I open the door, is that this is the most well-intentioned teacher in the world and this teacher is coming into that classroom with years and years and years of her own beliefs and assumptions about how education should be.
17. Knight (2007) posits that instructional coaches must adopt a partnership approach built on the core principles of equality, choice, voice, dialogue, reflection, praxis, and reciprocity. It is further suggested that three key components of instructional coaching are (1) enroll – strategies for getting teachers on board, (2) identify – methods for finding the most appropriate teaching practices to share during instructional coaching, and (3) explain – tactics for insuring that teachers fully understand the materials shared with them (Knight, 2007).
18. Coaching model implementation:
1. First, the roles and responsibilities of the instructional coaches were defined conceptually but lacked specificity and further, the focus of the instructional coaches varied by department across the district. 
2. Second, when the work of the Curriculum Integration Specialists was amended to an Instructional Coaching model there was little systemic communication throughout the district regarding this change. 
3. Third, mobility (turn-over) of instructional coaches as well as district leaders adversely affected the implementation of an instructional coaching professional development model. 
4. Fourth, the district lacked a long-term strategic plan for professional learning opportunities to support the work of the instructional coaches 
19. District leaders must clearly define what the 140 roles and responsibilities are in practical settings – the day-to-day work – of the coaches
20. It is less imperative to identify the right framework as it is to thoughtfully, collaboratively, and systemically adopt a framework to provide structures for the instructional coaches to support deeper understandings of culturally responsive teaching
21. While there is strong evidence (Payne & Allen, 2006; Neufeld & Roper, 2003) that instructional coaching contributes to improved teaching and student learning, it should be noted that instructional coaching must also be accompanied by rigorous curriculum, on-going formative assessment and feedback for students, strategic planning, and strong leadership of local, state and national policy-makers if educators are to eliminate existing academic gaps in opportunities to learn between White students and students of color.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes: Technology Coach to Support Tech Integration

Keep up to date on #EdTechCoach topics with the Flipboard eZine:

Read it on your mobile device or via the Web

Authors: William Sugar, Patricia J. Slagter van Tryon

Source: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11528-014-0752-7

Abstract
In an effort to develop a virtual technology coach for K-12 educators, this article analyzed survey results from sixty teachers with regards to specific resources that a technology coach could provide within a virtual environment. A virtual technology coach was proposed as a possible solution to provide continual professional development for teachers to support their technology integration efforts. Results indicate that the Collaboration, Discussion, Learning, and Sharing resources of a virtual technology coach are considered valuable. This finding appears to corroborate the importance of developing a professional learning community to promote effective and sustained technology integration strategies among teachers. In addition, these virtual technology coaching attributes are identified in current education coaching (NETS*C) standards pointing to a potential support structure for schools and school districts implementing the NETS*C standards.

MyNotes

1. Finding corroborates the importance of developing a professional learning community to promote effective and sustained technology integration strategies among teachers.
2. Continual professional development as opposed to one-time workshops has been deemed more effective in supporting teachers’ ability to learn about new teaching strategies and facilitating a change in their classrooms.
3. Why a Virtual Technology Coach?
1. Many school districts are now implementing school-based coaches as a way to provide effective and continual professional development.
2. Coaches can help teachers incorporate new knowledge and skills into classroom practice both for the short-term and long-term.
3. With the goal of creating a shared vision among all teachers, an instructional coach facilitates and maintains a supportive environment within a school setting.
4. A coach creates a non-confrontational environment where teachers can share their thoughts, instructional best practices and learn from each other.
5. A coach is also an encourager who can help teachers to become more comfortable and motivated to learn about new instructional strategies
6. Including full-time, on-site technology coaches at a school significantly increased teachers’ confidence in integrating new technologies, as well as enhanced teachers’ new technology skills.
7. The tech coach essentially establishes and nurtures a professional learning community of teachers.
8. These learning communities enable their members to share ideas and resources among each other and to create a shared knowledge base of best practices and provide a “sense of collective accountability.”
9. Virtual communities of practices…learning in an environment where communication is mediated allows building a knowable social context where participants can experience dynamic interpersonal interactions that lead to successful group structure.
10. Establishment of an online presence is critical among virtual community members.

Be sure to listen to this podcast!

Alternate Link: Download & Listen to Podcast 
(Note: This is a Dropbox link to download MP3 Audio File; Size: 21megs ; Length: 60 mins)

In this podcast, we explore collegial coaching for technology integration with the Drs Dawn Wilson and Katie Alaniz, authors of a just published book available in print and ebook formats, Naturalizing Digital Immigrants.  You can find a link to the book in the show notes.

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes – Tech Implementation Study for Superintendents

The following notes come from the June 2014 School Administrator magazine which feature an abstract of a 2013 doctoral study by Dr. Sharon M. Biggs. You can find it on page 39 of School Administrator. The full doctoral study can be found online.

Some quick reflections:

1. I very much enjoyed Dr. Biggs’ literature review, and the points made about first-order and second-order change. As a Technology Director, first-order changes (technical in nature) appear the easiest place to show growth quickly. Second-order changes (changing teacher attitudes about blending technology into instruction) are the hard part.
2. Some of the important findings or conclusions included these,which I wholeheartedly agree with and I would encourage technology directors to apply to themselves, not just their superintendents (or help the super to “get it”):
1. Provide leadership based on technology plans.
2. Conduct frequent needs assessments to ensure currency and sustainability
3. Develop committees of stakeholders that can help with technology planning
4. the need for superintendents to be empathetic and understanding that systemic change can cause high levels of anxiety for some people, therefore, a portion of stakeholders will “get on the train kicking and fighting.” The superintendents agreed that they must still make hard decisions about technology implementation based on what is best for their students, despite knowing there might be pockets of staff and community members who oppose and try to sabotage plans for technology implementation. 
5. It is important for superintendents to take time to learn and understand the history, culture, and dynamics of their school districts before deploying technology plans. 

My Notes

1. 2013 doctoral study at Seton Hall University explored common barriers superintendents face that influence their district technology leadership.
2. The findings included the following:
1. lack of sufficient financial and technology resources
2. resistance by stakeholders to change their traditional and/or date district cultures and mindsets about integrating technology in 21st-century classrooms
3. The purpose of the study was to gain an understanding of superintendents’ beliefs about technology leadership barriers and about how superintendents engage in technology leadership practices.
4. Superintendents understand their critical technology leadership roles and they try to remain actively engaged and involved through-out the different phases of technology implementation.
3. The following notes come from the doctoral study itself:
1. The federal government provided a compelling argument about technology being an essential ingredient of economic growth and job creation (U.S. Department ofEducation, 2006). 
2. Some researchers believe superintendents are key driving forces behind the technological development of American students. Others argue that technologically developed students are essential if we want to have a technologically advanced America. 
3. Houston (2001, p. 429) explained that superintendents are aware they “can change the trajectory of children’s lives, alter the behavior of organizations, and expand the possibilities ofwhole communities.” This statement supports the idea that superintendents are considered the primary leaders of  transformational and adaptive (Heifetz, Grashow & Linsky, 2009) technological development within school districts. 
4. Gibson (2001, p. S02) said “the number one issue in the effective integration of educational technology into the learning environment is not the preparation of teachers for technology usage but the presence of informed and effective leadership ….
5. Valdez (2004) claims district leaders need to “know and utilize instructional technology … (1) to prepare students to function in an information-based, Internet-using society; (2) to make students competent in using tools found in almost all work areas; and (3) to make education more effective and efficient”
6. Abrams and Russell (2004) found that 93.4% of the principals they surveyed placed heavy importance on technology implementation, however, only 40.5% of the respondents indicated they were successfully implementing technology in their schools.
7. Despite the existence of potential technology leadership barriers, school leaders believe technology implementation is important, and they engage in efforts to effectively lead technology implementation in schools.
8. According to Ausband (2006, p. 16), there are district-level barriers that hinder technology integration, and those barriers can influence the technology leadership practices and behaviors of district superintendents.
9. The role of superintendents as instructional leaders is to inspire other district stakeholders to create a systemic shared vision for transformational technology implementation. This involves the consistent engagement with and communication about the integration and implementation processes. 
10. Superintendents should also form. collaborative strategic plans for developing student technology literacy since they are the key technology vision-setting leaders in districts. 
11. Superintendents are now required to posture themselves as student learning advocates at the local, state, and national levels to garner resources to help support technology implementation that can impact technology integration and usage in their districts (iste.org, 2012).
12. Instructional leaders must consistently promote technology-based professional learning communities to help improve instructional practices at the classroom level.
13. leaders should facilitate and participate in technology-driven learning communities and study groups, use digital tools to model effective communication and collaboration, stay current on educational research about new technologies, and be well versed regarding technology implementation benchmarks (iste.org, 2012). 
14. District leaders are expected to recruit, hire, and retain technologically literate and proficient staffs that effectively use technology resources and tools to advance the operational and academic vision and mission of the district.
15. there is an expectation American superintendents will provide district technology leadership that will help develop student technology literacy skills.
16. district superintendents must now remain actively engaged during the processes of technology access, implementation, integratio~ and literacy development so they can hold principals and teachers accountable at the building level (Lim & Khine, 2006)
17. Changing teachers’ attitudes and beliefs, and teachers’ knowledge and skills require second-order change efforts because the areas are reflective of ingrained cultural norms. 
18. Many of our administrators are novice technology users and have gained little experience or training in the knowledge and skills needed to be effective leaders. Even though administrators understand the importance of implementing and supporting technology use…the development of technology leadership skills seems to be left to chance.
19. School boards of education sometimes sign off on district technology spending before ensuring that superintendents fully understand the first-order change (infrastructure and hardware) and second-order change (shifts in mindsets, practices, and district cultures) implications the technology implementation and integration can have on an entire school system.
20. The superintendent’s own level of technology proficiency and beliefs about technology implementation can influence how effectively he or she overcomes first-order and second-order technology leadership barriers.
21. Superintendents must “identify their own technological skills and address their needs with training” (Braswell & Childress, 2001, pp. 473-474).
22. theory of”deliverology:”
1. Develop a foundation for delivery – 
1. a) Define an aspiration, which includes setting measurable goals; 
2. b) Review the current state ofdelivery, which involves conducting a needs assessment; 
3. c) Build the delivery unit, which fosters the idea of building the capacity of a group of implementation vanguards who will help push forward the implementation initiative, and 
4. d) Establish a guiding coalition that can remove barriers to change, influence and support the unit’s work at crucial moments, and provide counsel and advice; which involves developing a coalition ofdiverse stakeholders who will assist with the change effort
2. Understand the delivery challenge – 
1. a) Evaluate past and present performance, which involves bridging past practices with current target goals; and 
2. b) Understand drivers of performance and relevant systems activities, which includes helping stakeholders understand the impact of variables that can drive student learning.
3. Plan for delivery – 
1. a) Determine your reform strategy, which involves developing a collaborative and fluid strategic plan for implementation; 
2. b) Set targets and trajectories, which includes setting realistic and measurable success targets for different groups affected by the implementation, and 
3. c) Produce delivery plans, which entails developing plans that are works in progress
4. Drive delivery ­
1. a) Establish routines to drive and monitor performance, which includes clearly defining roles and responsibilities; 
2. b) Solve problems early and rigorously, when involves dealing with issues as soon as they occur, and 
3. c) Sustain and continually build momentum, which includes persisting through implementation and not getting side-tracked by barriers.
23. a superintendent’s embrace of a technology implementation initiative is not necessarily a guarantee that all other stakeholders within a district community will immediately or ever embrace the technology implementation initiative. 
24. Weick (1982) might say that superintendents who lead technology implementation initiatives stand the risk ofbeing ineffective ifthey attempt to treat school districts as “tightly coupled systems” where everyone acts upon an initiative the same way, at the same time, and from the same vantage point; similar to what one might see in a factory assembly line or departmentalized business (faylor, 1911). Thus, superintendents might need to accept the reality that school districts are loosely coupled as they attempt to overcome technology leadership barriers during implementation.
25. Superintendents as adaptive leaders must build bridges between existing ways of doing things and thinking (first-order change) and new required ways ofthin king and doing things (second-order change).
26. Superintendents might face first-order change and second-order change barriers that can interrupt well laid out intentions and plans for leading adaptive and sustainable technology initiatives. 
1. First-order changes tend to be of a technical nature and the keen adaptive leader should work toward bridging the gap between existing approaches and new approaches. 
2. Second­ order changes have to do with attitudes, beliefs, values, and cultural norms; and can present bigger challenges to the superintendent who is expected to lead adaptive technology implementation in a district.
27. superintendents who want to effectively lead second-order technology implementation changes should: 
1. (a) deliberately orchestrate ongoing collaborative conversations about the implementation process; 
2. (b) avoid relying on absolutes during the process and foster an environment of experimentation; 
3. (c) encourage the acceptance ofdiverse technology platforms, proficiency levels, values and opinions about technology; 
4. (d) stick with implementation plans that work and toss plans that peter out, and 
5. (e) recognize the association between technical problems and solutions and adaptive challenges and solutions, but be able to distinguish between the two.

---

View my Flipboard Magazine.

---

Make Donations via PayPal below:

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push([‘_setAccount’, ‘UA-3445626-5’]); _gaq.push([‘_setDomainName’, ‘mguhlin.org’]); _gaq.push([‘_trackPageview’]); (function() { var ga = document.createElement(‘script’); ga.type = ‘text/javascript’; ga.async = true; ga.src = (‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https://ssl’ : ‘http://www’) + ‘.google-analytics.com/ga.js’; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();

MyNotes – Quick Stats

Over the last few months, quite a few magazines have stacked up on my desk. I’m amazed at how little I read these free offerings from various organizations; most of my input comes from RSS feeds and web sites shared via Twitter, G+, etc.

Here are my take-aways from Scholastic Administrator’s Spring 2014 issue:

1. Law enforcement professionals make the case that an extra $75 billion spent over 10 years on early-childhood education could lead to 2 million additional high school graduates. The group notes that the country spends same amount each year to incarcerate 2 million prisoners. “Pay for quality early education and care now,” former LA sheriff Lee Baca says in the report, “or pay far more for the costs of crime in the decades to come.”
2. As of January 2013, teachers had access to the following technologies:
1. 90% personal computers or laptops
2. 59% interactive whiteboards
3. 36% handheld devices
4. 35% tablets and e-readers
3. Among teacher who use tablets, the following uss are cited as most beneficial:
1. 71% educ.apps
2. 64% educ web sites
3. 60% e-books and e-textbooks
4. Classroom cell phone use by students:
1. 35% of teachers of lower-income students say their school’s rules have major impact on their teacher compared with
2. 15% of those who teach students from the highest-income households
5. Flipped Learning white paper (June, 2013) shares the following:
1. 66% of teachers using flipped learning reported that their students’ standardized test scores increased after they flipped their classrooms.
2. 8 in 10 teachers reported an improvement in their students’ attitudes towards learning
3. 45% reported significant improvement in their own job satisfaction.
6. 88% of districts around the country offer some form of credit-recovery courses or programs, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

There’s lots of goodness in this issue but these are the points that jumped out at me.

---

View my Flipboard Magazine.

---

Make Donations via PayPal below:

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push([‘_setAccount’, ‘UA-3445626-5’]); _gaq.push([‘_setDomainName’, ‘mguhlin.org’]); _gaq.push([‘_trackPageview’]); (function() { var ga = document.createElement(‘script’); ga.type = ‘text/javascript’; ga.async = true; ga.src = (‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https://ssl’ : ‘http://www’) + ‘.google-analytics.com/ga.js’; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();

MyNotes – Instructor-Made Videos as a Learner Scaffolding Tool

Source for this post comes from:

Pan, G., Sen, S., Starrett, D., Rodgers, M., Tikoo, M., & Powell, D. (2010). The effectiveness of video component: An expanded follow-up investigation. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2010 (pp. 2067-2072). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education. Retrieved from Ed/ITLib Digital Library. (35857)

MyNotes:

Source: JOLT – Journal of Online Learning and Teaching

Instructor-Made Videos as a Learner Scaffolding Tool

1. instructor-made videos (IMVs) of three to 10 minutes in length on problematic topics or subject matter areas were produced for business, chemistry, and mathematics courses.
2. Initial findings revealed that multimodal IMVs involving the demonstration, illustration, and presentation of key terms, knowledge, skills, and resources can help students understand important procedures, structures, or mechanisms in previously problematic content. Simply stated, IMVs can have a positive impact on student learning.
3. 69% of Internet users and 52% of adults in the United States have watched or downloaded videos online (Purcell, 2010).
4. Videos would represent 50% of total data transfers on the Internet by 2012 (Madden, 2007).
5. Some professors use short YouTube videos to empower and motivate their students (Bonk, 2011).
6. 38% of adult Internet users watch educational videos online, and that number is expected to rise significantly (Purcell, 2010)
7. Video incorporates multimedia resources, including text, images, sound, and speech, that when integrated effectively, form a powerful teaching and learning tool.
8. When a student processes and later reprocesses information, each medium reinforces the others while adding to the authenticity and reality of the learning context (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989). As a result of their visual and auditory messages, videos extend learning to visual or episodic memory and help foster students’ dual coding of information (Bonk, 2011; Paivio, 1986)
9. Video is also believed to have a nurturing value for instruction and to serve as an effective way to motivate learners, maintain their attention, and provide learning satisfaction (Choi & Johnson, 2005, 2007; Koumi, 2006; Mackey & Ho, 2008).
10. Learners become active in the video learning environment, able to pause, stop, skip, and/or rewind sections to review problematic content until understanding is achieved. Stated another way, video delivery of content allows students to choose what to watch, when to watch, and where to watch.
11. By enabling students to access and make use of the course content at their own pace, the online initiatives transformed the role of the instructors from that of demonstrators to a facilitative role in which they assisted the students in just-in-time learning. As such, video is an ideal vehicle for self-paced and self-directed learning. Hartsell and Yuen (2006), in fact, argue that learner control is the main advantage of incorporating streamed videos into distance learning courses.
12. online courses emphasize just-in-time learning and a customer-oriented approach by assisting students in better organizing and managing knowledge (Keengwe & Kidd, 2010; Mason, 2001; Hall, 2000)
13. Easy availability of online learning materials through portable devices like laptops, iPads, or iPods enables just-in-time learning for modern day students that often have to study in between work breaks or during commutes (Evan, 2008).
14. Videos are believed to capture a student’s attention more effectively than other media.
15. beneficial aspects of videos also include attention-grabbing moving images, easy and repeated access to content, and the capability of modeling different ways to explain the same content (Branigan, 2005; Rose, 2009).
16. Hove and Corcoran (2008) reported that students with unlimited access to video capture of lectures performed significantly better than those without such access.
17. In a study on streaming video of captured lectures, Veeramani and Bradley (2008) found that 82% of more than 7,000 students preferred courses with an online lecture option because the captured lectures were deemed either “very important” or “somewhat important” for improving the retention of class content (78%) and improving their test scores (76%).
18. A key problem is that streamed videos used for teaching and learning are often 40 minutes or longer.
19. Poorly designed videos may not align well with course objectives or explicitly delineate key course concepts and principles (Williams, 2007).
20. videos produced on educational budgets rarely approximate the quality that students are accustomed to viewing on television or in motion pictures.
21. IMVs are videos that offer introductions to the instructor and other aspects of the course. In an IMV, the instructor might discuss weekly topics, detail course assignments, highlight aspects of the syllabus, offer test reviews, address discussion forum questions, or model difficult procedures and skills (Rose, 2009).
22. IMVs are brief and concise, typically less than 10 minutes in length.
23. What makes IMVs stand out is their scaffolding role – addressing those concepts that are the most difficult and typically cannot be resolved independently when students first encounter them.
24. Scaffolding is a supporting structure, base, or outline for learning. It is the “process through which learning efforts are supported” (Hannafin, Land, & Oliver, 1999, p. 131) by various means.
25. “conceptual scaffolding” can be provided to help learners identify key conceptual knowledge related to a problem.
26. With conceptual scaffolding, students may find that some tools are recommended for addressing the problem at a particular time.
27. The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury (video) series produced by John Bransford and the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV, 1990, 1991) was an early attempt to use videos as scaffolding tools. In the Jasper Woodbury series, students were provided with multiple opportunities to solve complex mathematical problems as well as communicate their thinking strategies and findings. Controllable variables (also called “crucial factors”) were embedded in the series for students to reflect on and change (Chen & Hung, 2002). By solving these problems, students learned to manipulate the variables, observed how each variable interacted with the others, and gained an understanding of the relationships between the variables and outcomes (Chen & Hung, 2002). Student learning was facilitated through the process of scaffolding where the students’ control of the number of variables was “systematically reduced in order to increase the complexity” and, consequently, student problem-solving capability (Chen & Hung, 2002, p. 151). To foster interdisciplinary thinking and more richly connected learning, students in the Jasper Woodbury project were also encouraged to make connections to other content areas and domains such as science, social studies, literature, and history (Vanderbilt University Peabody College, 1992).
28. Bonk (2011) used short YouTube videos in his courses to present behavioral concepts, motivation, cognitive theory, and other related course concepts. Situating learning in context, modeling certain skills and procedures, and accompanying instruction with visual and auditory messages, he found that web-based videos enable instructors and students to “personalize learning and make ideas come to life” (p. 153)
29. online videos represent helpful interactions between novice students and a more capable other. In effect, they provide the “process through which learning efforts are supported” (Hannafin et al., 1999, p. 131). As a result of such scaffolded support, students become capable of doing something beyond their independent efforts (CTGV, 1992).
30. IMVs appeared to play a highly positive role in terms of scaffolding student learning as well as instructor reflection on their own pedagogical practices. IMVs enabled students to see and hear their instructors. Such direct connections immediately bridged the gap that exists between students and their instructors in many online courses.
31. The instructors’ demonstration, illustration, and presentation in the IMVs consisted of key terms, knowledge, skills, and resources that helped reveal related procedures, structures, or mechanisms for coping with and resolving problematic cases that the students encountered.
32. more students were able to grasp content that previously was beyond their reach.
33. Not too surprisingly, such just-in-time learning support was highly valued and long remembered. Learner emotions (i.e., high degree of satisfaction) and cognitions (i.e., enhanced conceptual learning) were intertwined. Stated another way, affect was tied to cognition. This is also in line with the findings of Evan’s (2008) study, wherein students valued the flexibility available from the podcasts, which enabled them to study whenever and wherever they wanted.
34. The students might not have known what scaffolding meant, but their testimonials revealed deep appreciation for it. In fact, many stated that the instructor demonstrations, illustrations, and presentations in the IMVs offered “more clarification and in-depth information” about the topics and subject matter areas in question. In addition, these videos “added to the mix” of resources in their learning environment and helped them to “learn things that [they] might be confused about.” As a result, with timely scaffolding from the IMVs, students were able to complete labs and comprehend readings that might otherwise have seemed impossible.
35. The findings show that the length of IMVs was not a decisive factor in student satisfaction. In contrast to expectations arising from the pilot study, whose findings suggest videos of 10 minutes or less are ideal, short videos were not necessarily the most popular. The responses from students show that sometimes it took longer than 10 minutes to clearly present an idea. When the concepts were clear, many of the students did not mind how long it took. Yet, it is always recommended to effectively portray an idea within the student’s attention span.

---

Check out Miguel’s Workshop Materials online at http://mglearns.wikispaces.com

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push([‘_setAccount’, ‘UA-3445626-5’]); _gaq.push([‘_setDomainName’, ‘mguhlin.org’]); _gaq.push([‘_trackPageview’]); (function() { var ga = document.createElement(‘script’); ga.type = ‘text/javascript’; ga.async = true; ga.src = (‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https://ssl’ : ‘http://www’) + ‘.google-analytics.com/ga.js’; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();

Research on Blogs and Perception

This 2006 research study seeks to explore the K-12 use of blogs by teachers. Research question for the study, What are the perceptions and activities of K-12 teacher bloggers concerning the usefulness of Weblogs? In particular the researchers sought to examine the usefulness of blogs in supportive reflective practice.

Research study–available online–is entitled Teacher-created, Teacher-centered Weblogs: Perceptions and practices by Beverly B. Ray and Martha M. Hocutt. It appears in the Fall 2006 issue of Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, pg 11.

My take-aways from this article:

1. Blogging promotes critical literacy skills, including reading, writing, self-expression, reflection and creativity (Huffaker, 2004).
2. Oravec’s (2004) work supports these assertions. “Similar to an open journal, the accumulation of writings and other content [published in a blog] creates both a record of learning and a resource for others” to use (Campbell, 2003).
3. Through the use of blogs, journaling has re-emerged as a way to promote writing skills.
4. Written reflection…is an effective method of thinking about practice. Blogs are especially effective at supporting…reflection…more so than other technologies would be.”
5. Weblogs can provide an electronic forum for reading, writing, and collaborating with peers, and others.
6. Students and instructors can use blogs to cultivate ideas and share them online with colleagues and others.
7. Blogs can give users a sense of connection with their peers.
8. Blogs provide a means of delivering course content including syllabi, assignments, links and other updates as necessary.
9. Blogging supports reflective practice.
10. Blogging provides an opportunity to record experiences, reflect…and organize.
11. Findings indicate that teacher-created, teacher-centered weblogs can be effective reflective devices. For most participants, blogs functioned as reflective journals where theycould write about and reflect on events occurring in their classroom. Blogs are used not only to think about teaching practice but also to assess the teachers’ own performance as teachers.
12. Reflection is importance since expert teachers engage in continuous reflection about the effectiveness of their work.
13. Blogs are especially effective at supporting…reflection…more so than other technologies would be.
14. Blogs enable teachers to establish communities of practice that support one another’s work. This kind of collaborative interaction among peers can promote enhanced understanding of complex situations.
15. Blogs allow for individual expression and ownership, even as they promote collaboration between educators.
16. Future research suggestions include the use of weblogs with preservice teachers.

---

Check out Miguel’s Workshop Materials online at http://mglearns.wikispaces.com

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push([‘_setAccount’, ‘UA-3445626-5’]); _gaq.push([‘_setDomainName’, ‘mguhlin.org’]); _gaq.push([‘_trackPageview’]); (function() { var ga = document.createElement(‘script’); ga.type = ‘text/javascript’; ga.async = true; ga.src = (‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https://ssl’ : ‘http://www’) + ‘.google-analytics.com/ga.js’; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();

Does HS Prepare Students for College? Help a College Student Do Some Research @arguhlin

Would you help a college student do some research? Read below….

I’m a college student at the University of San Diego who’s conducting a survey for a project that revolves around high school and college students. My goal is to see if high school properly trains students for college life and if college prepares students for post-graduation life. By getting feedback from these surveys, I hope to better understand how students feel during each step of the education process. The goal would be find and address any needs that are currently not being met. On top of this, there are also survey for parents of students in high school/just entering college and a survey for students who have already graduated from college and are transitioning into adult life.
The surveys are short and simple, they also require no personal information. I was wondering if you could post the links to the surveys on your blog so that I could get some most results (I’m about half way done currently). I’ve actually learned some interesting things so far, for example, parents find their children to be very prepared for college; however, many students comment on how they were unprepared for the challenge of living alone and managing their time the first year away from home.
Thank you for the time and consideration.
The links to the surveys can be found below:
High School Student Poll: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NB7DLWPCollege Student Poll: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XFDZPNGPost-Graduation Poll: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ZQD292SParents’ Poll: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NTKDMXK
Thanks again,
Safa

---

Check out Miguel’s Workshop Materials online at http://mglearns.wikispaces.com

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push([‘_setAccount’, ‘UA-3445626-5’]); _gaq.push([‘_setDomainName’, ‘mguhlin.org’]); _gaq.push([‘_trackPageview’]); (function() { var ga = document.createElement(‘script’); ga.type = ‘text/javascript’; ga.async = true; ga.src = (‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https://ssl’ : ‘http://www’) + ‘.google-analytics.com/ga.js’; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();

Riddle Me This – Mobile Device Survey Questions #iPaded @tceaadvocacy

A teacher just called me and asked if we had any surveys related to the use of tablet implementation.

These are the two things she is trying to gather information on:

1. A survey that would ascertain the comfort and skill level of the teachers relative to the use of mobile devices in the classrooms.

2. An instrument that would help evaluate the use of mobile devices in the classroom.
Source: Jennifer Bergland, TCEA TEC-SIG Group Post

Hmm…what an interesting question. The first set of questions focuses on the comfort and skill level of teachers relative to the use of mobile devices in the classroom. So…

Question #1. What kinds of questions would you ask that ascertain the comfort and skill level of a technology (e.g. whatever that may be) in the classroom?

1. Do you have a mobile device? (Yes No)
2. What kind(s) of mobile device(s) do you have? (Check all that you have)
1. Tablet- iPad WiFi
2. Tablet – iPad 3G/WiFi
3. Tablet – Android WiFi
4. Tablet – Android 3G/WiFi
5. Smartphone – Android
6. Smartphone – iPhone
7. Smartphone – Blackberry
8. Netbook – Windows
9. Netbook – Macbook Air
10. Netbook – Linux
11. Laptop – Apple Macbook OS X.6 or greater
12. Laptop – Windows 7 or 8
13. Laptop – Linux
3. Do you feel comfortable using a mobile device? (Yes Somewhat Neutral Not really No)
4. Currently, how many times per week do you use a mobile device–such as a smartphone or tablet–to accomplish the following:
• ___ Take pictures
• ___ Record video
• ___ Share pictures/video via Flickr, Picasaweb or via email
• ___ Read and respond to email
• ___ Read and update social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter)
• ___ Get directions to and from a location via GPS
• ___ Read/send text messages
• ___Contact your work supervisor about work-related topics
• ___Collaborate with co-workers about work-related topics
• ___Do research that is work related.
5. As a classroom teacher, do you use a mobile device to help you in your current job? (Yes No)
6. Will learning how to use your mobile device in the classroom (with students) help you get a higher-paying job? (Yes No)
7. How many times per week do you plan or think you will use a mobile device in your classroom?
• 0 days
• 1-2 days
• 3-4 days
• 5-6 days
• 7 days

Ok, obviously, those questions could be improved upon. I’ve adapted them from a Summer, 2006: Volume 38 Number 4 ISTE article (it’s in PDF and will download). What’s ironic is that we’re asking questions about comfort level of teachers, questions that are still very similar to the ones we could have asked about using older technologies. Somehow, we need to get past this need for comfort level attainment and realize that comfort comes with constant use and practice over time…not PRIOR to the implementation of a new technology.

Mobile devices: student survey results from AnnaMlearn

Question #2 – How would you assess the use of mobile devices in the classroom?

This is a bit tougher question to get at because it depends a lot on factors that have nothing to do with the technology. That’s why I like the classroom learning activity rubric. Let’s take a look at it and ask some questions.

1. Is your use of student-owned, or school-owned, mobile devices consistent with higher levels of use as described by the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy?
   (Yes Somewhat Neutral Not really No)
2. Do you employ cooperative groups to maximize the use of mobile devices for instructional purposes?
   (Yes Somewhat Neutral Not really No)
3. What percentage of time would you ascribe to mobile device use by your students in the classroom?
1. ____ Creating content (e.g. photos, videos, text documents or multimedia)
2. ____ Polls and active data collection in the classroom in response to student or teacher created surveys
3. ____ Research that focuses on Internet-based reference materials and/or primary data access
4. What percentage of the time are students able to choose what products they make with mobile devices? (<=20% <=50% <=80% <=100%)
5. Is knowledge of apps and what they can produce considered by you and/or by students prior to engaging in a classroom learning activity?
6. Are students engaged in the use of mobile devices to accomplish learning that would be impossible without the use of those devices? (Yes No)

For fun, those are 6 questions. I’m sure that the whole instrument probably wouldn’t live up to a test for reliability or validity, but hey, this is a blog, not a peer-reviewed publication.

Speaking of which, has anyone seen that kind of instrument that original teacher who kicked off this blog post in one of those rarified journals no one reads anymore down in the trenches?
😉

---

---

Sign up for the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education Email List

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push([‘_setAccount’, ‘UA-3445626-5’]); _gaq.push([‘_setDomainName’, ‘mguhlin.org’]); _gaq.push([‘_trackPageview’]); (function() { var ga = document.createElement(‘script’); ga.type = ‘text/javascript’; ga.async = true; ga.src = (‘https:’ == document.location.protocol ? ‘https://ssl&#8217; : ‘http://www&#8217;) + ‘.google-analytics.com/ga.js’; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s); })();

MyNotes – College Rape

Since I have a daughter entering college, this blog entry on Sexual Assault on College Campus caught my attention.

Here is what I sent my daughter to read:

You need to read this:

http://drwilda.wordpress.com/2012/04/21/sexual-assault-on-college-campuses/

Based on the research, avoid the following:

1. Men that drink alcohol
2. Drinking alcohol while on a date
3. Leaving any drink or food unattended
4. 60% of the guys you meet
5. Fraternity boys

Quick facts:

• College women are most vulnerable to rape during the first few weeks of the freshman and sophomore years.
• 90% of all campus rapes occur under the influence of alcohol.
• Men are more likely than women to assume that a woman who drinks alcohol on a date is a willing sex partner. 40% of men who think this way also believe it is acceptable to force sex on an intoxicated woman.
• Alcohol use at the time of the attack was found to be one of the four strongest predictors of a college woman being raped.
• Almost 60% of the completed campus rapes that take place on campus occur in the victim’s residence

Where’s that order form for mace, krav maga, personal bodyguards?

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

Podcasts for Education Leaders

Listen online at http://goo.gl/gDG80

Looking for some engaging, wittily fun podcasts about professional learning communities, educational technology, etc.? Consider this series from veteran podcasters, Dr. Carolyn Crawford and Dr. Richard Smith from the University of Houston at Clear Lake.

Caroline Crawford and I just did a set of podcasts for our series Technology and Education Today (http://prtl.uhcl.edu/portal/page/portal/SOE/Programs/Instructional_Technology_MS/Podcasts)
that covered the recent SITE Conference and the SXSWedu conference both held at the same time in Austin, two weeks ago.  Actually, the podcasts are pretty informative.

SUBSCRIBE TO PODCAST IN iTUNES: 

Use the following URL to download Technology and Education Today to your MP3 player. This URL maybe used with iTunes or iPodder.
http://inst.uhcl.edu/podcast

Below is a list of topics relevant to education:

Instructional Technology and its Application in the Country of Tunisia (3/5/2012) – Grand Valley State University graduate student Ahmed Lachheb describes, to hosts Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford, his outlook on how instructional technology can be implemented in Tunisia in order to facilitate education. Recorded live during the 2012 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference in Austin, Texas.

Helping Parents to Understand How Their Children are Doing in School (3/6/2012) Hosts Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford speak with Clyde Boyer the cofounder of Trinity Education Group regarding helping parents to get a better grasp on what their children are doing in school. Recorded live during the 2012 SXSWedu Conference in Austin, Texas this podcast also describes LaunchEDU, a new way in which companies can be aligned with investors.

Professional Learning Communities for Education Leaders (3/6/2012) Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford meet with Ken Kay, the Chief Executive Officer of EdLeader 21 and discuss the importance of developing and utilizing professional learning communities for leaders in education. Recorded live during the 2012 SXSWEDU Conference in Austin, Texas.

Innovative Science Curriculum (3/6/2012) Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford discuss a novel video enhanced supplemental science curriculum with the CEO of Exploration Nation, Pete Monfre. Recorded live during the 2012 SXSWEDU Conference in Austin, Texas.

Increasing Teacher Effectiveness (3/7/2012) Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford meet with Raluca Sirbu, Lead Member of the Technical Staff at AT&T to discuss ways that teacher effectiveness can be improved. Recorded live during the 2012 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference in Austin, Texas.

Structuring a Study Abroad Experience for University Students (3/7/2012) Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford speak with Roberta K. Weber, Associate Professor at Florida Atlantic University regarding structuring a meaningful educational study abroad experience for university students. Recorded live during the 2012 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference in Austin, Texas.

The SXSWedu Conference (3/6/2012) Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford discuss the SXSWedu conference with the conference’s Executive Producer, Ron Reed. Held in Austin, Texas and in its second year, this conference is a unique blend of authoritative speakers and knowledgeable attendees who share innovative ideas and projects in a relaxed atmosphere. Recorded live during the 2012 SXSWEDU Conference in Austin, Texas.

The Consistency Management & Cooperative Discipline Project (2/21/2012) Richard A. Smith and Caroline M. Crawford interview Dr. H. Jerome Freiberg, the originator of a unique systematic method of instruction that ensures maximum participation of students, teachers, and parents in the educational process while also producing increases in student academic achievement.

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes – Crowdsourcing Higher Education

Source: http://www.geekologie.com/2012/03/16/ant-photography-7.jpg

MyNotes:

JOLT – Journal of Online Learning and Teaching

• Crowdsourcing Higher Education: A Design Proposal for Distributed Learning 

• by Michael Anderson,  Director of Online Learning University of Texas at San Antonio San Antonio, TX USA Michael.Anderson1@utsa.edu

• Texas ranks 35th in the nation for graduation within six years (Austin American-Statesman, 2010, July 13).
• the cost of public higher education has risen even faster than the cost of healthcare (Langfitt, 1990). Increased costs have primarily impacted the pocketbooks of students as public appropriations for universities over the last decade have declined an average of 5.6% annually adjusted for inflation (Southern Regional Education Board, 2010). Private universities are not significantly better off.
• The combination of rising costs and perceived low performance is reflected in the public’s lack of confidence in higher education to deliver a worthwhile service (Texas Public Policy Foundation, December 6, 2010).
• While the path of instructional technology is littered with the unfulfilled promises of all-encompassing answers, a possible solution is emerging. The growing availability of low-cost computer networks, capable of linking novices and experts in social and contextual environments, reduces the inherent friction of production and elaboration in higher education. Learners no longer need travel to Cambridge to take a media literacy course from Henry Jenkins; they can watch his lecture on an iPhone™ or friend him on Facebook™ and chat about the utility of social networks. Using networks for distributed learning can solve the efficiency challenge if the academy can embed that learning in effective instruction.
• Effective instruction requires constant adjustment to the learner, reinforcing mastered concepts and holding out new concepts that are barely able to be mastered by the learner at that point in his or her concept knowledge trajectory. Computers can constantly evaluate and adjust to inputs in an efficient manner, providing personalized instruction. Computers can also track performance at a granular level and match learners with experts on the basis of fine-grained competencies for the purpose of targeted mentoring. Embedding these metrics within a networked environment facilitates the computer’s information management capabilities across multiple characteristics of learning interactions and within a computer-mediated socialized network. However, humans can better interpret a lack of understanding of the intermediate steps in a problem-solving process, and humans can offer complementary explanations easily adjusted based on feedback. Digital capture of these explanations can be archived for use by other students, and the quality of those digital artifacts can be verified by the performance of the student consumers, resulting in a collection of diverse and proven solutions.
• Crowdsourcing views humans as processing units which can be integrated with computer processors to draw on the unique strengths of each (Alonso, 2011). Crowdsourcing is not a group of people performing a task typically performed by an individual, but rather an approach that leverages the individual strengths of human and machine processing.
• Brabham (2008) argues that crowdsourcing offers a solution to complex problems that require both types of computing: human and machine, interpreting and manipulating.
• Surowiecki (2004) maintains that crowdsourcing “wisdom” requires independent, decentralized answers with cognitive variety, properties that are characteristic of a collection of solutions created and rated by individuals.
• It’s 10 pm, and Will is working on his assigned Chemistry 101 homework. He logs into his personal learning system (PLS), and the Chemistry course menu shows he left off his last session at “Balancing Equations” so he decides to tackle that topic this evening. The PLS assigns random problems from the “balancing” topic, and Will works a couple of problems correctly, then misses a couple. After working on the problem set and failing to correctly answer four consecutive questions, the PLS soon offers him the choice of watching a video or talking with another student. Will watches the video, but when he tries the problem set again, he is still unable to correctly answer four problems in a row and decides he needs to talk with someone. The system matches him randomly with Miguel, another Chemistry 101 student who is online and who has already mastered the topic. The system launches a semi-private (first names only) voice-enabled whiteboard with the last problem Will missed on the screen. Miguel talks Will through the problem and offers hints on how he (Miguel) approaches the “balancing” topic, in this case, by starting with the atom with the largest coefficient.
• If Miguel’s solution engenders Will’s success, Miguel is credited with a point on the Chemistry leader board. If Miguel accumulates enough points, he may be offered a teaching assistant job next year. Miguel’s and Will’s video session was recorded and added to the library of videos for the “balancing” topic and awarded a point if it was successful. Over time, if other students are similarly successful with the “balancing” topic after watching Miguel’s and Will’s video, the session will be publicly recognized as an effective instructional segment for the topic and will rise to the top of recommended content objects for that topic.
• Vygotsky determined that learning occurs primarily through social mechanisms. Wertsch & Sohmer (1995) trace two additional themes from Vygotsky’s work: the requirement of a coach (or “more knowledgeable other”) and the identification that learning occurs in the “zone of proximal development,” the region between the learner’s ability to perform a task under the guidance of a coach and the learner’s ability to solve the problem independently.
• Lave & Wenger (1990) added the role of environment by showing that learning occurs in contextual situations, evolving from “legitimate peripheral participation” to full participation in an authentic community of practice.
• John Seely Brown (1989) extended situated learning to emphasize the role of cognitive apprenticeship.
• The crowdsourced PLS is based on social learning experiences embedded in an authentic “just in time” community of learning: the online mentor provides apprenticeship, and the dynamic menu continues to increase the depth of the topic to the level needed by each student individually (for example, an Engineering major needs more depth in Calculus than a Journalism major).
• a distributed learning network. An online system that combines the motivation of personal goal achievement with the socialization aspects of peer mentoring offers an effective solution.
• Distributed work teams and community evaluation and guidance have emerged as accepted methods for solving problems over geographical distances (Resta & Laferrière, 2007).
• open educational resources provide course materials for direct access and reuse. Learners are encouraged to utilize and in some cases, modify and share improvements in a content collaboration similar to Wikipedia.
• Extending the open content model, the University of Manitoba offered an open online course in 2008 which enrolled more than 2,300 students (Fini, 2009). The PLS solutions library functions as an open resource, at least for that class at a specific institution, with diverse content which can be directed to students on the basis of demographic data, learning patterns, and other performance metrics captured and indexed by the crowdsourced PLS.
• Jenkins (2006) argues that students are digital residents who live in a participatory age. Participation in the content construction aspect of learning environments is often characterized by the use of blogs or discussion boards that ask student to analyze and summarize core readings in a discipline and encourage (or require) peer responses to those posts. The pedagogical affordance of analysis by each student reduces faculty member workload by shifting the responsibility for knowledge acquisition to each individual learner. The formalization of blogs and other student-created content is realized in the advent of student portfolios.
• The crowdsourced PLS situates students directly in the learning environment at the moment of need and relies on human communication to interpret complex problems. Faculty workload is reduced through the engagement of external mentors (in real-time or as a content resource from the stored sessions) who fill the role traditionally assigned to discussion leaders. Situating these communications in virtual environments, whether fictional (Liu, 2006) or real (Doering, Scharber, Miller, & Veletsianos, 2009), provides intrinsic motivation for learners to remain personally engaged.
• Table 1. Instructional Design Approaches Approach Advantages for learners System disadvantages Collaborative projects Socialization within group Potential for no individual accountability Supplemental Instruction (SI) Socialization within group Content placed in immediate problem context User-initiated (not embedded) Open Educational Resources (OER) Socialization within group User control Lack of personal direction Public content Opportunity for reflection Motivation from participation Absence of assessment and feedback Peer assessment Motivation from participation Possible system manipulation Problem-Based Learning (PBL) Motivation from participation Socialization within group Content placed in immediate problem context Requires external experts Serious games Motivation from participation Socialization within group Content placed in immediate problem context Intrinsic motivation for learners and mentors Expensive to develop
• students must accept communal responsibility and provide mentoring in a quid pro quo environment where payment is non-material. Empowered by proven techniques in social learning design and crowdsourcing, these new responsibilities promise more effective and efficient learning outcomes.
• This work is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share-Alike License

Source: http://en.www.lensart.ru/album-uid-210a-aid-456b-sh-2.htm

Saying Goodbye?

It was a bit shocking to see 250 Dallas ISD teachers notified they wouldn’t have jobs. You may remember that Dallas ISD also eliminated it’s entire Instructional Technology Department in one fell swoop as well as others recently.

When you see what’s happening in schools, it’s easy to imagine that the general malaise and anger is being directed at teachers. “Why should anyone be happy, goes the thinking of Jon Everyman, if I’m not happy? If I can’t hold a steady job, neither should my children’s teachers! They’re too happy anyways when they greet me at the classroom door in the morning!“

As cited by Anthony Cody at EdWeek Blog here (A Million Teachers Prepare to March Out of the Classroom Door), poor conditions at work align with teacher job satisfaction.

The Metlife survey report aligns these conditions with teachers’ job satisfaction, and the likelihood they will leave the profession:

This decline in teacher satisfaction is coupled with large increases in the number of teachers who indicate that they are likely to leave teaching for another occupation and in the number who do not feel their jobs are secure….teachers with low job satisfaction are more likely to teach in urban schools and in schools with larger proportions of minority students. Teachers with low job satisfaction are more likely than others to teach in urban schools (32% of teachers with low job satisfaction teach in urban schools, compared to 25% of teachers with low job satisfaction). Teachers with low job satisfaction are also more likely to teach in schools with more than two-thirds minority students (40% vs. 28%).

Likelihood to leave the profession shows a similar pattern in demographic characteristics as job satisfaction.

I suppose school districts aren’t waiting for teachers to leave…they are dismissing them ahead of time. What terrible price Texas will pay for this ideological stance that is destroying the very fabric, or infrastructure, of schools. Will we be able to rebuild them, or will those that leave walk away angry, bitter, and refusing to return?

View more videos at: http://nbcdfw.com.

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

The Power of #OER – Finding Sources of Research #Free Online

A few weeks ago, a colleague working on district technology planning from another District sent me the following request for research matching the use of educational technology in the following areas:

1. Policy and procedure development as it relates to technology
2. Professional Development (includes campus tech mentors)
3. Administrative support, awareness, and accountability
4. Infrastructure
5. Change in teacher instructional methods

Wow, what a great set of questions to have to answer. At the time, I was engaged in a variety of different projects for work and home, so I couldn’t spend the time to respond. However, it occurred to me later that finding research on the Web has never been easier.

I still remember the time I had to find research on integrated learning systems (ILS)…there wasn’t hardly anything online to refer to when searching with a search engine. Instead, I found myself digging through Gale Resource databases that gave me access to peer-reviewed, education related research.

Find out more about OER

Since then, we’ve sent a wide variety of research sources appear that fall into the category of open educational resources (OER)…a little more about what OER is:

Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching and learning materials that are freely available online for anyone to use, whether you are an instructor, student, or self-learner. OER can exist as smaller, stand-alone resources that can be mixed and combined to form larger pieces of content, or as larger course modules or full courses.
OER is also a process of engaging with the materials. This process involves sharing materials that you have created, either individually or in groups with other teachers and/or learners; using and adapting others’ materials for your own use; and sharing back modifications to or comments about others’ materials so that future users can benefit. In this course, when we use the term OER, we are talking about the process of engaging with the materials.

You can also find research about OER.

Although I’m not completely sure if they are the same thing–I’m a lowly practitioner, not an Ivory Tower academic–there are many open access journals that can provide research. You can find a list online, and as well as in the Directory of OpenAccess Journals. A few that I visit often include the following:

1. JOLT – Journal of Online Learning and Teaching
2. EPAA – Education Policy Analysis Archives

And, realizing that’s entirely too few, here are some more…

• JiTP – The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy
• Education Next
• Education Online
• Education Review
• International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership

In terms of matching research to the points in my colleague’s list, hmm…uh, not in this blog entry!

😉

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes – Social Media Use in Higher Education

In an earlier blog entry, Being Ethical and Using the Social Network, I took a stab at responding to Harold Jarche’s question. This evening, I remembered that the Journal of Online Learning and Teaching (JOLT) might have some relevant research, and, sure enough, stumbled on some in my first try to locate it.

For me, some of the “money” quotes include the following:

• On the subject of using social media, “he [Alexander] also challenged the community to look at how higher education faculty currently put forward “a complex, contradictory mix of openness and restriction, public engagement and cloistering”. This seems directly relevant to the points Harold Jarche was making in his blog entry, as well as previous entries about “cloistering” or using free software to establish open, not for profit areas to share ideas and learning.
• “Further complicating the ownership question is the fact that these new creations are often hosted on servers and services owned by for-profit companies. 
• Most users of these services are not aware that the providers of these free tools may claim ownership of the work created and residing on their servers”
• Should faculty ask or require students to use public systems that gather preference data on users, which the sites then sell to other companies as valuable targeted marketing data? Facebook has repeatedly made news headlines about privacy issues and access to user profiles. Lately, the concern has been third party applications misusing information without users even knowing that their information is being made available (Young, 2008). But perhaps this new Google-infused culture renders the privacy issue moot, as Google appears to be the search engine of choice and has long been mining user emails and search histories without widespread dissent. If nothing else, faculty can use these issues as teaching topics that aim to enhance students’ media literacy.

You can read other relevant points below, as well as read the entire study yourself.

MyNotes:

JOLT – Journal of Online Learning and Teaching

• MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching
• Vol. 7, No.4, December 2011
• Social Media Use in Higher Education: Key Areas to Consider for Educators Julia E. Rodriguez Assistant Professor Information Literacy and Educational Technology Librarian Oakland University Rochester, MI 48309 USA juliar@oakland.edu
• The ubiquitous term “social media” has become inherently connected to the popular YouTube, Flickr, and Facebook websites. Describing media as “social” implies that it exists in a social space and/or users interact in some way with the media. Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) defined social media as “a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content” (p.61).
• social media is the arena where users can “engage in the creation and development of content and gather online to share knowledge, information, and opinions using web-based applications and tools” (Grover & Stewart, 2010, p. 9).
• This call to users to become content creators radically challenges the traditional authoritatively-driven teaching and learning model.
• When students actively participate in knowledge creation for themselves and their peers by employing the tools they use every day, they are changing the flow of information from “unidirectional to multidirectional,” (Grover & Stewart, 2010, p. 10-11) and defining a new Learning 2.0 paradigm .
• Lee and McLoughlin (2007) noted that this reality is one where teachers/educators relinquish some control to embrace the informal leaner-centered pedagogies empowering twenty-first century learners; they went on to state, “these changes are inevitable and unavoidable, given the morphing nature of higher education.”
• Advocates feel that the wide acceptance of social media sites outside the higher education arena establishes a congruity easily transferable to community building in e-learning, which has the potential to transform higher education as a whole (Hoffman, 2009)
• case studies demonstrate “multiple benefits for using SNS [social networking software], including, retention, socialization, collaborative learning, student engagement, sense of control and ownership” (p.3), along with a list of other perks for students and instructors.
• Alexander (2006) introduced a variety of social media tools and explains how they could be used in higher education classes. Yet, he also challenged the community to look at how higher education faculty currently put forward “a complex, contradictory mix of openness and restriction, public engagement and cloistering” (p. 42). Duffy and Bruns (2006) detailed the possibilities for using social software tools such as blogs, wikis, and RSS feeds in educational settings, stating that our new ‘social’ and ‘mobile’ reality of delivering educational content to students must match what they will encounter after graduation.
• Wheeler, Yeomans, and Wheeler (2008) evaluated collaborative learning by students who use a wiki to create user-generated content for their learning experience. Despite students’ hesitation to create work in a public setting, or to work as a group and the limitations of evaluating individual contributions, they still felt the tool held great potential to transform education. They emphasized that the primary benefit of using the tool is for collaboration or extending engagement outside the classroom and advised teachers to act only as facilitators or moderators in this environment.
• faculty attitudes strongly predicted whether or not they actually adopted a new method. Their recommendations called on administrators to promote the use of new social software , emphasizing their gradual learning curve and congruity with current practices. Further, they suggest that efforts should be made to build educators’ overall confidence and comfort with new technologies (Aijan & Hartshorne, 2008 ).
• data demonstrate that students using Twitter “had a significantly greater increase in engagement than the control group, as well as higher semester grade point averages” (p. 1). The researchers strongly feel these results are evidence to support the educational usefulness of the tool and social media as a means to reach higher educational outcomes.
• The European Commission, interested in promoting innovation in higher education, has funded a three year iCamp research project which ” investigated how Web 2.0 technologies can be implemented in higher education settings.” (n.d., p. 6). This has resulted in the free published handbook, How to Use Social Software in Higher Education. The handbook is aimed at educators who are interested in incorporating social software into the learning process.
• Missing from this dialogue, however, is discussion of how best to tackle some of the practical, less paradigm-shifting questions about ownership, privacy and security, access, accessibility and compliance, stability of technology, intellectual property rights, and copyright law.
• When using social media tools in the classroom, the strict definition of original author or owner is blurred. For example, who owns the IP rights to a class-created wiki or blog, or the items developed for an island in Second Life? As faculty members recognize the possibilities of using these Web 2.0 tools to engage students, they are becoming co-authors/creators alongside their students. Students begin to see these creations as portfolio work, and desire some ownership of what they’ve created.
• Further complicating the ownership question is the fact that these new creations are often hosted on servers and services owned by for-profit companies. Most users of these services are not aware that the providers of these free tools may claim ownership of the work created and residing on their servers
• What is perhaps the most well-known controversy of this nature arose in 2009 when Facebook changed its terms of service agreement with its users, granting itself the rights to use photos, posts and content that users make available on the system in any way it desires–even in cases where users have terminated their accounts. Facebook’s explanation was that this change was necessary to maintain cohesion and system functionality, but the public perception was that Facebook was staking claim to users’ copyrighted materials. The outcry was so great that Facebook returned to their original policy (Stone & Stelter, 2009; McCarthy, 2009).
• While faculty members may understand that having access to another’s work does not make them owners or give them rights to freely use the content as they wish, this concept may not be so clear for students. Recognizing the ease with which digital content can be copied, remixed, and reused, it is wise to facilitate discussions or assign readings about ownership and attribution, addressing ethical and legal content use.
• Intellectual property rights and ownership questions are at the center of a complex web, overlapped by issues encompassing the use of copyrighted materials. Stuck in this web are other important concerns that must be considered such as matters of privacy rights; the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA); security; accessibility; access; compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); and the longevity and stability of these tools and services .
• Even though social media tools being used do not collect enough personally identifiable data to threaten FERPA laws in most cases, the issue of student privacy in the broader context is still one that should be strongly considered.
• Should faculty ask or require students to use public systems that gather preference data on users, which the sites then sell to other companies as valuable targeted marketing data? Facebook has repeatedly made news headlines about privacy issues and access to user profiles. Lately, the concern has been third party applications misusing information without users even knowing that their information is being made available (Young, 2008). But perhaps this new Google-infused culture renders the privacy issue moot, as Google appears to be the search engine of choice and has long been mining user emails and search histories without widespread dissent. If nothing else, faculty can use these issues as teaching topics that aim to enhance students’ media literacy.
• Common sense would dictate that even when an online space is restricted to a specific classroom, it is never wise to publicly discuss student grades or put forth any critical review or feedback of an individual student’s performance.
• The stability of the technology and the systems professors use for teaching and research is often taken for granted. Unless there is an outage, accessing the network from anywhere, using technology in the classroom, or teaching with a course management system (CMS) are usually effortless tasks that happen repeatedly throughout the day without much thought. However, if the network goes down in the middle of a lecture or files that were uploaded to the CMS disappear or are somehow corrupted, the reliability and stability of these systems quickly become an issue.
• Campus systems need to establish support mechanisms: there should always be someone to call, be it the university technology services department or the technology help desk. However, when faculty members use off-site, in-the-cloud software, the reliability and stability of these systems are all outside the traditional support structure. New start-up companies (and even some well-established ones) can disappear overnight, can be bought by competitors, or change their use agreements without notice, all of which jeopardize the users’ content.
• Social media and remixing of creative expressions inherently challenges the third exclusive right of creating derivative works based on the original. All of these activities can take place daily in a modern classroom that incorporates new media tools.
• Many groups have joined together in challenging the evasive permission culture (Lessig, 2004) in defense of fair use and the ability to retain access to cultural objects not just for educational purposes but continuing our tradition of “free culture– not free as in free beer but free as in free speech, free markets, free trade, free enterprise, free will, free elections. A free culture supports and protects creators and innovators” (Lessig, 2004, preface xiv).
• this time the technological change isn’t arriving as carefully planned and sanctioned institutional initiatives but more as a grassroots movement. Adventurous educators see how the new communication and networking tools used by the masses can be adapted and utilized for teaching purposes. The free, easy-to-use social media that has now permeated so much of daily life brings with it the opportunity to enhance learning, participation, communication, and engagement; to extend the classroom experience; and/or to enrich the online classroom.
• Choosing to use social media software and integrate UGC with the intention of enhancing engagement, interaction, and excitement is a very worthwhile effort but one should ensure that the trade-offs are equitable and ethical.
• Faculty can benefit from sharing experiences with colleagues and developing assignments that engage students in thoughtful discussions of new media’s challenges relating to privacy, ownership of intellectual property, and use of copyrighted materials which are teaching topics that can enhance students’ media literacy.
• This work is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share-Alike License

This message was sent to you by mguhlin via Diigo

Fit In – The Kundalini Equation in #EdTech

Note: This is one in a series of blog entries exploring the role of the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) or Director of Technology. Please be sure toread the whole series! 

Why doesn’t technology fit in better with curriculum and instruction? It’s a question that I’ve pondered often over the last 20 years, often wondering if it shouldn’t be the other way around. Why doesn’t curriculum and instruction fit in more with technology? But, then, I remember my experience driving the highway one day and ask, Is fitting in the right way to look at it? Or, do we need to focus on dynamic tension, the synergy between the 3?

Do you remember when “fitting in” was a good thing? You know, you go to school, and the advice your parents gave you was, “Don’t worry, you’ll fit in.” You start a new job, and the boss says to you, “Don’t worry, you’ll fit in soon enough!” That’s a death knell, right? Does fitting in mean you’re going to accept the status quo?

On my work commute, I had a visceral reaction to a sign from a university. I forget the university, but the gigantic billboard next to the highway certainly grabbed my attention. In red letters, Fit in. caught my eye and my gut-level reaction was, “No way!” I immediately second-guessed myself. Am I so rebellious, so anti-authority, anti-establishment that fitting in is now a bad thing? 

Seth refuses to believe that passion is something you’re born with. So if it’s not heredity, what is it that differentiates someone [who does something]…from a random person working at a “compliant” type of a job without any desire to change the world? The difference, Seth says, is fear. It’s the most important emotion in the world. 

We evolved as human beings to fit in. If you did not fit in to the village of 150 people and the chief got mad at you, you were kicked out, the tigers would find you and you would die. So we were trained to fit in, to do what we’re told, to buy into the norm.
Today, the ideas is the currency, not the ability to do what you’re told. If you want to make an impact in this world, you better overcome your fear of being different and stand out from the crowd. (Read More Seth Godin)

We don’t overcome our fear, so we’re “doomed” to fit in. We overcome our fear, we better watch out for tigers and a short lifespan. Yes, that about covers the popular perspective on the lives of modern superintendents who endure for 2-3 years before moving on to another job. If they were afraid, they’d do something else. 

As I’ve shared previously, my desire as a K-16 student was to fit in whenever possible. Even during my early career years, the goal wasn’t to do extraordinary things–unless helping students be extraordinary using writing and technology isn’t ordinary–but to get a job and keep it. Some time in the last 20 years, my vision has changed. Now, I feel an onset of irritation when someone says, “Why do more? Why don’t you just be grateful for a pay check? Why don’t you fit in?” even when I’m not a part of the conversation! 

“Fit in” is good advice for college students when that phrase means, Find some place that aligns with your core values and beliefs, that will help you dig to bedrock of your soul and tap into the wellspring of power that lies latent inside you. “Fit in” in this sense lets you unleash your “kundalini” (would you believe I first ran into that term reading science fiction–Steven Barnes’ The Kundalini Equation–when I was a high school senior and it stuck with me until this blog post? Unbelievable). 

Watching my daughter go through interview process with a university that could swing her up into the stars, it occurs to me that “fitting in” is terrible advice when it means, “Do what you can to fit in, don’t rock the boat, support the status quo.” The reason my daughter gets access to awesome university opportunities–scholarships that can take her far farther than my wife and I could with our meager education pay–is because she’s 1) Obsessed about pursuing her academic passions; 2) Unwilling to sit still and be quiet, instead reaching out to make connections; and 3) She’s darn smart!

Now, what happens when you think of technology, pedagogy and content? If we were to personify those 3 areas, it would be easy to imagine technology as the child who is constantly being told to “fit in,” right? Think about the conversation:

Pedagogy says, “You can’t do nothing without me, baby!” 

Content cries out, “You ain’t got nothing without me, honey!” and 

Technology replies, “I guess that must be true.”

A quote from a recent MyNotes article really has stuck with me, and I’m going to share it again:

Digital design neither learning about technology nor learning with technology, but learning creativity and innovation through technology. 

http://tpck.org/

Now, while many educational technology folks know about this already, it’s worth revisiting the idea of TPACK:

The TPACK approach goes beyond seeing these three knowledge bases in isolation. On the other hand, it emphasizes the new kinds of knowledge that lie at the intersections between them. Considering P and C together we get Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Shulman’s idea of knowledge of pedagogy that is applicable to the teaching of specific content. Similarly, considering T and C taken together, we get Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), the knowledge of the relationship between technology and content. 

At the intersection of T and P, is Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK), which emphasizes the existence, components and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in the settings of teaching and learning. 

Finally, at the intersection of all three elements is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). True technology integration is understanding and negotiating the relationships between these three components of knowledge. A teacher capable of negotiating these relationships represents a form of expertise different from, and greater than, the knowledge of a disciplinary expert (say a mathematician or a historian), a technology expert (a computer scientist) and a pedagogical expert (an experienced educator). Effective technology integration for pedagogy around specific subject matter requires developing sensitivity to the dynamic, [transactional] relationship between all three components. (Source: http://tpck.org/)

When people ask, where does technology fit into the grand scheme of teaching, learning and leadership? we have to step back and ask ourselves, do we really want technology to “fit in,” or do we want to find that sweet spot, unleash the coiled energy that lies at the base of the relationship between Pedagogy, Content, and Technology?

Source: http://goo.gl/YjAIK

Note: Lest I be branded a New Ager and burned at the stake, please know that this blog post is not an endorsement of kundalini, yoga, chakras or anything like that, but rather, a playful “stretch” of the mind that encourages educators–especially ultra-conservative educators–to rethink their approach to the idea that technology should fit into pedagogy and content model.

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes – iPads Research in School

Welcome! You may also want to read Just Jump In – Exploring Options for Netbooks, iPads, and Others

Read the University of Nortre Dame study online

Source: Angst, C. and E. Malinowski (2010). “Findings from eReader Project, Phase 1:  Use of iPads in MGT40700, Project Management,” University of Notre Dame Working Paper Series. Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre Dame, http://www.nd.edu/~cangst/NotreDame_iPad_Report_01-06-11.pdf, pp. 1-17.

Note: Italicized items are direct quotes from the study.

Interesting study…give some college students an iPad with the intent it be used as an eReader and see what happens. The experiments are happening with children, too. In case you missed the comment in the table above, allow me to emphasize it:

The ancillary benefits of the iPad (consolodisation of personal/school lives, constant connectedness, etc.) outweigh the device’s drawbacks as an academic tool.

The iPad’s benefits outweigh it’s drawbacks, such as file management, security, workforce abuse, expenditure of funding on things instead of teachers and librarians, etc. Ok, that information aside, on to the study….

Some of my favorite findings–quoted from the study–are as follows:

• It is the opinion of these researchers that it is premature to make a decision about widespread distribution of iPads or any eReaders.  We are using the term ‘distribution’ to mean requiring students to adopt an iPad.
• Students feel the iPad; a) encourages exploration of additional course topics, b) helps manage time, c) provides new functions/tools, d) increases learning, and e) makes courses more interesting
• In addition, the cost of the devices ($499 for the model we used) appears to be prohibitive for students, even considering that eTextbooks are usually 60-80% of the cost of a traditional textbook.  Even if the technology were mature, with new competitive offerings coming to the market rapidly, it is unclear which device would be optimal for distribution.
• on average, students feel the iPad; 
• a) encourages exploration of additional course topics, 
• b) helps manage time, 
• c) provides new functions/tools, 
• d) increases learning, and 
• e) makes courses more interesting.
• It is also true that the iPad LACKS important functions/tools that are available with a traditional textbook.  
• A considerable amount of non-course-related reading was done using the iPad.

The highlighted section results in a laugh when you consider that K-12 has already jumped into iPad adoptions in the thousands, such as Fort Bend ISD with 16,000 iPads adopted. Will use in K-12 pre-dispose students to use of iPads in higher education? You bet! 😉

What’s even more funny are the remarks from college students…can’t you imagine your grade 5-12 students making these observations, too?

• It’s very convenient to carry around plus it makes you look tech savy
• If more classes adopted the ability to use this i probably wouldn’t be carrying a backpack at all.
• I am more organized and my backpack is certainly lighter since I dont need to carry my laptop 
• and cord everywhere. I also LOVE the long battery life. (this would have been my remark! I hated carrying around heavy backpacks, and seeing my own children do it makes my back twinge -Miguel).

Onward, into a Brave New World! Image Source: http://goo.gl/gkWXy

Below are MyNotes/Take-aways from the research study:

First, our findings suggest the greatest value of the iPad may not be its ability to function as an eBook reader but instead its capacity to function as a consolidator or aggregator of information.
Second, a statistically significant proportion of students felt the iPad,
1) makes class more interesting,
2) encourages exploration of additional topics,
3) provides functions/tools not possible with a textbook, and
4) helps students more effectively manage their time. While there were some technical and behavioral challenges associated with reading the eBook, overall impressions of the iPads were very favorable and students noted they would tolerate some of the shortcomings as technical improvements are being made.
Because our results do not provide a comprehensive measure of the objectives related to consolidating/aggregating information, nor do they fully explore the extent to which learning outcomes vary with respect to iPad use, further studies that include natural observation, surveys, and student focus groups are recommended.

Some Graphs worth keeping handy:

Other iPad in Texas Schools Posts:

• 3 Tips to Flipping Your Classroom with iPads
• Building Mobile Device Apps
• Throwaway iPad Apps
• Mobile Device Management
• iOS Headaches
• Make It Work

And, unrelated to the study, but worth revisiting again:

Created by: OnlineTeachingDegree.com

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

Personalized Learning and School TechTools – Do they mix? @bbray

Linux 2012 Work Report

Isn’t it amazing that self-directed learning is one of the key ways folks learn more in this report? Isn’t self-directed learning, which some may characterize as personalized learning? Could choosing the right technology tool to implement in your school district help students be more self-directed learners?

Consider Barbara Bray’s and Kathleen McClaskey’s chart below:

Personalized Learning Chart

View more documents from Barbara Bray

“Eight in ten (81%) recruiters say hiring Linux talent,” states the 2012 Linux Jobs Report, “is a priority in 2012.” This past TCEA 2012 session, I had the chance to listen–albeit, not closely since I was trouble-shooting a Moodle 2.2 questionnaire question for a tight deadline (Moodle 2.2 questionnaire no longer allows anonymous guest users to fill out a questionnaire!!! Argh!)–to highly esteemed colleagues, Tim Holt and Ben Grey discuss iPad vs netbooks.

Saugus Union School District (SUSD) has earned a reputation as a leader in utilizing technology — including Web 2.0, social networking tools, and Linux open source software — to maximize education opportunities. One program that Jim Klein, SUSD’s director of information services & technology, is particularly proud of is the Student Writing Achievement Through Technology Enhanced Collaboration (SWATTEC), a recently completed two-year pilot involving all 1700 of the district’s fourth grade students. The program targeted writing, information literacy, and Internet skills with help from one-to-one netbooks. 

The Vision 

The overall vision of the SWATTEC program was, “To select and use technology to support the achievement of the instructional goals of the District and to support the preparation of students to live and work in the 21st century.” It was determined that writing was an ideal area to address with the fourth graders; after spending grades 1-3 learning to write the students were ready to start writing to learn. Based on the belief that “writing is the key to learning in all subjects,” the goal was to encourage students to write and to share what they wrote with the community and especially with their peers.

Featured quite prominently in that conversation was Jim Klein’s Ubermix.org. The conversation came back to mind today, as I sit at home suffering (I just woke up from an 18 hour nap to assuage the weakness of being sick) with an appetite and a craving to find out what was going on in the world. To my amazement, this question had been asked:

We are a 1A district with Google Apps for both students and staff. I am interested in Chromebooks and would like to talk with anyone who has some experience (I know they are new). Our goal is to engage students, move content and creation online, and to integrate technology. We are not trying to go 1:1, but we are looking to augment as we dip our toe in the wonderful waters of BYOT.
My concerns:
Unless it is web-based, no etextbooks
Will Chrome as an OS stick around? (very mixed reviews on that)
I know we can buy netbooks for less but they have much more admin cost (not a deal breaker though)

As much as I’ve enjoyed Google’s Chromebook CR-48, in the short space of time that I was able to load Lubuntu 11.04 on it, I found it remarkably improved. Simply, Chrome OS just doesn’t do everything I need it to do. I have to be careful, though, that I don’t generalize and say that MY dis-satisfaction with Chromebook would be true of students and staff.

Still, the question is raised, what choices do educators have access to? Is it strictly expensive Chromebook vs even more expensive iPad with a bevvy of peripherals and apps that make life even more costly?

Choices. It’s about choices, which is why I find Ben Grey’s and Jim Klein’s approach to the question posed worth considering.


Some may argue that Linux is so yesterday, that the App Economy–read TechNet’s report on the App Economy–is where it’s at.  In the end, we have to ask ourselves, which tools allows for the most open-ended learning and development? Which tech tools in schools allow children time to explore, to be self-directed learners, engaging in personalized learning that prepares them for a competitive job market?

Update: I’m including Stephen Downes’ comment in this blog entry by way of correction and food for thought, highlighting the relevant part

Stephen Downes

Miguel Guhlin writes, “Isn’t it amazing that self-directed learning is one of the key ways folks learn more in this report? Isn’t self-directed learning (what) some may characterize as personalized learning? Could choosing the right technology tool to implement in your school district help students be more self-directed learners?”  

No doubt, but let me take this opportunity once again to sistinguish between personal learning and personalized learning: – ‘personal learning’ is when you create your own learning – self-directed learning is the typical instantiation of personal learning – ‘personalized learning’ is when someone else creates some standard learning, and then tailors it (‘personalizes’ it) for you. 
Companies can sell you ‘personalized’ learning, but only you can produce personal learning. Schools, as well, allow very little ‘personal learning’ (though they might make some time for personalized learning). That makes all the difference in the world!

Source: Stephen Downes, OLDaily

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

App Indigestion? – The #iPad Effect @DrLaPrairie @ddmeyer @timholt2007

Thanks to Dr Kimberly LaPrairie and Dr. Marilyn Rice for sharing their presentation on The iPad Effect, which includes matching iPad apps to the revised levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. You can view it below since they were kind enough to share it on Slideshare!

TCEA 2012 iPad Effect

 

View more PowerPoint from Dr. LaPrairie @ Sam Houston State University

As I meditate on their presentation slides–unfortunately, I missed their presentation at TCEA2012–the question they ask at the start of the slide show is one worth reflecting on, regardless of what technology you introduce in the classroom:

How do you decide what tech tools to use in the classroom?

Chatting with colleagues at IronWorks BBQ in Austin, Tx last week, I couldn’t help but ask myself this very natural question as an educator. Amidst the unending volley after volley of iPad apps, web-based tools and services that are must-have for this or that educator, how do you decide which tools to use? 


To that end, we’ve seen thousands of web-services and apps for tablets and regular computers matched to Bloom’s Taxonomy, wikis created to catalog the drops of the Web 2.0 rainstorm that has been pelting teachers, school systems, and others. Here are a few of those by example, and please, no criticism is implied since these are immensely useful in helping one make sense of new technologies:

• Andrew Churches’ venerable Digital Taxonomy
• Bloomin’ Apps – Kathy Schrock sets us up with iPad apps that match Bloom’s.
• Instructional Strategies and Technology – Go here and click on the links to see lists of “old” tech combined with strategies.
• GoogleApps and Marzano’s Strategies – A clever blend of the two in a slideshow, albeit a bit dated (isn’t that the problem?) since it includes Google Wave.
• Technology Integration Matrix Digital Tools – organizes tools according to the TIMS, including Entry, Adoption, Adaptation, Infusion, and Transformation.
• Web 2.0 Tools – organizes tools according to Marzano’s

In reviewing the sites above, I can’t help but wonder, How different is the approach promised by “new” technologists any different than the one I committed to when I was younger? In much the same way that I blended instructional strategies with the technologies available at the time, there simply doesn’t seem anything new under the sun in the instructional strategies approach. Whether it’s project-based learning or problem-based learning, blending in communication technologies seems essential…but is it?


Can you imagine a time when school administrators will sell their souls–or body parts, as in the news story below–to get access to the “tools” their staff and students need to be successful in a global, competitive market, which paradoxically, depends on “creating, collaborating, curating?”

According to the Shanghai Daily, a Chinese boy sold his kidney for 20,000 yuan ($3085) in an effort to purchase Apple’s latest and greatest hardware, the iPad 2. Almost immediately after selling his organ, his health began to deteriorate leading him to regret his decision. (Source: Gotta Be Mobile)

The question is less what tech tools does one decide to use, but rather, what does one want to do and are school districts prepared to part with integral components of today’s education system to accomplish it? Have we fundamentally changed our approach in schools or are we just replacing the tip of the spear with a sharper point, leaving the shaft of the spear as is and not changing how we approach the throw?

http://thedarkblade.com/wp-content/uploads/atlatl-info.jpg (Sorry, I read Jean M. Auel’s work during my formative years)

With differentiated learning a powerful option in schools, learners make decisions that stretch the imagination of their teachers–a.k.a. learning facilitators–making it difficult for schools to scaffold unimagined learning opportunities. But, will iPads–finally, at last, I can hear students and administrators saying together, we have a technology that’s so easy, so worthwhile we won’t mind “cutting out” libraries, librarians, GT programs so “get the benefit of the iPad”–make us change how we do business?

In slide 12 of Dr. Prairie’s and Dr. Rice’s The iPad Effect, they share an example of an iPad app for each level of Bloom’s, along with an example. This approach means that to move from revised Bloom’s Taxonomy Level Remember to Create, there are 6 different apps (ranging from free to a cost of $1.99, $5.99, or a total of approximately $7) …and there are many other apps that will fit in. To satisfy learning across K-12, teachers may very well be expected to be catalogers of a million and one apps, perhaps getting “app indigestion” for their efforts. Not only do you have to know the curriculum, you have to have access to a variety of apps and know how they fit in. Though the price of the apps for slide 12 totals $7 (you only pay for 2 of the 6 apps), multiply $7 by the total number of sets needed and you get an astronomical cost. Is it worthwhile to buy these apps or are there enough out there at no cost to fill in the gaps?

Our customer’s customers are accustomed to choice. However, the real opportunity moving forward may be in approaches that help our customers —and their customers — make sense of the proliferation of apps. In The Paradox of Choice, author Barry Schwartz tells us at what point choice makes it difficult to make decisions. While we assume more choice means better options and greater satisfaction, excessive choice is not always a good thing. In fact, the best solution to our choice overload may be offered by approaches that limit our choices. (Source: Mobile Content Curation)

Is education being reduced to a series of app curation activities? I hope not. Perhaps, we need to come back to the essential question of Dr. Prairie’s and Dr. Rice’s slideshow…how do you go about app curation for your classroom, your campus, your district? Is standardization the wrong approach? I have to ask this question because a colleague of mine said to me just this week, Miguel, from a district technology perspective, we have to standardize to be able to provide support. That seems wrong somehow, when what learners seem to want is MORE differentiation.

For Scott Newcomb, a fourth-grade teacher at St. Marys Intermediate School in St. Marys, Ohio, using smartphones in the classroom helps him teach math to his technology-savvy students in new ways.  Instead of the typical textbook geometry lesson, Newcomb brings his students outdoors, where they use smartphones to snap photos of parallel lines, acute angles and other examples of geometric shapes…Newcomb, a teacher for 11 years, says it’s a way to differentiate instruction and assess which students might need more help. “The students are so engaged, it’s almost weird how quiet it gets in the classroom when they’re working on a project,” he says. “It’s amazing to see how excited they are.” (Source: District Administration)

Hmm…it seems that technology engages learners, knocks them sensible and into quiet fascination with the content they are engaged with. Are 6 apps enough to differentiate for students who learn in many different ways? Or are the 6 apps simply placeholders for the zillions of free apps available that diverse students can use to differentiate their own learning?


DyDan wrote an excellent post–ok, ok, he writes lots of those–that compares Angry Birds to Teaching. The benefits as I understood them are as follows–and Dan Meyer writes it a lot better than my wordy summary below:

1. Make the activity students are introduced to in a lesson as easy to start as an app.
2. Show what you hope students will learn from a lesson rather than tell them. Alas, I remember Mark Twain’s quote of the old lady screaming, “Aaaaarrrghhh!” . A powerful lesson that endures.
3. Give useful, immediate feedback and allow students to try again.
4. Failure is a learning opportunity that doesn’t count against you, but is designed to help you get ahead.
5. Scaffold student learning, moving from simple to complex over time.

Ok, I’m not sure where I was going with this blog entry. Could we agree (please disagree and tell me why) that those who advocate on behalf of iPads believe the following?

• iPad apps facilitate differentiated learning opportunities for students with diverse needs?
• App-based learning models enable students to start simple and get smarter through ever-evolving levels of scaffolded complexity?
• App Indigestion may very well be a necessary side effect for teachers and school districts who insist on standardization rather than helping learners find their own way in completing a project or formulation solutions to ill-structured problem?
• App-based learning allows for audio/visual media that engages students in understanding abstract concepts?
• App-based learning enables engaged students to construct meaning in a way that is personally relevant (a la Dr. Judi Harris, taking public information outside of oneself and converting it to information that is personal or knowledge)?

What do you think? I’m still unsure.

😉

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes – What the Future Holds #tcea2012 #ipads #edchat

The Education EcoSystem…reminded me more of a universe and made me ask, when will it contract and implode? ;->

The following notes were taken at the System Administrator Academy held at the TCEA 2012 State Conference. The keynote speaker was Bill Rust (Gartner Group) who shared some eye-opening statistics. The most compelling point was the need for system administrators to change their perspective regarding up and coming technologies–such as mobile learning via BYOD/BYOT, tablet based computing including the “force of nature” iOS, free open source, and others whose time has come.

What struck me the most was the sense of inevitability, the tablet tsunami or unavoidable avalanche of personal computing devices finding their way into schools. As Bill Rust points out, schools are a reflection of society they are embedded in, and our society is making serious efforts to embrace mobile computing at the personal level. . .why shouldn’t our schools reflect this reality?

A crude drawing–sketched using Skitch on the iPad–of one of the diagrams Rust shared:

Essentially, in the diagram above, many school districts resisting change fall into the Cafe Fixed Menu, which means that the “CoolKids” users (bottom left quadrant) escape tight controls and choose to go underground or elsewhere with their technologies…I have to agree with that assessment.

He suggests a blend of the Private Dining Club, which is the Cool Kids Club for select people and purposes, and the Cafeteria Buffet. This reminds me a lot of the continuum of control diagram I shared some time back. Here it is again:

MyNotes on Bill Rust’s Presentation:

1. Speaker: Bill Rust and Jan-Martin Lowendahl, Gartner
2. Session Title: “Education in a World of Choice, Not Chaos”
3. This is not going to be a technical discussion (sigh) – What have we delivered to our clients globally, what is happening in education. Over the years I’ve learned not to use technical language.
4. Takeaway – change is happening and we won’t be able to stand in the way.
5. As CIO, we controlled everything that happened in the data center to the tips of the end user. Those days are gone.
6. We have to get cooperation to ensure operational efficiency, customer needs (or what they think they need). This is a world of choice…there are choices that are made on both ends.
7. This slideshow has been given to 10,000 people.
8. The elephant in the room – Technology has the potential to disrupt education. Disruptive technology is defined as cheaper, better and faster.
9. Disruption in Media – Is Education Next? Creation -> Production -> Distribution -> Consumption
   1. Expensive production facilities
   2. Control of distribution channels
      1. Retail chains (music, video)
      2. TV Broadcast networks
      3. Powerful marketing channels
      4. Promoting New content
   3. What is impacting the education ecosystem?
   4. Education Predicts 2012 – Mobility and consumer technologies are going to rule the roost, and are already doing so in schools…let things in, adding things, and producing services.
   5. The media tablet exemplified by the iPad…this is the primary form factor for desktops for students, the world of choice that has arisen is putting stress on people who are providing services to stakeholders.
   6. Our key strategic assumptions: 
   7. By 2016, traditional K-12 agencies will lose 10% of revenue due to loss of enrollment to technology fueld alternatives
   8. By 2016, the iPad will gain less than 50% of the K-12 market as CIOs favor devices that are deployed more readily.
   9. Through 2015, 20% o higher ed institutions will gain a competitive advantage via a BYOD allowance,
   10. By 2016, more than 50% of all e-textbooks will be self-published.
   11. By 2016, 40% o higher education will reduce the costs of communication/collaboration and content management assets with learning stack architecture.
   12. The iPad is the consumer’s choice…and we are powerless to stop this avalanche. If I am the CIO, am I going to spend money that will give me heartache or on something that will work well?
   13. There’s going to be more and more competition in the tablet arena…more services are arising to help control those.
   14. eTextbooks – the use of e-content is a question of when, not if. Do we go zero to 90mph or do we go faster. PDF is OK for now, but that will change.
   15. In a typical district, txtbooks are purchased and distributed.
   16. If we provide each student with a device with etextbooks, is it a wash? From a support perspective, how does that impact our infrastructure and are we ready?
   17. Top Technologies changing the education ecosystem:
       1. Personally-owned devices – BYOT
       2. Change in primary device form factor
       3. Multiple devices – Device and OS agnostic solutions
       4. Customer intimacy on a part with operational efficiency…the argument that these technologies are harder to maintain on the “inside,” will lose to the argument that the users want to use technologies on the “outside”. Infrastructure folks will have to work harder to support these new technologies. Does the school reflect the outside world?
       5. Opportunities to change and refine the organization and delivery of instruction
   18. STEEP = Introducting Structure to Chaos (“Eating the Elephant in Pieces”)
       1. Society Education Inflation
       2. Technology – Technical Turmoil
          1. Death of distance
          2. Consumerization
          3. New infrastructures
          4. Exponentially increasing options of means of production and distribution, both for individuals and institutions
          5. Access to the Internet has grown in millions of users, as has the number of mobile phone subscribers in millions
       3. Environment – Energy Uncertainty
       4. Economy – New Normal…what is your return on investment (ROI)?
       5. Political – Retreating Responsibility –
   19. What is changing the education ecosystem?
       1. Consumer IT
       2. Mobility
       3. Accountability – providing teachers with more data
       4. Emerging technologies
       5. Societal expectations
       6. Education Options
       7. Business Intelligence Tools
       8. Collaboration
   20. The assumption is that if we have students that can collaborate, then their productivity will be increased.
   21. Strategic planning assumptions:
       1. By 2013, 80% of business will support a workforce using tablets.
       2. By 2014, 90% of organizations will support corporate apps on personal devices
       3. By 2018, 90% of enterprise applications will be targeted at web-based OS agnostic environments
   22. Education EcoSystem Concept – refer to picture – http://m.lockerz.com//s/181557514
   23. If we are locked into Cafe Fixed menu, we push the “Sit with the Cool Kids” into the underground or leave altogether.
   24. We can offer a degree of choice that we can support (Cafeteria Buffet) and offer the “Private Dining Club”
   25. Technology Planning POVs
       1. The extremes of operational efficiency and customer intimacy…their choice, our choice, and how we decide who gets to choose what.
       2. Operational efficiency: an ATM that works great but no one can reach it.
   26. Growth of broadband: the Internet is more ubiquitous.
   27. HypeCycle – take emerging tech and put them on a curve when they are going to be most useful. Terms: Technology Trigger, Peak of Inflated Expectations, Trough of Disillusionment, Slope of Enlightenment, Plateau of Productivity
   28. Emergence: 5 to 10 years
       1. BYOD Strategy
       2. Social Software Standards
       3. District App Store
       4. BPO
       5. WaaS

You might also consider this infographic:

Created by: Online Teaching Degree

---

Get Blog Updates via Email!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

---

Visit the Texas for Technology Enhanced Education

---

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure

MyNotes – There’s Arsenic in Your Kids’ Apple Juice

Source: https://mguhlin.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/poison.jpg

At the kitchen table a few mornings ago, my daughter was swigging arsenic-laced apple juice (Mott’s). “Can’t I have just ONE more glass of apple juice?” She was a bit skeptical. 

Various brands of apple juice and apple sauce were tested and unfortunately one sample of Mott’s Apple Juice registered 55 parts per billion of arsenic. To put this into perspective, 55 parts per billion is more than five times the level of arsenic that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows in drinking water. (Source)

“Did you know,” I asked her–as she sipped her Mott’s apple juice–after reading this article, “what the main problem with arsenic is, aside from the fact that in larger quantities, it can kill you?”


“What?” she responded. “Decreased intellectual ability.” 


“Ok,” replied my honor student ranked 5 in her class. “I’m done.”


Whether this kind of reaction is warranted, it’s amazing that poisons like arsenic can find their way into juices children drink and nothing is said about it to the general public. I don’t know about you, but the feeling I get is that the conversation at the FDA went a little like this:

“Should we share that there’s more arsenic in children’s apple juice than water?”
“No, let’s not start a panic. We’ll just tell the companies what the problem is and then they can quietly remove it.”
“Don’t you think ‘the people’ should know?”
“Yes, but since arsenic hasn’t caused any serious problems–no one’s died choking on their arsenic apple juice this morning, have they?!? [laugh]–it can wait a bit longer.”

Sigh. Isn’t a little arsenic in your diet good for the liver? Maybe we should be giving cloves of garlic to our children along with their apple juice.


Should we be worried about arsenic in our juice? I don’t know, honestly, as I stand here throwing out apple juice boxes. Ah well. Better safe than sorry, right?


Quotes:

There’s Arsenic in Your Kids’ Apple Juice | Mother Jones

• There’s Arsenic in Your Kids’ Apple Juice —By Tom Philpott| Wed Nov. 30, 2011 11:08 AM PST
• The FDA currently does not regulate arsenic levels in fruit juices, CR reports. But for bottled and tap water, the agency enforces a standard of no more than 10 parts per billion of arsenic.
• Samples were drawn from juice in both concentrate and ready-to-drink forms, including juice boxes. All of the samples contained discernible arsenic samples; nine of them, or 10 percent of the total, were found to have arsenic levels that exceeded the drinking-water limit of 10 parts per billion. The samples were also tested for lead—and 25 percent showed levels higher than the FDA’s lead standard for bottled water, which is 5 ppb. 
• “most” of the arsenic it found in juices was of the toxic inorganic variety. And while in an online Q&A about apple juice and arsenic, the FDA calls organic arsenic “essentially harmless,” it adds a few paragraphs later that “some scientific studies have shown that two forms of organic arsenic found in apple juice could also be harmful, and because of this, the FDA counts these two forms of organic arsenic in with the overall content for inorganic arsenic.”
• the FDA is in fact “seriously considering” setting limits on the amount of arsenic it will allow in juice and is “collecting all relevant information to evaluate and determine an appropriate level.”
• And steady exposure to low levels of arsenic is linked to reduced intellectual capacity. Consumer Reports points to a 2004 study by Columbia University researchers showing decreased intellectual function in children exposed to drinking water with arsenic levels above 5 ppb as well as a 2011 study by Texas researchers finding that low-level arsenic exposure is “significantly related to poorer scores in language, visuospatial skills, and executive functioning” and “poorer scores in global cognition, processing speed, and immediate memory.”
• “Recent studies have shown that early childhood exposure to arsenic carries the most serious long term risk,” researcher  Joshua Hamilton of the Marine Biological Laboratory told Consumer Reports. “So even though reducing arsenic exposure is important for everyone, we need to pay special attention to protecting pregnant moms, babies, and young kids.”
• The brands that fared worst (again, I should stress the caveat about sample size) were Walgreens grape juice, Welch’s grape juice, Walmart’s Great Value apple juice, and Mott’s apple juice in juice boxes. Samples of the two organic brands in the test, Whole Foods’ 365 Everyday Value organic apple juice and Gerber Organic apple juice, had arsenic content of around 7 parts per billion (Whole Foods) and 5 parts per billion (Gerber)—well above Consumer Union’s desired threshold, but below the FDA’s drinking-water standard.
• Tom Philpott is the food and ag blogger for Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here. To follow him on Twitter, click here. Get Tom Philpott’s RSS feed.

MyNotes – Networked Science

Source: http://www.ima.umn.edu/2008-2009/PUB4.28.09/ALB_Network%20Image.jpg

This is an article I enjoyed, sharing the story of Tim Gowers to run an experiment in a way that his PLN could help him solve. Although the article states that “most such wikis have failed,” the idea of solving problems completely in the open is appealing!

What do you think of the “open sharing of knowledge?” Good or bad? Share your thoughts in the comments!

MyNotes:

Michael Nielsen on Networked Science – WSJ.com

• The New Einsteins Will Be Scientists Who Share From cancer to cosmology, researchers could race ahead by working together—online and in the open
• In January 2009, a mathematician at Cambridge University named Tim Gowers decided to use his blog to run an unusual social experiment. He picked out a difficult mathematical problem and tried to solve it completely in the open, using his blog to post ideas and partial progress.
• The discussion ignited, and in just six weeks, the mathematical problem had been solved.
• they have pioneered a new approach to problem-solving. Their work is an example of the experiments in networked science that are now being done to study everything from galaxies to dinosaurs.
• These projects use online tools as cognitive tools to amplify our collective intelligence. The tools are a way of connecting the right people to the right problems at the right time, activating what would otherwise be latent expertise.
• Ventures such as the Polymath Project remain the exception, not the rule.
• If you’re a scientist applying for a job or a grant, the biggest factor determining your success will be your record of scientific publications. If that record is stellar, you’ll do well. If not, you’ll have a problem. So you devote your working hours to tasks that will lead to papers in scientific journals.
• Consider, for example, the open scientific wikis launched by a few brave pioneers in fields like quantum computing, string theory and genetics (a wiki allows the sharing and collaborative editing of an interlinked body of information, the best-known example being Wikipedia). Specialized wikis could serve as up-to-date reference works on the latest research in a field, like rapidly evolving super-textbooks. They could include descriptions of major unsolved scientific problems and serve as a tool to find solutions.
• most such wikis have failed.
• We have to overthrow the idea that it’s a diversion from “real” work when scientists conduct high-quality research in the open.
• we must first choose to create a scientific culture that embraces the open sharing of knowledge.
• Mr. Nielsen is a pioneer in the field of quantum computing and the author of “Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science,” from which this is adapted.

This message was sent to you by mguhlin via Diigo