Why Teachers Aren’t Making “The Shifts”

Image via http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonbecker/4625331304
Image via http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonbecker/4625331304

I’ve began a few talks with this slide and I think it serves to spark the conversation about change. It’s been a little while since Will has pushed my thinking as he did this week with his post called “My Summer of Confusion“. While he shares many concerns and questions it was this  paragraph that prompted a response from me:

I’m also wondering to what extent is it a professional educator’s responsibility to keep abreast of the latest research, technologies, and news that impact learning? At one presentation to about 800 people, only about 25 raised their hands when I asked if they’d visited Khan Academy. In general, throughout the summer, I’d estimate less than 10% had heard of MOOCs, the Maker Movement, or 3-D printing. On many occasions, I wondered aloud if we would accept a similar lack of currency for our physicians or our accountants. Bottom line: as a profession, we’re not keeping up with the changes that are occurring.

After a few back and forths on his blog, I figured it required an expanded response.

The physician example gets used a lot but I think it’s problematic. First and foremost physicians work independently. They have pretty much full autonomy over what they learn. It’s solely based on patient needs. They have no one to report to expect their patients. The other problem I have with this analogy is that a patient’s health and doctor’s success is based almost exclusively on numerical data. I suppose that’s why many like it. Patients come in with very specific, targeted needs: “Here’s the problem, solve it”. I think what schools are tasked with is much more complex and nuanced. Finally, for any complex change or new approach, I presume physicians find and receive adequate training before they implement.

I will fully admit I’m pro teacher almost too a fault. It comes from the fact that I am a teacher and that my belief is that most teachers are in the profession to do great work. They put in endless hours and are continually asked to do more with less and in turn have lost much of what it means to be a professional. Having worked in a role where I’ve been supporting classroom teachers, the number of initiatives from state/provincial and district/school levels can be overwhelming. While the rhetoric is always, “this isn’t an add on but should be part of your classroom” it never plays out that way. In addition, the increasing gap between student ability, experience and well-being is making most “regular classrooms” obsolete. It’s forcing teachers to rethink everything. No one denies the need for differentiated instruction but few teachers have adequate training to understand and help all students be successful. It’s mentally taxing and emotionally draining.

Besides the issue of time, I think the reason teachers aren’t keeping up, as Will suggests, is that they are told they are. Most districts have staff in place to do the research for them. That was my role for 10 years. I essentially researched and studied all the ways technology was changing learning and was tasked with making those changes. During one of my deep dives into educational technology, I came across the concept of 씨벳, which opened my eyes to new approaches in digital learning platforms. The same was true for literacy, maths, assessment, and any other number of big ideas. We tried to share that research, tell teachers why they should change and how it would help kids, and then provide minimal time to figure it out, expecting them to make these changes in their classrooms. We sent them on their way and were frustrated when they weren’t doing all the things we told them to do. I made lots of mistakes in that role, and my biggest was not understanding how much time it takes and how difficult it was to make these changes. My frustration was in knowing the vast majority of teachers would never be able to make these changes under the current system.

In the comments Will wonders about those teachers who have and are making the shifts he and I talk about

Finally, what do we say, then, about the tens of thousands of teachers who have already engaged in the type of changed thinking and practice that both of us advocate? Are they just “special” in some way? A-listers? Are they all privileged in some way and immune from the pressures of “regular” teachers? I doubt it.

I don’t know exactly how to respond to this but would suggest that yes, in some ways these folks are special. When I think of some of the teachers who are changing their practice, they are often what I describe as “positive deviants“.  I’m always interested in their stories as to how they began to make the shifts they’ve made. Often there’s a bit of luck. They happen to go to a conference and hear a Will Richardson speak and are awaken to ideas they’ve never heard before. Sometimes they take a class and have a professor that introduces them to a new approach to learning. Sometimes they hear about a thing called blogging and head down a rabbit hole. While lots of people might have these same experiences and do nothing, there’s a greater number of teachers who’ve never even had a chance like these. Again, I don’t know exactly what it is but knowing we have such a small number of teachers really making these big shifts isn’t because teachers are uncaring, dumb or lack conviction.

Instead of the physician analogy, I might offer another one. Telling teachers it’s their responsibility to make the changes is like telling people living in poverty to get out of it. There are many examples of people who have come out of poverty, worked their butts off and made a new life for their family and future generations. Why can’t everyone in poverty do that? I admit, it’s not a perfect analogy but I think has as much validity as the physician one.

I’ve been privileged in my role with Discovery to work with a few districts that I think are doing the right work. They have leadership at every level who are on this journey. They struggle with how to help teachers make these shifts with the current constraints. It’s really hard to continue to focus on the “why” and also provide time and resources to work on the “how”.  There are very few districts out there who have made digital a focus. Even within those, we all know it’s not exactly about digital but without an emphasis on digital, it’s very difficult, if not impossible to fully realize the potential modern learning has to offer. Since the current system is still hierarchical, since teachers continue to lose autonomy over their own learning, the blame, if there is any, is on leadership who makes the decisions about what matters.

Okay, what I really need is for you to all chime in on this because it’s possible I could be entirely wrong, I’m just a little sensitive to any hints of teacher bashing. (Yes, I know Will you weren’t teacher bashing)

The difference between Khan and Austin

I get it. Will is has a point about the Khanifcation of Education. But as I expressed

…after watching a few and even knowing one of them, Paul Andersen, I was under the impression that most of these are classroom teachers. At least many of them are. So what's the problem? I get it, you're worried about Gates' vision of Khan but I think Khan himself argues against his work replacing teachers. I say, be wary of the business model approach but also let's stop crapping on people, teachers or not, who just want to share. If we keep this up, we're going to be discouraging new folks from sharing lest we check their credentials at the door.

These gurus are teachers and they're doing what many have us have been doing for years, sharing what they know. The fact that many of the things they're sharing are directly aligned with many curricula shouldn't make them any more of a teacher than a textbook should be seen as a teacher. They're resources. And while the video format is more compelling and often a richer learning experience, they don't replace a great teacher. They might replace a lousy one, but not a great one.  But we need to be very careful in our criticisms. Both Will and I have shared many times that the world is now full of teachers and one of our roles as classroom teachers is to help our students find the best ones and craft a learning environment that fosters our passions and also exposes us to new and unintended ideas. 

My learning project last year taught me something very important about the difference between Kahn academy and the personal relationship between a teacher and their students. Listen to the first 3 seconds of this video.

I explored many videos online to teach me to play guitar and many of them were useful. I know lots of people who have learned to play the guitar and other things simply from watching random youtube videos. The difference between all those guitar videos and this one is that none of the videos said, ""Sup Dean?" Those two words are a big deal to me. They represent the fact that Austin's video was personal, directed to me, addressing my specific needs. Playing guitar is a skill that likely can be learned without a traditional classroom teacher but the added value of a personal relationship between a teacher, in this case Austin, a 15 year old student from Connecticut and a student, an old man from Saskatchewan, made all the difference in the world. 

So yes, I get it, there's a danger in simplifying education to a series of online video tutorials but these folks that are being hailed as Edtech gurus are well meaning folks looking to share. They will never replace the personal relationship that enables a teacher to support learners as a mentor but they do play a huge role in providing useable resources that can be used to foster learning. Fight those wanting to dumb down education to a youtube channel but don't dismiss those willing to share their learning. Those are two very different conversations.

PS. Will, I still love you. 

Too Big for Your Britches

I've always felt this and certainly have experienced it, but as I've had the privilege of seeing a lot more schools and school districts up close, it's become evident to me that size is a real enemy to innovation. Change is difficult for any organization and education is particularly difficult because of its systematic problems and tensions as a public sector institution. But there is an inverse relationship between the layers of bureaucracy and the ability to innovate and change. I won't pretend that's a particularly profound or new realization but when I look at those pockets of change, it seems that it's often a result of fewer hoops to jump. 

I was fortunate to work for many years in a relatively small school district. All teachers had pretty easy access to superintendents and directors and even board members. Trust was easier to build. Certainly it doesn't guarantee a trusting environment but it's much easy to build. Convincing 2 people is easier than convincing 10. That's basic math. For example, back in 2007 I had a teacher email me asking if there might be a way for her students to use their cellphones in the classroom. This was way before we'd heard of BYOD concepts and cellphones were not quite in the hands of the majority of our teens as they are today. Within a few weeks, I had contacted our local ISP provider and within a few weeks, a plan was in place to provide these students with phones and data plans. And by the way, the school's policy was "no cellphones" which was quickly abandoned. When I tell people about the open internet, liberal filters, posting of student images, BYOD, mulitple platforms and many of the other things I was part of at Prairie South, they are often baffled as to how easily these things were able to happen. Then I forget that in most cases, those decisions were made by a small group of trusting teachers and leaders in one or two meetings. 

On Monday I had my class listen to the story of Clarence Fisher and Heather Durnin. Two teachers from rural provinces whose classrooms are one. I can't even tell you all the cool and meaningful things they do all day. From their common learning space to their connections with each other and experts,  I can't imagine there are many better learning environments than this one. They are constantly exploring new opportunities for their students. Recently they launched their own radio station. I'm guessing that most teachers would never be able to even consider this. Even if you have a principal and teacher on board, questions about permission, privacy, the things the students might say or do, etc, would kill the idea before it could take root. Clarence has always been advocating that his students, even though they are from a remote, small town in northern Manitoba can have the same opportunities as anyone. The fact is, in many ways his students are getting more of an opportunity to learn than many of our students from our biggest districts. 

 

 

Another disturbing trend with many of our larger districts and schools is an arrogance to admit they might not have all the answers. Big organizations are looked to for leadership and often they seem to be guarded against seeking help or exploring what the "little guy" is doing. Whether they actually believe they know it all or maybe they think that smaller organizations couldn't possibly have anything to offer, it's something I've seen more and more. This is certainly a relativity involved here as well. When Prairie South amalgamated from 7 districts to 1, I noticed some of the larger schools (300+ which is still small in most large urban centers) ignore or at least neglect to look to our smaller schools for expertise and innovation. Now I'm seeing some of North America's larger school districts showing little interest in what anyone of lesser size is doing in the way of innovative and promising educational practices. 

Certainly I'm making some generalizations here. Not all small districts and schools are innovative and awesome and not all larger institutions are thwarting innovation. I know Will Richardson has been on the look out for bold schools. I'm not sure what he's collected thus far but my money is most of those have reduced bureaucracy. If you're reading this and you're from a large school or district and yet you're happy with the freedom teachers have to make change and innovation, feel free to comment and help others see that it's possible. For the most part, I'm stumped as to how the red tape can be removed. To me it comes down to trust, autonomy and leadership. There are some great leaders in larger jurisdictions that are humble enough to recognize they don't have all the answers. That's what often leads to trust and autonomy. However, leaders need other leaders and too often it just doesn't trickle down. 

I used to feel bad for small districts with limited resources. I don't anymore. I truly feel for our large districts and those innovators who fight the uphill battle to make both significant and even incremental change. 

IFTTT Meme

I've not wrtten ia post about a tool in a long time. Mostly because I usually don't think about it that much and other people do a better job writing about it than I do anyway. But I've been using If This, Then That for a few months and quite like how it's helped my work flow. Will asked a few of us how we're using it and rather than try and cram it in a few tweets figured I could blog about it. Blogging is quite lovely thing for stuff like this. 😉

Let me share the tasks I've set up and why I use them..

 

I had a number of plugins that were supposed to autotweet new blog posts to twitter but they often failed. I've used the little cheesy phrase, "I've got something to share(ski)…." and it's easy to add that text in this task. It works well. 

One I hardly if ever use. I'm not very active on Facebook and really only have a presence there because of family. I thought I might occasionally have tweets using a #fb tag to go their but I never think of it. May be I wll someday. 

There's some controversy around this task. A few people I know, have thought this is kind of any "icky" thing. I get that, but after some thought I think it's useful. While it is a generic message to all new followers, it does make sure they are clear how I use twitter. Many expect me to be all serious and post awesome links all day. Instead they find I don't and perhaps at first glance think it's useless, which I admit it might be. This is the DM they receive:

FYI, I tweet about learning but I also tweet silly stuff. I do it purposefully. http://t.co/ITuMf5Y Nice to meet you.

So far I like it and have received feedback that many like it. Some I'm sure don't but I do think it's a way of establishing trust and transparency. I'm even toying with the idea of a video intro. Not to send them to my stuff or anything but simply to explain to people the way I use twitter. 

Just a way to capture favorite tweets. I even specify a notebook and tag for the tweet to fall into. 

I'm still a big google reader guy so this is a fast way to tweet good stuff in my reader. I do have to use the "add a note" part of GR otherwise it's just a link with no context. 

This is the way I largely use facebook My daily photo of the day gets posted. It's actually made me go there more as people will often comment on the pictures. One thing that's weird is it often uses the wrong thumbnail inside Facebook. Not sure why. 

The difference between this one and the other one that goes to Evernote, is that it only grabs favorite tweets that contain a link. The reason I make it private is because I don't really want the tweet, I just want the link. I'll strip out the tweet and make the link public. I need a way to streamline this because it's an extra step at this point. 

I use Evernote to build presentations and I'll star items in GR that I want to explore for presentations. 

If I could find a way to post back to Google Plus, i might use it more. This one posts to twitter from Google plus. I'm not a big plus user yet but this might serve me well at some point. Really would like to be able to get content into plus. 

 

Not sure I need this one as i tweet out new videos but as my tweet says, "you might see it on my blog soon" Most of the videos I post to youtube I end up blogging about anyway. I may scrap this one.

 

 

So there are 10 recipes/tasks I'm currently using. I'm still getting to know all the options of ifttt but I really think it's got big potential. 

In the spirit of blogging about 3 years ago, I'm going to tag some ifttt users to write about their tasks. I'd like to learn more.

Will Richardson

Danika Barker

Doug Peterson

Royan Lee

Jim Pedrech

Brian Ball

I actually forget how these memes work but if you're a ifttt using please blog about it and link back here so we can easily gather all the various uses. 

 

 

It’s not just a tool

Cross posted at Tech Learning

Saying technology is “just a tool” can be a very dangerous statement. I understand that when people say this, they’re simply trying to point out that technology is a peripheral that enables us to do the things we want to do better than before. I can agree with that concept but the problem with this thinking is that it often gets used to see พนันออนไลน์ technology only as a means to automate or make current practice more efficient. There are very few people involved in any level of education that thinks technology isn’t necessary for our students. Where we disagree is in how we’ll use it and most often there exists a lack of understanding and appreciation for the trans-formative nature of technology.

The question that my colleague Darren Kuropatwa asks in many of his presentations is “What is it I can do now that I couldn’t do before? is a fundamental question that should be asked way more. Many people’s use of technology simply involves faster and more efficient, not different. As Will Richardson points out,

“…if we’re touting the online experience has superior because kids can take trips and still do the work or because their teachers are excited, that speaks to bigger, more fundamental issues that aren’t being addressed. This is still all about content delivery, old wine in a new bottle that’s being motivated more by economics and convenience than good or better design. And it’s about, as I mentioned yesterday, a growing business interest that sees an opportunity to make inroads into education as ‘approved providers.’”

So is technology just a tool? That statement minimizes the shifts and changes that technology affords and allows people to use technology to perpetuate bad practices, more testing and seek efficiency and simplicity instead of the messiness that comes from personalized connections to passions and interests. While I advocate largely for the ability to use technology to share and make connections, the ability for us to leverage technology to create projects, works of art and beauty not possible prior to our current age should change they way we think about learning.


2917156969_6065a8811f_zI worry sometimes about efforts to “infuse technology” into our classrooms. Much of this infusion is just about continuing on with current practice and sprinkling technology on top and calling it innovative. This is when it’s just a tool. When the technology transforms the way we learn, offers us new, unchartered experiences and opportunities, it’s much more than a tool but a whole new environment.


In the book A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change by Douglas Thomas, John Seely Brown, they talk about this new culture as creating learning environments, not systems as we currently see in our schools. Systems emphasize control from a small number of managers, environments rely much more on the collective.

“If we change the vocabulary and consider schools as learning environments, however, it makes no sense to talk about them being broken because environments don’t break.”

Of course we currently aren’t using technology to create learning environments at best we’re embedding them into our current system. While that statement might seem like semantics to some, it represents the completely unique shift that can occur if we allow ourselves to fully utilize the affordance of technology. This isn’t even about some type of Utopian world of learning. With new affordance comes new problems. But these new problems need to be viewed and addressed in new ways.

So the next time someone says technology is just a tool, I’d encourage you to probe more about what that means because too often it’s a way of downplaying the significant potential and shift of emerging technologies.