Cur-educ-ation...

   by  http://heretakis.com 

The ability to curate well is increasingly more desirable and necessary technology leadership and teaching skill. Despite their requisite teaching and learning value, trade materials found at teacher stores and other static 'set in stone' print materials designed to be photocopied or replaced once used won't be able to hold up to the nearly unbelievable volumes of immediately available and up to the minute online teaching and learning resources available in different forms online. This would be very difficult to debate, and perhaps a statement of the obvious. The fact that there are so many online resources available is irrelevant if educators aren't skilled at retrieving them and making good use of them in a teaching and learning context. In order for school leaders to model effective 'cur-educ-ation' skills, they will have to develop some of their own first.

curate[n. kyoo r-it; v. kyoo-reyt, kyoo r-eyt] verb (used with object), curated, curating.

• to take charge of (a museum) or organize (an art exhibit)

• to pull together, sift through, and select for presentation, as music or website  content

curate. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved August 14, 2014, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/curate

The short and long now of education innovation...

flickr image via return the sun

Now is a curious word. For something to be happening now, now has to have a length. Whether a fleeting instance like a millisecond, a minute, day, week or longer, now has to have some degree of length so something has time to happen in the now. I think of now as being short or long. Each day I spend at school, when compartmentalized as a block of time where things happen quite quickly, is to me a fairly short now. I would consider what might be accomplished in an entire school year in a longer now context, and something like the continuum of technology integration in schools a very long now process. I think this short and long now perspective is a big factor relative to innovation in education.

My west coast Twitter colleague, Jamie Billingham (@jamiebillingham) put out a very interesting post recently on the Thought Stream blog. Representing feedback from the entire Thought Stream team, Jamie wrote about what they at Thought Stream feel 2013 and beyond will look like in the education innovation context. Jamie made some thought-provoking predictions in her post about a broad range of initiatives that are already in play in the short now, and that are certainly worth extending into the long now education reform context.

One size fits all?

 flickr image via cameronparkins

My school (formerly a sixth to eighth grade middle school,) is now an inquiry-focused, sciences and technology kindergarten to eighth grade school... elements that when put together can also be called my dream job. The school is in its third year of this paradigm shift toward a custom-built K-8 inquiry, sciences and technology context. We believe that our new school context creates an optimal environment to perpetuate the learning goals of our District.

The inquiry part of what we're doing at our school is what I want to focus on here. What is inquiry, and how are we building an inquiry-based school? This is the inquiry question we've been working on answering. To me, the process of answering this question is what's so exciting about being part of Glendale school's transformation. Our group of teachers are all at different places in their understanding of inquiry, technology and sciences, and that is not only OK, it is expected in an inquiry-based learning environment. We all have personal learning tendencies. Some like to go fast, take risks and make mistakes... others are more cautious and calculated, but everyone needs to be supported if we are to effectively balance the professional development needs of all staff. I believe it is very important to remember that an inquiry-based school doesn't work very well as a one-size-fits-all environment to address this diversity.

It is very important that we, (meaning all members of the school family: students, staff, parents and significant community members as partners,) have a collective vision and mission that guide our practice, but it's also very important that each individual member of our school understands that the collective vision and mission does not dictate that there is only one correct way to do something, and that we don't all have to be at the same place, and on the same timeline as we learn forward. If we were to believe so as teachers, we would not be modeling an authentic inquiry teaching and learning context, as surely we understand that our students don't learn in the same way, and at the same pace. The inquiry learning process is in part driven by the students themselves making it impossible to line everyone up in order of learning space and learning time. From Alberta Education on inquiry learning,

Effective inquiry is more than just asking questions. Inquiry-based learning is a complex process where students formulate questions, investigate to find answers, build new understandings, meanings and knowledge, and then communicate their learning's to others.  In classrooms where teachers emphasize inquiry-based learning, students are actively involved in solving authentic (real-life) problems within the context of the curriculum and/or community.  These powerful learning experiences engage students deeply.

 As we move forward we are asking ourselves over and over again, "how do we create authentic inquiry learning within our classrooms and school," we are confronted by the reality that, (like any good inquiry question,) there is more than one answer. There has to be, owing to the fact that every member of our school family possesses different knowledge, skills and attitudes (KSA) relevant to inquiry learning, and even within each KSA, we all possess different levels of function. This is real life, and it's awesome. The diversity we have among our school family members is not a bug; it's a feature... as long as we frame it that way and are able to let go of our anxieties about changing the way we are teaching and learning. There is no one size fits all solution to our guiding inquiry question... we need everybody's answers.

As we ubiquitously create the school we want to serve kids best in an inquiry-based, science and technology focused context, it is critically important that we understand the answers are in here... we are the answer to every question we ask regarding the directions we go, the services we provide and the ways that we care for each other, our students and the rest of the Glendale school family. In the authentic spirit of professionalism and collaboration, we must look first to ourselves for the answers to our own questions... that's what creativity is all about.

Returning to our District Education Plan, we couldn't ask for a better frame to guide our inquiry. We are representing the District-wide goals of inclusion, literacy and high school completion. We see the process as constructive. We start by inquiring about inclusion. We ask ourselves the inquiry question, "how do we create a sense of belonging for every single member of our school family?" and then we work off this foundation building toward other inquiry questions that guide our effort to promote literacy across the curriculum, and eventual successful high school completion.

When we work in a many sizes to fit many inquiry teaching and learning environment, we recognize the value of perspective. We all have one, our students included, and making the effort to know each others is inherently engaging and inclusive. We are focusing on each others strengths, and the strengths of our students to point us in the direction of likely engagement. We all come to school wanting to do well, and focusing on what we can do instead of what we can't leads us down paths that we want to travel. We fully understand that our strengths are differential, and we consider this a bonus... we promote the sharing of strengths openly so we can learn from each other and leverage our ability to maximize positive effect without the pressure of feeling that we're alone on our journey. This is the inclusive path at Glendale School.

Literacy to us is not just a reading and writing issue. We promote literacy in a wide range of developmental knowledge, skill and attitude domains. We understand that kids need to grow literacy comprehensively... physical, emotional, social, environmental, numerical, artistic, musical etc... if they are to be well-rounded learners who recognize how different levels of competence in different domains complement each other, we need to support inquiry into all these domains. We're framing them as the Sciences, and to us, they are also inclusive,

How often people speak of art and science as though they were two entirely different things, with no interconnection. An artist is emotional, they think, and uses only his intuition; he sees all at once and has no need of reason. A scientist is cold, they think, and uses only his reason; he argues carefully step by step, and needs no imagination. That is all wrong. The true artist is quite rational as well as imaginative and knows what he is doing; if he does not, his art suffers. The true scientist is quite imaginative as well as rational, and sometimes leaps to solutions where reason can follow only slowly; if he does not, his science suffers.

– Isaac Asimov
“Prometheus,” The Roving Mind (1983)

We believe there needs to be a zen-like balance between the arts and sciences... what for many are dichotomous domains. Staff members are involved in teaching the sciences as related to their relative knowledge, skills and attitudes within particular areas. We play to people's strengths. Everyone contributes based on what they have to offer. This is our balance, and we have great capacity to represent good inquiry teaching across the spectrum.

As we strive to provide inclusive environments targeting the development of literacy across domains, we believe we are promoting high school completion. One of our projects in the context of inclusion is called Empathy ReBoot. We believe that feelings come first, thoughts second and then tools... in other words, we believe we need to be empathic to the feelings of others before we can help them think with purpose. When we become attuned to the feelings of others, even if we don't fully understand them, we can at least have insight into their perspective. This insight allows us to help them form purpose; to write their learning stories during the time they are with us; to explore and develop literacy in multiple domains.

Caring for our students in this way shows them we are interested and want to walk with them down their learning paths; to think forward. Once we enter this forward-thinking mindset, it becomes much easier to develop tools together making the journey more purposeful, efficient and enjoyable... the kind students don't want to end, even past high school.

A motto I like to use, and it's permanently fixed on my classroom wall...

If you're having fun and not learning, that's bad.
If you're learning and not having fun, that's worse.
If you're learning and having fun, that's our classroom.

 If either of the first two situations arises in my classroom, it really just means we haven't asked enough of the right questions.

21st Century? Let's Just Call it Contemporary Teaching and Learning...

I don't write a lot about technology in education, but it is a prominent aspect of my professional development. I learned some years ago that the best way to learn in the context of professional development is to do the background work required to provide professional development for others. I did just that at the recent Alberta Technology Leaders in Education Conference (ATLE) 2010 in November. It's hard to believe I hadn't heard about this conference, and right in my backyard. Anyway, when I did hear about it via Twitter, I jumped at the opportunity to propose a session- Insights on Initiating a Technology Integration Game Plan from the Ground-Up.

My session was very-well attended and I was pleased with the dialog that it generated. I formatted my presentation in the form of a workspace; a style I'm using more and more often. I appreciate the collaborative element work spaces provide, and I think of this sort of presentation as an "open source" offering... when I'm done with my rant, those who attended can do whatever they want with it. The link is theirs to use however they want. They can even do the presentation themselves if that's what works for them. I'm learning that to be truly collaborative, (and my experience at ATLE 2010 confirmed this for me once again,) I have to let go of what I believe is a natural tendency of teachers to protect "their" stuff. If what I have to say helps a colleague advance their practice, I encourage them to leverage my message in their own way for their own purpose.

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to attend much of the rest of the conference as a result of other responsibilities and commitments, so my learning was limited to what I discovered while preparing my presentation. My school is on a technology integration learning curve funded through the Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI). Near half-way through our technology integration action research project, we've learned a great deal as a staff, and I've learned a tremendous amount personally as a leader within the project, mostly by making mistakes.

One of my larger epiphanies has surrounded the term 21st Century Learning. I'm not fond of this term. I have thought about this a great deal, and I've come to the conclusion that contemporary kids don't need to be told they are learning in the 21st Century... they just are. To me learning in the 21st Century, when boiled down to a core element is really just about change; not change as in a desired change of state from what is not good to what is, but rather change as a constant. This is how I've learned to frame change in contemporary teaching and learning. The world is shrinking and growing at the same time. This bit of irony continues to fascinate me. Technology creates accessibility among people around the globe, connecting them in affordable and efficient ways never before possible; our world is shrinking. At the same time, these networks and connections allow us exposure to new cultures, ideas and knowledge previously inaccessible; our world is expanding. This is an awesome shift.

As I stood and spoke with my audience during ATLE 2010, it struck me that much of the professional development we do in education fits the "change as moving to a desired outcome or state" paradigm. My session was contextualized as a primer for building a technology integration plan from scratch, and when I asked participants where they were at on the tech integration spectrum, most indicated they  arrived at a place where technology integration was evident. There was one lady though who asked me before I started who the target audience was. I explained that my initial plan for the session was to provide some insights for colleagues who were just getting started, but as I worked to prepare the session in the weeks leading up to ATLE 2010, I realized that the process of change, (in this case, change in the way we approach and utilize technology in schools,) is perpetual. Authentic change doesn't end because once we get to the state we desire, it's time to change again; that's just the nature of change within contemporary teaching and learning.

I told the lady that my session was for anyone who had an open-mind and a willingness to think deeply about the role of technology in schools, and more importantly, how teachers should be continuously upgrading and refining their technology skills and perspectives. She stayed, and participated in the back channel too. She engaged, and that made me happy.

So in retrospect maybe I should have called my session "Approaching Technological Change in Contemporary Teaching and Learning" instead, because that's what it ended up being. Imagine that, my approach changed to fit the context of my learning and what I wanted to share with my colleagues... maybe I am becoming a contemporary teacher and learner.

Drug and tech companies... too much influence?

flickr CC image via shipbrook

As drug companies influence medicine, is there a concern among educators that tech companies will become too influential in education?

In a market driven economy, I am of the opinion that sometimes wrong actions take place because they haven't been thoroughly and systematically reviewed beforehand. The Vioxx controversy comes to mind. The massive scale prescription of Vioxx proved to be damaging to our collective health to be sure.

The tech world operates in a market economy too. I wonder if we are occasionally sold a bill of goods in the "latest and greatest" tech tool that will advance our teaching practise and our student's abilities. As I write this, I'm actually wondering as far as software goes, why we're being sold anything tech oriented with all the open-source software out there for the taking. To further that idea in the context of education, can we be far away from open-source hardware? I see possibility in big hardware companies taking advantage of the availability of the recycled tech hardware that Moore's Law creates, refurbishing it, and giving it to educational institutions for free under the provision that a partnership is established to help develop software and uses for the hardware that the partner company has a vested interest in.

All I'm trying to say is, in our vigor to remain on top of Moore's Law in providing the most advanced tech integration possible in our schools, are we forgetting in our haste that just because something is "new," that it doesn't automatically mean it is pedagogically good for us or our students?

The More Things Change, the More They Should Stay the Same...

flickr CC image via robinrkc

We live in a strange and wonderful time. Our world is changing at a rate never before witnessed in virtually every aspect of society. Arguably, the advancement and integration of technology in society is at the forefront of this change. In the context regarding how technology is changing our lives, a curious irony is taking place.  As our technological capabilites expand, the distance and wonderment between previously unreachable networks of people shrink at the same time.

Technologically speaking, we appear to be rewriting the book on so many things: collaboration; cultural awareness; sharing of skills and knowledge; popular culture; real-time news... navigating this change is a fast-moving train. As a result, I am anxious that ethical and moral relativism is rearing its ugly head. Responsible utilization of digital fluency means different things to different people, and the rationalization of purpose and need regarding technology can take questionable forms. This is why I say, the more things change, the more they should stay the same.

In times of quantum change, there is a tendency to focus on rewriting the rules we think need to align with the change. We forget that, philosophically speaking, everything worth discovering has already been discovered, and that the challenge is to discover it again. In our quest for increasingly faster channels of technology evolution, I believe we can lose sight of deeply entrenched, historical values and essential truths that should be guiding our evolution; timeless bits of wisdom that never go out of style. Ethically and morally speaking, in order to guide the evolution of our new technology paradigm, I believe we should get back to ideological basics in the way we treat each other, the way we govern and the way we lead change.

I have stated before that there is no better arena to lead technology change than within the institution of learning. Can there be a better environment to synthesize timeless truths with the minute-by-minute advances occuring within the digital world? However, in order for this to happen, attitudes and perspectives need to be re-evaluated.

In virtually every collection of thoughtful insights since the beginning of intellectualism,  whether within Toltec wisdom, the Ten Commandments, the Book of Tao or countless others, sages have been extolling the virtues of ethical and moral well-being. Can we define a set of contemporary moral and ethical guidelines for the use of our expanding technology knowledge? Is anybody writing this book? Assuredly, everyone has an opinion related to how technology should be affecting and shaping our lives, and this needs to be respected, but also analyzed from a critical perspective... grounded in the timeless ethical and moral frameworks that already exist throughout the world. As a teacher and advocate for children, I believe school is the perfect place to begin filtering these frameworks alongside the technology integration challenges facing society.

A culture of learning is a culture of inquiry that values discovery and supports creativity, but it's also a culture that acknowledges discoveries of the past that guide our inquiry. Relative to the intense inertia surrounding advancing technology, there is without a doubt, contemporary wisdom to be gained through modern thought processes that will help us continue to learn and develop insight into how to maximize the advance; but there also exists timeless wisdom yet to be fully acknowledged by contemporaries about how leaders of technology change can ground their work ethically and morally. It is the integrative nature of combining the two spheres of wisdom that will allow us the largest capacity to frame technology so its potential to affect society positively will be fully realized.

Calling all schools: this is our task... are you prepared for the challenge?

Technology in Education- How to Support a Tip in the Right Direction

flickr CC image via Hampton Roads Partnership

There are so many issues surrounding education. People all over the world are tweeting, joining personal learning networks, participating in professional development and lobbying about all of these issues... there is seemingly no end to it, and perhaps this is for good reason. One of the most current extremely hot-button issues in education is the integration of technology in teaching and learning. Considering the pace at which technology is advancing in our world, there is a very real challenge in education to keep pace. (I would argue that keeping pace isn't even good enough. I believe that educators should be leading the charge in society regarding technology integration and utilization. Can there be a better environment for this to occur?)

As correlated to so many variables influencing the tone that technology integration in schools takes place, (age, access to technology, desire to learn, socioeconomic status, school division philopsophy, personal teaching philosophy, parental support, etc.) all of us who influence children's education fall somewhere on the spectrum of attitude toward the use of technology in schools as  microcosms of society, and society in general.

By creating an us (those who endorse, support and nurture digital fluency) against them (those who don't support, for whatever reason, the advancement of social, educational and scientific technology applications) adversarial environment in schools, there is no opportunity to move from transactional forms of leadership to idea-tipping transformational leadership (what we so desperately need to effectively synthesize tech. integration in schools, and in reality, so many other change-requiring elements of N. American education institutions.)

I'm a fan of eastern philosophy. In Taoist philosophy, the word "Tao" is loosely translated as "the way." I believe that in order to find 'our way' on the technology transformation journey, education leaders need to be less provocative and more transformative.

Those of us who are keen to explore, understand, discover and utilize technology in our teaching and learning practise are duty-bound not to alienate those who, for whatever reason, are not. (I would assert that most who appear opposed to tech. integration actually aren't; they simply are anxious about something that they don't fully understand, and they're waiting for someone to just 'tell them what to do' so they can reserve the right to continue feeling, dare I say, safely dictated to by powers beyond their control.) Many teachers suffer from this default perspective, in my opinion. I also feel that the vast majority of them are intensely passionate professionals who have simply been dictated to too many times; they've lost their verve. It's up to us who's flames haven't gone out to re-ignite their desire to explore and discover the tech. integration possibilities that have yet to excite them.

We do this by treating our colleagues the same way we would responsibly treat our students when they feel anxiety toward a new challenge; we lead by example as pioneers unafraid to make mistakes. Stepping out in front as teachers constructively utilizing technology in schools will provide a bit of necessary Teflon for those who are apt to hang back and not take this sort of risk. Stepping to the back when their incremental efforts produce success is a great way to support this 'tech pioneers as leaders' mentality.

Self-esteem comes to those who become good at something, and then are provided a means to share that with others when comfortable. My strategy in leading a technology integration process aims to provide opportunities for colleagues to watch and learn without anxiety (the art of protecting,) and then to illuminate their learning progress by creating opportunities for them to share new skills (the art of celebrating). The desired outcomes are a comfortable tech learning environment where success is unaffected by stress and external pressures, and an expanded set of tech skills and insights on behalf of the teachers I work with. How can this lead to anything but a transformational change?
The most effective revolutions are the ones nobody realized were happening.