Teach carpentry, not hammer | Future-proofing NZ schools

“What’s wrong with education cannot be fixed with technology…No amount of technology will make a dent…. You’re not going to solve the problems by putting all knowledge onto CD-ROMs. We can put a website in every school – none of this is bad. It’s bad only if it lulls us into thinking we’re doing something to solve the problem with education.”  (Steve Jobs, Apple CEO, Wired magazine, 1998)

Hands-up all those of you with a box of painstakingly drawn OHTs (=overhead transparencies, Google it if you’ve never seen them) or a beautifully tidy cupboard of VHS tapes, preserved on dusty shelves and neatly catalogued? I’ve got a few of those tapes knocking about at home – the six year old’s scan at 20 weeks, my first bungee jump, a few ‘80s movies (big hair! Big shoulder pads!). All of these are testament to a bygone era when OHT was cutting edge, and VHS was the way we all recorded film for posterity. Their poor, sad, dusty selves are testament, too, to the speed at which technology changes around us, developing incrementally at speeds never before seen. Top YouTube hits like ‘Shift Happens’  reflects this move, as does this infographic comparing the internet of 1996 and today [too large to reproduce here].

Schools would be forgiven for feeling overwhelmed by the task of keeping up with each new development. No sooner have we purchased interactive whiteboards, then laptops are in. We’ve just bought the laptops, and now iPads are de rigeur. Don’t buy that textbook, you can just download the e-version. How will you make the most of broadband on your doorstep? We would be forgiven, too, for feeling somewhat at the mercy of the technology corporations who seek to market each new device as the solution for educators. Certainly, Oppenheimer (1997)[1], Cuban (2001)[2] and Postman (2000)[3] have all explored the idea of schools being aggressively sold technology on the premise of improved results, efficiency, and the urgent need to prepare students for the digital future. There are certainly plenty of e-cheerleaders around to urge us on. And similar movements happened with the advent of radio, of film, of TV…

So, how can we keep our heads when others around us are losing theirs? Especially if they have the keys to the budget, to your professional development, or to your schools’ charter?

To future-proof a school, in terms of technology and ICTs, seems like an impossible task in which we are forever Lewis Carroll’s White Rabbit, racing against time.

What do we mean by ‘future-proofing’?

I think it’s important not to think of future-proofing as making decisions so sound that they won’t need to be changed.

But in the context of schooling, I would suggest that future-proofing is understanding that we have always lived in changeable times, and that schools need systems, processes and people in a state of preparedness to anticipate developments, to respond to possible challenges and to embrace opportunities. Sound curriculum and effective pedagogy may change, but we don’t have to update to a new version of these every few weeks. Much of what we know about effective schooling, change management and leadership is supported by sound, longitudinal, international research; this is our rock to cling to when the waves of technological change threaten to swamp us.

As the title of this piece asserts, we need carpentry for tomorrow, not a hammer for today[4]. In other words, we should think in terms of fostering schools’ reflexivity and students’ competencies for a changing future, not (just) to manage a single task for today.

If schools are to think about future-proofing themselves to manage the technological developments ahead, they need the capability to review what they can already do, understand where they want to go next and plan how to get there, as part of an on-going cycle of review and reflection.

So….how we might future-proof ourselves? Here are five thoughts to get you started…..

1.     Keep the New Zealand Curriculum and Te Marautanga o Aotearoa as our touchstones

These are our foundation documents for visioning, strategic planning, curriculum development and pedagogical design. If this is the starting point for decision-making, schools can feel sure that the rationale behind their choices, during periods of change, is more justified than making decisions on gut-feeling or because the school down the road is doing it.

2.     Inquire, inquire, inquire

A school that is flexible, secure in its processes and strategy is one that can respond to change in an uncertain environment. The inquiry model (adapted for the Best Evidence Synthesis series) is one that has permeated through resources on leadership, professional development and quality teaching, because it is crucial that schools, and teachers, can reflect and review on what they do, based on evidence purposely gathered. Again, decisions can be made based on firm foundations, not spur of the moment hunches.

3.     Build capability to use technologies effectively for teaching and learning

Part of a schools’ inquiry into how it is progressing might be done using a self-review tool (an e-capability model) and there are several to choose from, depending on your focus. The Ministry of Education is currently developing e-Learning Planning Framework for use in schools in 2012. The Māori-medium framework will be scoped in 2012, for possible development and use in 2013.

This framework will be a planning tool to help all teachers and organisations in New Zealand undertake a self-review of how effectively they use ICTs to enhance students’ learning (their e-capability).  The framework will provide a ‘road map’ for schools to identify where they are, the practical steps they can take, and relevant information or services to support them. Key areas of focus include the way e-learning can be enhanced through: leadership, professional learning, teaching and learning, digital citizenship, connections to the community, and technologies/infrastructure.

4.     Keep your finger on the pulse

Change is certain – but what is not so certain is how much we know about what is changing around us. This is where keeping in touch comes in – and technology can make this efficient and accessible. Teachers and school leaders can build their personal/professional learning networks (PLNs) to connect with other schools and clusters. Where to start?:

• Subscribe to useful news feeds and blogs using RSS/Google Reader.
• Participation in forums and online communities, such as Enabling e-Learning communities, can provide a flexible space to share ideas, resources and aspects of our practice.
• Build your PLN.

5.     Foster digital citizens

Can we future-proof our students? This is where the Key Competencies comes in – and, through a digital lens, these can be described as competencies for digital citizenship. Through effective curriculum planning and teaching, we can enhance students’ abilities to behave with integrity and responsibility online, build their digital literacy skills and maximize the opportunities online safely.

• Find out more on Digital Citizenship on Netsafe’s Learn-Guide-Protect site.

Further reading: New Zealand

• Future proofing schools: Emerging technologies.
• CORE Ten Trends: The ‘big ideas’ in technology of which New Zealand educators should be aware.
• The Horizon Report 2011: Synthesises short, medium and long-term trends in technology development.
• Future proofing our web 2.0 students
• Future-proofing our education system.

Further reading: International

• Making your schools future-proof
• How to future-proof our schools.

---

[1] Oppenheimer, T. (1997). The computer delusion. The Atlantic Monthly 280(1), 45-62.

[2] Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[3] Postman, N. (2000). Some new gods that fail. In The Jossey-Bass on technology and learning. San Francsico, CA: Jossey-Bass inc.

[4] The original quote is from Oppenheimer’s The Computer Delusion: “Michael Bellino, an electrical engineer at Boston University’s Center for Space Physics, stated in a protest against computers that, “The purpose of the schools [is] to…’Teach carpentry, not hammer,’” he testified. “We need to teach the whys and ways of the world. Tools come and tools go. Teaching our children tools limits their knowledge to these tools and hence limits their futures.” (http://www.tnellen.com/ted/tc/computer.htm)

 

[This piece was originally published in the NZATE English in Aotearoa Journal, October 2011. Theme: Future-proofing education.]

How confident do you feel when your students are working online?

[Cross-posted from the e-Learning Research Network]

If we are to make useful decisions about supporting our students as they use technology, it is important to have a baseline from which to make our decisions. A recent survey from Netsafe might be a useful starting point in this regard.

How confident are teachers in managing cybersafety?

This question was posed by Netsafe, an organization that understands well the challenges that schools need to overcome in order to allow students to use technology safely. The survey [http://www.netsafe.org.nz/Doc_Library/teacher-confidence-summary.pdf] was grounded on the Netsafe model of cybersafety, and key findings included:

• Teachers do not feel confident supporting students with cybersafety, with secondary and intermediate teachers less confident than those teaching at primary level. A knowledge of cybersafety issues was needed by teachers.
• In terms of managing issues, generally students were not involved in discussions about appropriate use of ICT, filtering was seen as only one element of managing cybersafety, and
• That issues extend beyond the school gate, but that educators were seen as vital in guiding students.

The survey concluded that

“significant proportions of New Zealand educators are not confident about their cybersafety ability and knowledge. This demonstrates the need to increase the confidence and ability of NZ educators. For a variety of reasons, the secondary sector may potentially require the most assistance in these domains. However, it is important to note that the primary and intermediate sectors still demonstrate significant cybersafety needs in some areas.”

What are the implications for schools?

The ways in which schools mediate learning through ICTs, and manage the challenges that occur as part of that, is a discussion that needs to occur throughout the school, from BoT, to leadership, community whānau, teaching staff and students. Listening to individuals’ concerns about working online, gathering information on students’ experiences, and comparing these with the aspirations reflected in the New Zealand Curriculum’s vision for our students is a complex strategic planning process.

It’s an issue that won’t be going away anytime soon. How does this survey resonate with your own experiences?

 

Would you change the way you use language to keep your friends?

Love this video from the National Union of Teachers (UK) – please tell me things have changed a bit since then! –  and while it might seem archaic, it might be an interesting jumping off point for students to think about how they adapt what they say, and write, when online and off.

Discussion points might include:

• The way we use different language styles according to context
• The pressure of one’s peers to change your behaviour
• Different generations and the shifts in language and behaviour

 

If you think it’s too difficult, you’re right.

This is cross-posted from a guest piece I recently wrote for CORE Education:

Feel the fear – and do it anyway

If Hilary had concentrated only on glacial ravines, would he have ‘knocked the bastard off’? Would Armstrong have taken his great leap if he had worried his oxygen failing?

And can schools embrace the learning opportunities presented by the web, by ultra-fast broadband, if they focus only on cybersafety?

We’re only a few weeks into the new school year, but there has been a slew of stories in the media about cybersafety – sexting, Facebook bullying and the like  – and we see the inevitable banning of technological access as a result.  A recent talk I gave at a local college to launch their e-learning professional learning for the year, saw excitement among staff but also concern about student safety and online bullying. A 2010 report, commissioned by the Ministry of Education, reminded us that “Preventing access in schools to mobile technologies or firewalling some sites does not teach effective and critical uses of these technologies that students have ready access to outside of school” (Wright, 2010)

Despite all the potential and promise that technology might offer to educators, to what extent do we still have a deficit model of technology?

The New Zealand Curriculum (NZC) advocates for e-learning as a way to “open up new and different ways of learning” (e-learning and pedagogy, NZC). And yet, for many schools, it is the very ‘opening up’ that is so challenging. School leaders understandably have to balance the opportunities for learners presented by, for example, ‘web 2.0 technology, with managing parental expectation and the duty to keep students safe.

Perhaps a marriage of the Key Competencies and digital citizenship might offer a potential pathway through the minefield. The NZC is littered with phrases that clearly align to the potential of e-learning; for example, the “active seekers, users, and creators of knowledge” (Vision statement, NZC) should arguably be “confident and capable user[s] of ICT” (myLGP: Learn, Guide, Protect – Netsafe) in order to create and seek knowledge for themselves.

Most importantly, the Key Competencies of managing self, relating to others, and participating and contributing clearly align to the importance of students becoming confident in the way they manage challenges online, in the way to they relate to, and communicate with, others in cyberspace.

Embracing the teachable moment, managing risk rather than banning access, and looking to the opportunities rather than the dangers are approaches far more likely to foster students’ integrity and responsibility. Especially when they will inevitably have to face cyber challenges without adult supervision.

Like Hilary and Armstrong, perhaps those schools that interpret the NZC through the lens of digital citizenship have found a way to navigate the possible risks and dangers while maintaining their focus on a greater goal – that of students being able to fully participate in the digital world.

[Image source]

 

Rethinking education: New video from Mike Wesch

I’m a bit of a fan of Professor Wesch. I like the way he captures some of the big picture ideas that sit at the point where technology and anthropology meet.

In his most recent video (a conversation starter produced for an EDUCAUSE book, The Tower and the Cloud: Higher Education in the Age of Cloud Computing, edited by Richard Katz), he explores the way peer collaboration and knowledge creation in our web 2.0 world pose serious implications for the way we regard knowledge and publications at university. And in school.

Interesting comments about the way links work instead of a hierarchy online, that there is no ‘top’ to the web, and that we need a more open approach to the concept of knowledge because we live in a sphere that is far wider and more open than before.

A teacher who encourages students to develop opinions on a wiki, or review and critique a blog post on a news item, for example, will know this already…that it is better to be open and prepare students to become discerning digital citizens of what’s out there online than deny them the opportunities that web 2.0 presents.

And if you haven’t seen Wesch’s other video think pieces, check out his YouTube channel.

Thanks to dangerously irrelevant and Free Technology for Teachers for the link:-)

When your 13-year-old joins Facebook

Finally.

I have found a great post that articulates really sensibly the role that a parent could – should? – take to support their child’s developing understanding and awareness of digital citizenship.

I was struck by the way the author, Molly Baker, embraces the benefits, and takes a pragmatic approach to the potential challenges. She acknowledges the bigger picture, the world of technology in which our children are growing up and the way. Her analogy of teaching children to ride a bike, that we need to give them ‘training wheels’, is spot on. Sensible woman.

On the other hand, the comments underneath that post reveal a whole other side to her argument, one that often sees technology as a harbinger of danger, predation and a dumbed-down view of life.

Here is the original post:   Why I finally gave in and let my 13-year-old join Facebook

(Thanks for the tip, via the blog Might be of interest; image via Freefoto.com)