i.shui.tech

Another absolute must-see from VBS.tv:

I’ve never quite understood how anyone can ignore such blatant environmental problems. Do people fight hard to pretend the planet was just as dirty 50 years ago? I remember reading how some environmentalists viewed Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” as soft on the issues. This is the kind of TV everyone needs to witness. Get slapped.

Non-biodegradable plastics are evil. We can’t possibly expect all of it will get recycled (it’s just too cheap to make it new). And it does break down eventually… into molecular poisons that living organisms (us, especially) cannot clear from our cells.

The chemical–which is widely used in products such as reusable water bottles, food can linings, water pipes and dental sealants–has been shown to affect reproduction and brain development in animal studies. ScienceDaily (Feb. 4, 2008)

As a family, we just invested in steel water bottles from Kleen Kanteen (before seeing this video). We did it initially to avoid the molecular degeneration occurring in plastic water bottles, as reported in Time magazine and elsewhere. You should do the same. Or some other non-plastic solution. Please, our children have enough toxic chemicals coursing through their bodies. Let’s stop poisoning them and planet.

Sometimes it takes time. It’s been a long hiatus, but I have lots of good stuff waiting for posting. It may be a few months outdated. For those of you with any interest whatsoever, I was hit with a long spell of business, gaming (with some interesting reflections to bring back), and most recently, shifting priorities. Hang tight. And enjoy the modern cyclo from a visit to the Hirshorn in Washington D.C. at left.

This is, admittedly, one of the best web discoveries I’ve made. VBS.tv is not your average cable channel. Out of the plethora of content, the documentaries are some of the best I’ve seen. If only PBS could get away with this. I just watched the 5 episodes (~4 minutes each) of El Dorado, Venezuela, and gold mining. It is cutting edge, brutal honesty, and by hollywood standards, PG.

Let’s talk education… you probably can’t bring this into most classrooms, which is unfortunate. The clip sizes are perfect for grabbing the right amount of attention. Followed up by a round of discourse, it could an awesome opportunity for learning. YouTube has brutal honesty. PBS has quality content. VBS.tv brings it together. And older kids will get it like nothing else. If you can bring this into the classroom, embed the videos. And kudos to you. There is some R-rated stuff on the site. Like life itself.

From the NSF website: the world’s smallest radio is a carbon nanotube! Broadcast entertainment has been slow to catch the digital wave, but innovations like this may just re-awaken the art. I’m not going to provide details… read it for yourself. On another note, it’s been a good month since my last post and I’ve just about caught my breath! Lots more nifty stuff to report on, so stay tuned!

Yesterday I posted abut the K20 Center’s OK-ACTS Leadership Seminar. While the change pedagogy and introduction to classroom technologies is great, I think there is room for improvement. One key activity is a guided reading of resources that happen to be located on the web. The resources might as well have been PDFs located on their desktop. There is little indication that these resources exist beyond the confines of there own computer. A excellent opportunity exists during this session to give them a taste of Googling, many of which may have limited experience.

This is the bane of many traditional webquests. Wherein lies the power of the internet when resources are handed to you on a platter? It just doesn’t work that way. Lists of links made by someone else are inherently subjective. I would suggest a guided search: create search phrases that insure the sought after resource is returned in the first 5 items in Google. The assignment is to read the one item, but engagement lies in the opportunity to also look at the other 4 hits which may provide added value.

Let’s take it a step forward… into the realm of social networking. I would have del.icio.us installed as a browser add-in. Have them tag it in del.icio.us. Show one example of how the article could have been located using a del.icio.us tag search.

The technological expertise of the participants is very wide ranging. These two suggestions add very little complexity, but allow far more opportunity for greater exploration.

There are certainly additional ways to introduce the participants to social networking, and I understand the need to keep on track with content. Yet, the authentic world of technology is increasingly built upon social networking tools. We should stretch the participants in the right direction.

I’m writing this post from one of the K20 Center’s OK-ACTS Leadership Seminars. The OK-ACTS (Oklahoma Achievement through Collaboration and Technology Support) program works with schools leaders through the leadership seminar and schools that have received funding for technology and professional development through a grant from the Oklahoma Educational Technology Trust (the grant is administered through the OK-ACTS program).

Targeting Oklahoma public school principals and superintendents, the seminar introduces the K20 Center’s IDEALS framework for whole school renewal using technology integration as a catalyst for change. For principals and superintendents, the two day seminar costs only $299 and the participants receive a laptop computer valued at $1500.

The seminar focuses on creation of professional learning communities (PLCs). PLC development is addressed through understanding the change process, sharing of successful models, and creation of action plans towards moving their own school or district towards a PLC. Action research, data driven decision making, and leadership skills are covered.

The K20 Center’s twist on this already successful idea is how technology integration can create a powerful catalyst for changing a school into a PLC. Classroom technologies (interactive whiteboards, student response systems, Powerpoints, classroom sound systems, etc.) are used through out the seminar to exemplify uses in teaching and learning. Participants create Powerpoint presentations, are given opportunities to word with Microsoft Word and Excel. They are provided a supportive environment to use their new laptops, find internet resources, and play with classroom technologies. Sessions are provided that demonstrate different technologies used in schools.

The sharing, networking, and modeling are powerful elements of the seminar. Each seminar (limited to approximately 40 participants) are divided into two cohorts that will continue networking beyond the two days. The seminar moves the leaders towards innovation adopters through use of technologies and sharing stories from their own districts.

School renewal efforts often overlook the necessity to provide professional development for school administrators. Change theory acknowledges the necessity for powerful leadership to lead change. Educational change that involves technology (as much does today) requires leadership that fulfills the role of technology adopters. The power of the program lies in creating a venue of leadership development to introduce the use of technology.

For more information, see the K20 Center website.

Continuing with the perceived attributes of innovation (previous post)…

2. Compatibility. Back to the realization that some great technologies out there are incompatible with current modalities of teaching and learning. I would love to see more Web2.0 tools in the classrooms, but these tools require (gasp!) collaboration and creativity, neither of which are part of the didactic, lecture based models.

An idea that is incompatible with the values and norms of a social system will not be adopted as rapidly as an innovation that is compatible. The adoption of an incompatible innovation often requires the prior adoption of a new value system. (p.15)

Again, as much as we can, the K20 Center uses bridge technologies. Innovations that can be used in the current paradigm of teaching and learning, but give the freedom to push the envelope. The point is to introduce innovations that enhance however the students are being taught. And with the right professional development and the right leadership, teachers will begin to see how the technologies can really engage students in 21st century skills.

I’ve started reading Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovation. What a great book! It’s got my brain spinning and making some strong connections to our work at the K20 Center.

First, I really like his definition of innovation:

An innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption.

There are some compelling aspects of education and technology with regards to this definition. Common education has been a slow adopter of innovation and I want to know why and how this can be fixed. This issue is at the core of what the K20 Center does. The concept of innovation as an idea and practice is very important for education and I’m beginning to sense that many, if not most, believe innovation to be related strictly to tools (technology). We know from research (at the K20 Center and elsewhere) that technology adoption in education is most successful when fused to a change in school culture. That change in culture is, in itself, an innovation.

A second important aspect of this definition surrounds the concept of “perceived”. Using a laptop is not an innovation to me. I’ve been doing it for years. The ways I use a laptop may be innovative. But for many educational leaders, putting their hand on a keyboard is innovative. Using a trackpad to move the mouse cursor is innovative.

If an idea seems to be new to the individual, it is an innovation.

Leaders can have a difficult time with innovation adoption. I’m sure their is more psychology worth investigating, but I suspect if an individual’s knowledge base has gotten them the top of the ladder, it can be a challenge to admit their is more worth learning. Unless, of course, one is threatened with extinction. Social service leaders may have the most difficulty with adoption of innovations.

Rogers writes (p.12) an important question innovation researchers address is

…how the perceived attributes of an innovation, such as it’s relative advantage, compatibility, and so on, affect its rate of adoption…

Drilling down into these attributes, the beauty of the K20 Center’s work using the IDEALS model for school change begin to emerge. I’ll tackle one attribute per post:

1. Relative Advantage. Kids are learning so why change? Assessment strategies are key here. If education assessment creates the wrong perception of effective learning, we might as well go home. NCLB isn’t helping in this regard. Assessment of learning is a complicated beast and stupefying it to the level of NCLB will do more harm than good. But what alternatives do we have? Plenty. But proper assessment takes time and wasting it on pouring data into the heads of children does not help.

But let’s assume we begin assessing kids on their problem solving abilities. Not multiplying 3 times 3, but how do you evenly arrange 9 desks in a room? It’s the process we are interested in, not the solution. And it is the process that should be assessed. In the real world, there are multiple solutions to complex problems. In school, we teach our kids there is one right answer and infinite wrong answers. This is not real world preparation. Does this mean we shouldn’t teach the basics? Yes. They’ll learn the basics when they discover the wrong math creates inconsistent results and integral errors when complex problem solving. And please, don’t underestimate kids’ ability to do complex problem solving and project-based lessons. Learning 2.0.

How does the K20 Center contribute to addressing the relative advantage attribute? We take into account the current culture of education. But show that it’s real power comes after cultural change. Some of the best tools for educational change are poorly fitted for the current paradigm of teaching and learning. It’s unfortunate because there are some really awesome tools available to schools that engage kids in complex problem solving and project-based learning.

Nonetheless, there are what I would term, bridge technologies. Technologies that can be effective in both paradigms. And the best technologies are ones that bridge and direct learning towards the new paradigm. These are also technologies that can easily be re-purposed. Here’s one: the laptop computer. Like many innovations, you’ve got to be careful with it. It can send you backwards as well as forward, depending on how you use it. Why? I’ll have to get to that on another post.