The Tempered Radical

Tricks or Trash?

There's some interesting thinking about digital learning taking place in the comment section over at Dy/Dan today, sparked by a Jeff Wasserman blog post.  In the comments at Dy/Dan, Jeff wrote:

It’s a mess. That’s why I don’t care anymore. Large schools that generally “do well,” whatever that means, have no incentive to shake things up and try something new.

This part of Jeff's comment really resonated with me---even though I'm personally left jazzed by the potential of tech tools----because he's right.  "Doing well" in today's schools is actually a whole lot simpler than we make it out to be.  Our kids can be successful by the standardized measures that we use to assess our students without teacher's ever having to change our instructional practices or uses of technology at all.

And when that is the measure that we're held accountable by, it's easy to turn our backs on the incredible amount of time that finding ways to "do new things in new ways" with tech really takes.  What's the point of teaching kids to create, collaborate and communicate if none of those skills are measured? 

I've struggled with this for years---tech and techless.  My classroom used to be a place where Socratic seminars were regular features....and the thinking generated in those seminars was remarkable.  My kids wrestled with issues in ways that I'd never seen them wrestle before.  They were motivated and engaged.

But my test scores were always the lowest on the hall.  My assumption that higher order activities would translate into higher scores for my kids on our end of grade exams was faulty.  Instead, the "drill and killers" were producing better "results," and I was called on the carpet. 

How have things changed?

While I still feel passionate about any activity that engages my kids in higher order thinking and I still believe teachers have an obligation to find ways to use digital tools to enhance their instruction, I also find it incredibly tempting to shy away from such activities now.  Drill and kill has crept its way into my "bag of tricks" (trash?).  We practice multiple choice reading questions EVERY SINGLE DAY. 

< cringe > 

But my scores are up and everyone's happy. 

Scary, huh?

Barkin' Dawgs and Miserably Poor Policy. . .

You know, it's been a helluva' week for me and I'm fixin' to drop a bit of a rant here on the Radical. To put it simply, I'm tired of the combustible combination of whiny teachers and ineffective policymakers. 

Where'd this rather offensive conclusion come from? 

The seemingly never-ending negative reactions to my string of entries about new digital tools. (See Delicious, Twitter #1 and Twitter #2). In nearly every conversation that I've had away from this blog, teachers have groaned about how they "haven't got the time" to learn to use new tools or that "technology is an over-rated distraction" in classrooms. 

Mike's recent comment is a pretty good reflection of the sentiment expressed by colleague after colleague:

Twitter. Hmm. Sorry to rain on the parade a bit, but in the daily rush of trying to teach sufficient material, grading, lesson preparation, etc. I find such diversions to be a luxury for which I don't have time, rather like video games, etc. Yes, I know Twitter isn't a video game, but the issue is time and usefulness.

Luxurious (and useless) diversions from reality, huh? 

Those kinds of responses---which will resonate with anyone who has tried to introduce new technologies to teachers---always leave me completely bewildered because technology is essentially designed to save users time or to enhance the quality of their lives. Washing machines replaced hand wringers and saved housewives (sorry for the sexism) hundreds of hours. Impatient with the stove top, we invented the microwave. Tired of the donkey and the horse-drawn wagon, Ford and Edsel whipped up a newfangled motorized buggy. 

The card catalog was replaced by the computer database. The typewriter by the word processor and then the computer. Fireplaces by gas logs. The 15-Kb modem (didn't those stink) by high speed connections.  The video rental store by instant downloads and pay-per-view. The inkwell by the ball point. The charcoal grill by the George Foreman. The attendance lady by the absolutely miserable online program that I wrestle with every morning.    

Do I need to go on any further? (Actually, I'd love to add to the list.  Got any ideas?  Leave them in the comment section.)

And that is exactly the role that tools like Pageflakes, Twitter and Delicious can play for educators who are willing to do a bit of exploring. Essentially, each of these services provides users with immediate access to content that they are likely to find valuable. Someone in one of this weekend's Educon sessions described these tools as a way to have content of interest pushed directly to them---eliminating the all-too frustrating experience of sifting through thousands of search hits after Googling.

When users find a "network of learners" who share similar interests, digital tools that facilitate collaborative discovery are an incredible time saver. Consider that while I was reading the morning paper and eating a few sausage burritos at the McDonald's this morning, I found a great free tool that will help me in a presentation I'm making later this month and a wiki that links digital tools to the research of Robert Marzano. 

While these types of resources may not be valuable to you, they'll be invaluable in my work. And I did NOTHING to learn about them except turn on my computer and listen. Had I tried to search for similar resources on my own, I suspect that it would have taken me far longer. (Heck, I just Googled "Marzano, Digital Tools" and came up with 7,150 search results to sift through. Ready to start digging?)

So I get my hackles up when teachers try to tell me that they "don't have the time" for technology. If anything, it should be the first thing that they make time for because anyone can "plug in" to a network and learn together efficiently. It's collective intelligence at its best. 

Now, as frustrated as I am with the whiny-ness of teachers, I also know exactly where they're coming from. After all, I'm a full-time classroom teacher. I'm not sitting back in an office Twittering away my day and playing with my feed reader. Instead, I've got 60 kids at my classroom door every morning, a thousand papers to grade, parent conferences to have, and (yes, Mike) even lessons to write. 

Time is simply the resource that's the most limited in every school, yet everyone beyond the classroom seems to hold on to the hurtful perception that the work teachers do away from kids is irrelevant. Few people truly recognize just how much time our work really takes. 

No where is this misunderstanding more evident than in the results of the North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey---where the amount of non-instructional time available to teachers (or lack thereof) has been linked to higher rates of teacher turnover and to lower rates of student achievement. Time is regularly the area that surveyed teachers express the most dissatisfaction with---and where school leaders look the most clueless. 

Consider the results of this question: "The non-instructional time provided for teachers in my school is sufficient." Percentage of teachers who agreed with this statement:  45%. Percentage of school leaders who agreed with this statement:  76%. 

Crazy, huh? Talk about a gaping maw of misunderstanding! 

And that misunderstanding is understandably frustrating.  As policy makers and parents continue to demand more from teachers (gotta love an accountability culture, don't you?), they continue to fail to provide the kinds of support---especially time---necessary for meeting new expectations. That's a failure, plain and simple.  As my boy Richard Elmore says:

Accountability must be a reciprocal process. For every increment of performance I demand from you, I have an equal responsibility to provide you with the capacity to meet that expectation. Likewise, for every investment you make in my skill and knowledge, I have a reciprocal responsibility to demonstrate some new increment in performance. This is the principle of "reciprocity of accountability for capacity." It is the glue that, in the final analysis, will hold accountability systems together (Elmore, 2000).

So where does all of this thinking get me? 

To the following two conclusions:

First, teachers must confidently embrace a bit of change: Our profession has earned the reputation of being the "Boys who Cry Wolf." At every turn, we throw the "I-don't-have-the-time-or- resources-to-do-my-oh-so-hard-job-well-and-that's-your-fault-so -woe's-me-woe's-me-it's-just-unfair-we-simply-can't-do-it- because-we're-overworked-and-underpaid" card on the table. 

To lose that stigma---and to regain professional credibility again---we simply must stop shooting down every suggestion and find the capacity within our ranks to improve our own conditions. We're not as helpless as we like others to think that we are.

Second, policymakers must step up to the plate: My grand-daddy always used to say, "If the dawg's barkin', there's probably a pine cone in his paw." Great saying, right? His ol' hound dog was one tough cookie. When it got ornery, there was generally some real issue that needed to be resolved. 

The same can be said for teachers. There are real challenges that need to be addressed to enable teachers to succeed in their work. First and foremost, we need to increase the amount of non-instructional time that's available to every teacher. Yes, this is going to cost a small fortune---but to overlook the need to invest in a teacher's ability to grow as a learner is pretty short-sighted, isn't it. 

We also need to invest in the right kinds of digital professional development. Tomorrow is a different world---one that is driven by technology. The rate that content is being created simply outpaces our ability to learn it---which requires a different approach to "mastery" on the part of teachers and students. 

Mastery in the 21st Century is primarily about learning to use technology to retrieve, evaluate, synthesize and manage information---and (more importantly) to network with other learners. "Digitally prepared children" will know how to use web-based tools to create, communicate and collaborate around areas of personal and professional interest. They will be creators--rather than simply consumers---of information.

It's simply impossible for teachers who have little personal experience with technology to effectively prepare children for this reality.

(Whew---glad I got that off my chest.)   

A Twitter Pushback. . .

Dina---blogging over at The Line---caught up with my recent post on Twitter and left me a comment that's challenging my thinking a bit.  She asked:

Bill-- I wonder if you're in a perfect position to talk about the valueset of Twitter *language*. Does Twitter not imply: You can communicate everything of importance within 160 characters? Or: revision is unnecessary, perhaps even SILLY (there isn't even a function for revision on Twitter itself, just "delete"!) :) Don't get me wrong-- I joined Twitter over the weekend and I'm having a ball. But I am fascinated with what the Twitterverse is saying to us about communication and human connection. It is not value-neutral. No technology is. Would love your thoughts.

Good questions, Dina---and questions that I think connect back to our ideas of what relationships are and what role technology can play in the development of a person's "network of learners."  This is a topic that I wrote about recently and that the brilliant folks at In Practice have been wrestling with as well.

In my mind, Twitter's not designed to be the primary vehicle for an individual's communication and human connection to others.  While I value the people in my Twitter family greatly---in fact, many of them are just plain brilliant and I'm thankful that they're willing to let me "listen" to their Tweets---I don't see Twitter as the best way of getting to know them deeply or to figure out who they are as educators or as people. 

To me, Twitter's not about extended conversation and reflective thought.  Consider some of the things I've done with Twitter this week:

• Learned about a free discussion board service.
• Shared blog entries that I'd written.
• Read about 10 blog entries written by other people. 
• Seen several great articles shared by those in my Twitter family.
• Asked and answered a few provocative questions. 
• Had my thinking challenged once or twice. 
• Helped out with a Skypecast being conducted in another user's class.
• Sent out two or three resources to help others with questions about topics I know. 

Twitter is a really quick and really easy (which are two reasons Twitter's so successful) way to share resources and get ready access to a collection of people who share a common interest.  It's a way to join together with other likeminded individuals and offer just-in-time support to one another.

What's really neat is when you start to pair Twitter with all of the other forms of communication that digital folks are using.  Most Twitter-ers (including you!) have blogs.  Most are keeping Delicious accounts.  Most have feed readers.  Finding and following all three give you a better sense of who someone is, what they know, and how they feel about issues that are of shared interest. 

Clay Burrell---a remarkable thinker whose blog I started reading a few months back---described it (ironically enough in a Tweet) as "triangulating" someone.  I thought that was a neat way to think about it. 

I certainly don't think that you can communicate everything of value in Twitter's 140 characters....But I don't think that Tweets are the end of an individual's communication.  Instead, they're a new beginning that often lead to additional thought and expression carried out in other more appropriate and extensive forums.

I guess what I'm trying to say (in an all too long winded kind of way) is that Twitter is not designed to be a stand alone tool for communication.  It is only one tool that can help users connect to, learn from and support others. 

Does this make sense?

Image retrieved from http://grow.covlife.org/1031/wp-content/pressdocs/File/Push-Back-web.jpg on January 24, 2008. 

Twitter-ific Success...

So I've been playing with Twitter all weekend long and today I had my first Twitter-ific success.

For those of you who haven't quite made the Twitter jump yet, it is essentially a public instant messaging system that allows users to attract "followers" and to "follow" others. As Sheryl Nussbaum Beach so aptly explains, Twitter is a way for people to build a "personal learning network" of colleagues and friends who can provide just-in-time help, resources and advice about almost anything.

The central element in a Twitter conversation is called a Tweet----and it is a short (140 character message) that users send through an online client that looks just like any other instant messaging application that you've ever seen before. That message immediately appears in the Twitter windows of anyone who is "following" you....and they can respond with help/advice/suggestions/ ideas/compassion/random insults/open sarcasm if they feel so inclined.

I signed up and sent my first Tweet or two last weekend....but didn't have any followers! A lot of good that does me, right? Calling for help when no one is listening is somewhat useless, don't you think?

Then I stopped by the Teacher Leaders Network and advertized my Twitter-ness. Found out that about six digital friends are in the Twitter-verse (a term used by Twitter-heads to describe the conversation that happens via Tweets). They started following me and I started following them!

I also picked up a few Twitter followers when Sheryl---who's got quite a Twitter following---sent a Tweet advertizing me as a Twitter Virgin. (I'm not sure that's an official part of the Twitter lexicon, but it ought to be, don't you think?  Besides, it might drive a few hits to the Radical from search engines.)

I headed into school this morning and found out that Twitter is blocked by our school's network (which considers it a dating service despite the obvious difficulties of courting in a 140 characters or less) and went home discouraged. I sent a Tweet out to my very small following asking if anyone had found a way to use Twitter in schools through an approved third party application.....and got an answer (and a solution that works) in all of eight minutes from someone I've never met who is following me.

Crazy, huh?

So what's the real power in Twitter?

The members of a Twitter Family (again, probably not a term from the Twitter dictionary) can serve as instant resources for one another, giving and getting advice immediately.

Even crazier....I bumped into one of my students at the gym yesterday and told him about Twitter. He went home, signed up immediately and sent me a Tweet before I made it back to my computer screen. Since then, he and I have been sharing resources about how to best enjoy the Twitter-verse.

Way cool to say the least.

Anyone out there Twittering in your professional lives?  Why?  Do you have a Twitter success story?  How about Twittering with kids?  Can we work to shape Twitter into a tool for communicating with colleagues?  With students?  Will Twitter Families (or something similar) become invaluable resources for everyone in the future?

Wanna swap Twitter names?  (I know, there I go talking dirty again!)

Mine's plugusin.

.

To Protect and Prepare. . .

I think I've finally calmed down enough to think through my frustration with firewalls blocking the Web 2.0 tools that I'm trying to use in my classroom.  If you read my last post, you know that I was pretty jazzed.  Heck, I even pulled out the word "thwarted!" 

My long-winded, churlish, one-sided blovian rant "spirited opinion" comes from a place that most teachers can probably relate to:  I've invested hundreds of hours into trying to understand techology....and all too often that effort ends up wasted when a tool I've mastered suddenly gets blocked.  In a profession where time is limited at best, that is almost heartbreaking. 

For most teachers, similar situations are enough to discourage them from ever talking tech again. 

But over the past week, one thing has become clear to me:  District technology leaders are in a digital pickle that I'm just plain glad I don't have to deal with.  You see, they're forced into the uncomfortable position of having to deal with two completely opposite---and powerful----competing interests. 

Think about it:  The primary responsibility for district leaders has to be protecting children, right?  And the prevailing message being sent---even overseas---in the media is that our kids are at incredible risk while working online.  Pornographic material can be found at nearly every turn and heartbreaking stories of students who've fallen into the hands of predators draw front page attention at an all-too uncomfortable rate. 

Even though these stories often overestimate the actual degree of risk (in a recent NSBA study, less than 7% of students surveyed report ever being asked for personal information online and less than 3% report having unwanted strangers attempt to repeatedly contact them online), we can all agree that even one incident of a child falling into harm's way because of action taken online at school is too many for any district to be comfortable with.   

But districts also recognize that digital literacy and the ability to use the Web to create, communicate and collaborate are essential for success in today's day and age.  They're literally inundated with stories about the need to prepare "globally competitive citizens" who have "21st Century Skills."  They're told time and again how our public school system is "failing to prepare children for tomorrow," and how our children are "falling behind China and India." 

And these are smart, tech-savvy men and women.  They certainly recognize that the "world is flat," they are likely to understand the true benefits of technology better than any of us, and they're probably using technology more efficiently than the rest of the system combined. 

District technology leaders clearly aren't the Anti-Techs that I sometimes make them out to be!

Instead, they're progressive folks whose hands are tied by the almost overwhelming pressure to keep kids safe. If something horrible happens, a community isn't going to care about the number of students that have created digital partnerships or developed personal learning networks. All they'll want to know is who was responsible for approving a particular application. 

And that guy will get hung out to dry!  This is America---the "land of the lawsuit"---after all. 

So what's the resolution?  How can we protect children today while preparing them for tomorrow?

That's a tough one for me to answer because I don't know what is or isn't possible from a technological or a legal standpoint...But here are my thoughts:

First, I think that states and districts have to become much more rigorous about teaching children how to protect themselves online.  Most frightening to me in this entire conversation is that there's not much being done to introduce Internet safety habits and behaviors in our schools---even though there are some simply remarkable materials available for free online. 

"Keeping kids safe" means far more than "keeping them out of harm's way."

If we were more proactive about teaching Internet safety, we'd probably have fewer instances of students ending up in trouble online....and we'd build confidence in parents and the general community that we were being responsible when tackling new uses for technology.   

Looking for a model of a proactive approach to teaching Internet saftey?  Then check out this site created by the Henrico Public School System in Virginia.

Next, I'd like to see more sophisticated firewall technology employed by schools, districts and states.  What if we developed a series of permission levels for students in a district that determined just how much of the Web was available to them? 

Better yet, what if we required parents and students to complete a course on Internet safety together before a student was granted access to wider portions of the Net?  At the end of the course, parents could sign a waiver agreeing that they understood the potential risks involved in opportunities for digital communication and collaboration, releasing the district from liability for the actions their child took while online.   

I'll freely admit that I don't understand district firewalls well enough to know if this is even possible----either technologically (different passwords and logins for thousands of kids sure seems daunting) or economically (such tools may break the budget for some districts).....but in the interest of sparking conversations, I figured I'd throw it on the table.

I'm sure that there are probably a million other ideas about how to effectively balance the need to keep kids safe with the need to give them exposure to the kinds of tools that they'll use in tomorrow's workplace--- I stumbled on this article just recently addressing that very topic.

And I'm equally ready to recognize that this is a conversation I'm not the best prepared to lead.  The real experts are the district leaders who have a broader view of the ramifications---legal, financial, political---of any decision to make digital tools available to students.

What I can say is that something's got to give!  We can't continue to claim to be interested in introducing students to "the tools of the 21st Century" if we're going to make accessing those same tools nearly impossible. 

Instead, we've got to start having meaningful community based conversations about the kinds of risks that are involved in allowing kids to create, communicate and collaborate online, about the amount of risk that we're comfortable with, and about the best ways both protect and prepare our kids. 

To do otherwise is to fail.

Economist Debate on Social Networking in Schools

Hey Radical Readers:  This came through my inbox today....and is going to consume me for the next few days!  Figured you'd be interested too:

Dear Bill,

I saw your blog and thought that you and your readers would like to know that today, Economist.com kicked off a new Oxford-style online debate tomorrow on social networking and the value it adds to the classroom. Since you’re a member of the technology and blogger community that is highly relevant to this topic, The Economist wanted us to give you a heads up.

·          This month’s debate proposition is: “The house believes that social networking technologies will bring large [positive] changes to educational methods, in and out of the classroom.”

 

• Our expert debaters are two leaders in education and technology, and will square off for three rounds of debate.
  • CON - Michael Bugeja , Director of Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication, Iowa State University of Science and Technology. The author of 21 books whose research is often cited by the New York Times, Dr. Bugeja was among the first to analyze the use of social networks ( Facebook & Second Life) before their use by students and educators was widespread and well-understood.

• PRO - Ewan McIntosh, National Adviser on Learning and Technology Futures for Learning and Teaching Scotland, the education agency responsible for curriculum development, and a member of the Channel 4 Media Advisory Board. He writes about social media and learning for the Guardian and the BBC, speaks internationally and consults for organizations including the British Council, the RSA, General Teaching Council of Scotland, RM and Scottish Enterprise, advising on how social media can be harnessed for to improve learning. He blogs at http://edu.blogs.com

·          Guest participants will also contribute featured comments .

o     Parry Aftab , Founder & Executive Director, WiredSafety.org

o     Judith Krug, Directory, Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association (ALA)

o     Ann Flynn, Director, Education Technology, National School Board Association (NSBA)

o     Nancy Willard, Executive Director, The Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use

Follow the Debates on Facebook

The Economist has launched a Facebook group for followers of the debate. If you’re already a Facebook member, we encourage you to join our group where you’ll find syndicated content and be able to interact directly with members of The Economist community, including some of our previous guest participants.

Here’s a short debate schedule:

·          Tuesday, January 15 - Opening statements & floor opens to comments from public

·          Wednesday, January 16 - Guest Participant, Parry Aftab , WiredSafety.org

·          Thursday, January 17 - Rebuttals

·          Monday, January 21 - Guest Participant, Judith Krug, American Library Association

·          Tuesday, January 22 - Guest Participant, Ann Flynn, National School Boards Association

·          Wednesday, January 23 - Closing statements

·          Thursday, January 24 - Guest Participant, Nancy Willard, Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use

·          Friday, January 25 - Debate winner announced

Check back regularly to see the latest comments by your peers and to see if the moderator or debaters picked up your or other viewpoints from the floor. And as always, if you prefer not to be contacted again by me regarding The Economist Debate Series, please let me know. I’m more than happy to comply.

.

 

 

 

This is Freaking Delicious!

Figured I'd take a minute to explain some posts that you've probably noticed on The Tempered Radical that you may not be familiar with.  They're called "links for" posts, and you'll start seeing them on a regular basis. 

Here's an example.

"Links For" posts are an interesting service provided by one of my favorite Web tools, Delicious.  Delicious is known as a "social bookmarking" application.  In it's simplest form, Delicious serves as an online bookmark application that readers can use to keep a list of "favorites" accessible from any computer connected to the Internet. 

In and of itself, that's pretty handy.  How many times have you wished that you could get to your favorites list when you were sitting at someone else's computer?  With Delicious, you can. What makes Delicious even more powerful, though, is that you can make your "favorites" list open and available to anyone who is interested in looking at what you are reading. 

Here's mine.

That means that if you find someone whose thinking stimulates yours, you can "see" what it is that is leaving them jazzed on any given day.  Chances are, that material is likely to be of interest to you as well, right?  Essentially, Delicious users are helping one another to "sift through" the volumes of content available online.  Rather than Googling a topic, Delicious users can narrow their focus by exploring the links that others they admire or respect are bookmarking. 

For example, I'm always highly motivated by Will Richardson.  After all, he's doing some remarkable thinking around the innovative ways that technology can be used in the classroom, right?  Wouldn't it be cool to share his online reading list?

Well, you can....and I do!  It's available right here at Delicious.  If you use a feed reader like Pageflakes to keep track of the blogs that you like to follow (Here's mine), you can even add someone else's Delicious account to your feed and instantly track the content that they are bookmarking each day. 

Now here's the real kicker:  For each item that you bookmark, Delicious will provide you with a direct link to all of the other users who bookmarked that the same item.  Take a look at this image, showing an entry in my Delicious account:

 

Do you notice the "saved by 31 other people" text highlighted in pink?  That link will take me to the Delicious accounts of other users who found this same article interesting.  Most of them are users that I'm sure I won't know---after all, tens of thousands of people use Delicious every single day.  But one thing that all 31 of us share in common is an interest in this particular article on recording Skype interviews. 

How can that be valuable to consumers of web-based information?

It's an instant "starting point" for researching.  I know that I share a common interest with the 31 other users who bookmarked this particular article:  We are all researching ways to best record conversations that we have through Skype.  The chances are good that someone in that list of 31 people has found even more information about our shared interest.   

So why not spend some time poking around their Delicious accounts! 

By doing so, I'll be able to benefit from the time that they've spent winnowing down the available resources on our shared topic of interest.  The effort that they've invested in searching the Web will be time that I don't have to spend---and the effort that I've invested is time that they don't have to spend.  By sharing our resources, we're making one another collectively smarter...and we're saving one another time. 

And we don't even know one another!   Amazing, huh?

Now, Delicious also has a feature that allows users to automatically post links to their bookmarked resources in their blogs....and that's something that I configured yesterday.  So every day at 5 AM (a time I arbitrarily picked because I didn't bother to look up what "GMT" was), Delicious is going to post a list of everything that I bookmarked the previous day. 

Lots of bloggers are using this feature primarily because it allows their readers to "track" what's on their minds.  Obviously, you've been drawn to the Radical for some reason, right?  Otherwise you would have stopped reading a long time ago. 

So I figure you'll probably be interested in seeing what I'm reading each day!  Maybe the resources that I reflect on will be something valuable to you as well...and if it is, that's a beautiful thing because it's saved you time and hassle. 

Now, just know that the "links for" posts that you find here aren't going to be fancy at all.  There's no pictures attached and no commentary---other than what I add into Delicious when bookmarking a site.  They are simply a list of the things that I've read during the course of a day.

Also know that you'll see resources that are related to all of my personal interests:  Technology, education, politics, the European Union.  I only have one Delicious account and I use it for all of my personal and professional purposes.  So the next time you see an article in my Delicious links about the Schengen agreement or the American Gladiators, don't be surprised!   

Anyone else out there using Delicious?  What kind of impact has it had on your ability to become an efficient consumer of online information?  Has it made your life easier in any way?  How?

Better question:  Is it important for teachers to introduce tools like social bookmarking services and feed readers to kids?  After all, managing online information is only going to get harder in the future, right?

Best question:  When will Delicious be banned by my district's firewall!

 

Our Digital Starvation Plan. . .

WARNING:  What you're about to read is the tale of a semi-exhausted, tech starved teacher!  You know the type:  Strung out on email...a carpel-tunnelled Twittering mess....Babbling about URLs and HTTPs...But also likely to understand a thing or two about the challenges of digital integration!

The past few days have been nothing short of a massive headache for me. You see, I've been fighting a seemingly never-ending fight against our district's firewall. Having heard the call for introducing students to the skills necessary for succeeding in the "21st Century," I've begun exploring online services that allow students to use the Web to create, communicate and collaborate with others.

After all, those are the skills that will determine success in an increasingly digital future, aren't they? Businesses are beginning to recognize that bandwidth allows them to break large projects into smaller chunks that they electronically "ship" to professionals in faraway destinations.

"Teams" in the most progressive work places today (and the most common work places of tomorrow) are just as likely to be comprised of several individuals who collaborate online instead of face-to-face in old fashioned conference rooms. By relying on digital tools for collaboration and communication, businesses guarantee themselves access to the most accomplished employees...or the cheapest employees....or both!

As a result, isn't it essential to teach today's students how to use the Web efficiently and effectively for communication and collaboration? Won't doing otherwise literally fail our students, leaving them unprepared for the work world that they will inherit?

And while I still place a priority on using technology to deliver the required elements of my curriculum (to do otherwise is to waste class time that I don't have), does anyone else believe that teaching technology for technology's sake is becoming somewhat essential, too?

Consider this quote from eSchool News:

“Educators, economists, and forecasters all agree on the growing importance of so-called "21st-century skills" in the workplace. While reading, writing, and arithmetic will always form the foundation of any solid education, digital communication and media literacy are on the verge of being elevated to the same level of importance. In addition to requiring advanced skills in reading and math, the employers of tomorrow are going to require a high degree of digital and multimedia fluency.”

But teaching "21st Century skills" has been anything but easy for me. At every turn, my efforts are thwarted (you can tell I'm jazzed anytime I throw down the word thwarted!) as each service that I discover is blocked by our district's firewall.

First it was Flickr---which I was using to have students annotate images of families from around the world, looking for similarities and differences to their own lives.

The reason it was blocked: The presence of inappropriate content in the Flickr community.

Then it was Trailfire, which I was using to have my students study---ironically enough---Internet safety. I had created a collection of annotated websites that my students could navigate through, answering questions that I had left for them about responsible Web behaviors. I had also planned to have my students find sites exploring both sides of a controversial issue (think global warming), organize those sites into a Trail, and then leave annotations that shared their thinking about each site.

The reason it was blocked: The presence of inappropriate content in the Trailfire community.  (And no joke, there was some crazy sick inappropriate content in the Trailfire library.)

Next is likely to be Voicethread. I say "likely to be" because I'm fighting tooth and nail to get it on the "approved software" list---and as of this morning, it is still currently available in our school. Voicethread is literally the tool I value the most.

I'm using it to engage my kids in collaborative conversations around images, and it's been a huge success. My kids---on assignments that are completely ungraded---have viewed our Voicethreads over 2,000 times and have left over 200 audio and text comments on our pictures since September.

Even better, we're right in the middle of establishing a digital partnership with a school in Kuwait and another school in Denmark where we are hoping to use Voicethread to reflect on different cultures by studying images from our homes and communities. Our students are going to have their first chance to literally use the Web to create, collaborate AND communicate with kids abroad, mirroring the work that they'll be asked to do in the future.

Why do I suspect it will be blocked: Because if you poke around long enough in Voicethread, you're likely to find someone using it to create inappropriate content.

The blocking of Skype has also been a problem for me this week---even though my district hasn't blocked it! Instead, it's been blocked by a sister school in New York that I'm hoping to connect our kids with. They keep a really neat blog about current events that mirrors the work that my students do on our classroom blog, so we figured we'd Skype each other to share ideas about how we're using blogs to think and write about the news.

Why was it blocked in New York: Because people can definitely use Skype to create inappropriate content---and in real time, too!

The final straw (which is what led to this extended rant) was when I walked into school this morning and found out that Snip URL has been blocked too! Of all of the services blocked to date, Snip URL may be the simplest...but it is also one of the most important! Snip URL allows users to take really long web addresses and convert them into shorter, more manageable addresses.

Think about how important that is for my middle schoolers when they are researching for classroom assignments? Sometimes they find websites that they want to cite in their research that are over 100 characters long---like this one, linking to a map of Kenya:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Flag_of_Kenya.svg/800px-Flag_of_Kenya.svg.png&imgrefurl=http://bpy.wikipedia.org/wiki/%25E0%25A6%259B%25E0%25A6%25AC%25E0%25A25BF:Flag_of_Kenya.svg&h=533&w=800&sz=20&hl=en&start=3&um=1&tbnid=sMao2wUOfjViJM:&tbnh=95&tbnw=143&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkenya%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7GGIC%26sa%3DN

How exactly is a twelve-year old supposed to copy that web address down on their Works Cited page?

The answer is simple: Copy and paste it into Snip URL to get a shortened version. Need an example? Then look at this link to the exact same image that I created using Tiny URL, a similar service that is sure to be blocked once someone figures out that it exists:

http://tinyurl.com/3yb8ok

Why is Snip URL blocked: Because people can use it to disguise links to inappropriate websites.

Now don't get me wrong: I completely understand the need to keep our children safe while surfing the web in school, and I believe that the creators of Web 2.0 content authoring tools should work diligently to design systems that block or to "quarantine" explicit content from their sites if they hope to ever tap into the massive marketplace that is the K-12 school community.

What I disagree with is the method that our districts are choosing to use to "keep children safe." By simply blocking services, we give parents, children and teachers a false sense of security.

While they won't be able to get to inappropriate content while in school, kids are certainly stumbling upon it all the time while online at home----and we haven't done anything as educators to prepare them to make responsible decisions when they land somewhere they shouldn't! I would argue that a more responsible action on the part of our schools and districts would be to develop a comprehensive Internet saftey curriculum that is delivered in every classroom.

My real frustration today, though, lies in the fact that a "block it all" mentality on the part of district technology decision makers is preventing me from engaging kids in the kinds of creative uses of technology that education advocates have been pushing for the past five years. Heck, in our state, developing students who are prepared to succeed in the 21st Century as globally competitive citizens is the primary objective of the State Board of Education.

How do I do that when every free tool available becomes unavailable every time that I turn around?

More later....My mind is just starting to slow down enough to put some real brainpower behind this issue. Until then, what kinds of challenges is your district facing in balancing the need to keep children safe with the desire to prepare "21st Century" citizens? Have y'all brainstormed meaningful solutions to what is sure to be a constant issue in the upcoming decade?

What are the barriers in this debate? How are successful schools and districts getting around those barriers?

(This article is continued here in the post titled To Protect and To Prepare)

Random Babblings 1: Gabcast, Grading and the Gladiators

Alright y'all...I wanted to introduce you to a new type of post that I suspect that you'll see more of here in the Radical called Random Babblings.  Random Babblings are born from an all-too common problem in my life:  I can't stop thinking about teaching and learning, but I also can't find time to sit down and write more often!

I'll bet that's a challenge for some of you too, isn't it?  You'll have a drink with a friend and get engaged in an incredibly meaningful conversation about education---then forget half of it before you can write it down.  An idea will strike you as you're standing in the halls "on duty," then you're swamped with sixty twelve-year olds for six and a half hours. 

In fact, most of us have probably forgotten more of our good ideas than we've recorded, haven't we?

Well, I've found what I think will be a bit of a solution for me in a service called Gabcast.  Gabcast literally allows users to call a phone number from their cell phones and record a message about anything at any time.  Then, that message can be embedded directly into a blog.  If you can figure out the settings (which I haven't yet mastered), Gabcast will even post your message into your blog immediately!

What does that mean for me?

Well, I've put the Gabcast phone number in my speed dial so that when I've got a bit of an idea rumbling through my head but lack the time to sit and write, I can record my thinking as a rough draft to return to later.  Now I know that whenever an idea strikes me, it won't be lost----unless I can't find a cell!

Not bad, huh?

I debated long and hard about whether I wanted to post my Gabcast files here in the Radical because I suspect that some of them are going to lack spit and polish.  I mean, I'm certain you'll hear more "umms and ahhhs" in ten minutes of Radical Speak than Wolf Blitzer is likely to drop in a year.  Remember, I chose writing as a forum for communication because that's what I'm good at. 

But in the end, I decided that making my thinking transparent in any form was the real purpose for the Radical----and Gabcast can make that possible.  I suspect that each time I post a Babbling, I'll return to that topic later and craft a more detailed written response.  My "babbling" is essentially a first draft....and that might end up being kind of cool. 

I'm looking forward to seeing whether or not my ideas evolve over time....and whether or not that evolution can be tracked from my Gabcast files to my written posts.  More importantly, I'm willing to let my readers watch that evolution----even if it appears messy and unpolished. 

Why? 

Because I think that's one of the most powerful elements of the blogging experience.  Blogging, to me, is about reflective thinking.  It's about wrestling with powerful ideas---and mentally wrestling with an issue is as sweaty and dirty as the real thing!  That kind of intellectual smackdown is what Ewan McIntosh argues makes blogging an incredible forum for personal growth and professional development. 

If I can model that reflective process for my students, then my Random Babblings posts will be worthwhile times ten---even if you don't like them! 

All that I ask from you is that you understand that any ideas recorded in a Random Babbling are in their infancy.  They are fleeting thoughts that I've chosen to capture before the escape in the flash of demands that is the day of a classroom teacher.  Consider them a digital example of the quick conversations you share in the halls between classes with your colleagues----equally powerful and incomplete. 

Also, if you listen to a Random Babbling, consider leaving me a comment to push my thinking!  Force me to consider positions outside of my own because in a Babbling, my positions haven't developed yet.  They're far from finalized----which is the perfect time for others to point out the flaws in my logic. 

Sounds cool, huh?  Let's see what this becomes. 

Here's my first Random Babbling....recorded in my car as I drove across Raleigh last night.  It's on the inherent connections between American Gladiators and traditional grading practices  Simply click the play icon in the small blue player found below to "hear" what's on my mind:

Gabcast! Tempered Radical Postings #1

Looking forward to your feedback....Both on my beliefs about grading and the idea of Random Babblings.

The Wrong Set of Digital Lenses?

Have you ever had one of those weeks where your mind is simply flying with thoughts about teaching and learning that just won't stop? 

Then you'll understand exactly where I am today!

You see, I've spent the past few weeks developing a course on blogging in education for the American company Pearson Achievement---and it's given me a chance to spend time studying some of the best bloggers and blog resources....all while getting paid!

I've probably read most everything that Ewan McIntosh has been writing lately---between posts by Jeff Utecht and Clay Burrell.  All have some pretty remarkable posts that remind me of why blogs have become my primary form of professional development and reflection.  Literally---I could learn more for free by scrolling through my feed reader than I could in a thousand years worth of in-service training sessions!

And until about 2 hours ago, I planned to write about Jeff Utecht's great K12 Online Conference presentation on sustainable blogging because it is changing the way that I'm thinking about the work we do in my classroom with blogs.  It's truly a worthwhile twenty minutes that I'm certain to return to soon.

But I just walked away from a meeting that has gotten me thinking about the state of digital learning in our schools.  I had lunch with a decision maker who was interested in hearing more about the potential for establishing digital partnerships between students in the States and students abroad. 

Over the course of our conversation, my colleague mentioned that one challenge is convincing others that digital relationships are real relationships.  "So many times," he mentioned, "The people that I work with shy away from digital opportunities because they believe that you can't truly know someone unless you have a face-to-face opportunities to get to know them."

Does that sound familiar to you?  It sounds all too familiar to me! 

Many teachers that I meet seem resistant to digital dialogue simply because electronic relationships "don't feel real" to them---and I can't say that I blame them.  After all, most of today's teachers have grown up in an era where technology just didn't play a very significant role in one's day to day life---and anytime email constitutes the extent of your digital interactions with others, you're bound to be skeptical about the value of a relationship built online! 

But is it possible that those teachers are making judgments about what kinds of relationships are "real" by looking through their own (somewhat tarnished) digital lenses?

Think about it----our students have spent their lives connected.  They've sent thousands of instant messages and texts.  They have personal web pages and blogs.  They play online versions of video games with "partners" thousands of miles away.  They spend hours behind a computer screen, plugged into an iPod or talking to someone on their cell phones, don't they?  They've got webcams and they're not afraid to use them!

In my personal life, I had a first-hand experience that got me thinking the other day.  My 3 year old niece who I've only met twice Skyped me.    I was pretty certain that she would struggle with the idea of "talking" to me online...and I couldn't have been more wrong. 

As soon as she figured out who it was staring back from the computer screen, she started talking as if I was in the same room---"Hi, Uncle Bill!  I love you.  I went to the zoo today and saw the animals."  Heck, when we were finished talking, she even put her cheek up to the webcam and asked me for a kiss.

Amazing, huh?

How would our students define "real relationships?"  Do you think digital interactions are any less "real" to them than the face-to-face friends that they have?  Is it possible that the digital relationships that we find dissatisfying are becoming nothing more than a natural extension of "human connections" in their tech-driven world?

Is the very idea of "relationships" changing?.