Whether to use a Shot Gun or a Rifle

One of the problems that keeps us from achieving our goal to integrate technology into the classroom is that we too often use a shot gun approach in our training. By that I mean that every time a new technology begins to emerge we throw it at our teachers in the hope that maybe someone can use it. The problem is that our teachers soon become overwhelmed and don't know what is or is not important. All our teachers hear is blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Here is just a partial list of what has been thrown at teachers in my district during the last few years:

Atomic Learning, Epsilen, Zimbra, GroupWise, gMail, Live@edu, ePals, unitedStreaming, iMovie, Windows Movie Maker, Garage Band, Aviary, Animoto, Edmoto, Moodle, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Google Docs, Google Sites, Weebly, Eduphoria, Edusoft, iStation, vMath, Education City, ScanTec, Computer Learning Month, IGPro, TEAMS Gradebook, SmartBoards, T3 Grant, digital video cameras, digital cameras, Audacity, iSpring, iNova, Prezi, iPads, iTouch, iTunes, NovaNet, E2020, Plato, digital document cameras, digital projectors, Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, NetTrekker, Yahoo, Google, Blogger, Word Press, Ning, Kidspiration, Inspiration, Bubbl.us, Wikispaces, EasyTech, ConnectedTech ...etc.

 Now I realize that part of this is a necessary evil because of the nature of technology and how rapidly it is changing. BUT, there is a lot of rabbit chasing and wasted money as well. I have a standing joke with my trainers that as a district we will swallow anything as long as it costs at least $250,000; $500,000 or $2 million is even better. It is insane madness. I also realize that not every teacher is being assaulted with every one of these technologies. Some of these technologies and promotions are worthwhile and others are not. As a whole, however, we miss the target of getting the technology into the hands of our students to achieve academic goals because we are too busy chasing after nonsense. We can't hit the target because we act like we are blindfolded and firing a shotgun mindlessly in every direction.

Is there a solution to this problem? Yes, there is. We need to take off the blindfold, put down the shotgun, and pick up a rifle, take aim, and fire. How do you do that? You begin with the curriculum. Many of the technologies listed above are worthwhile (many are not), but the question is "How does a technology help a student reach an academic goal?" If a math teacher wants his/her students to use a spreadsheet to calculate or project the results of a bake sale, then the teacher and students need to learn how to insert formulas in a spreadsheet. If a language arts teacher wants to teach her students how to brain storm a topic for an essay or develop an outline, then a tool like Kidspiration, Inspiration, or Bubbl.us would be a good choice. The point is that you use the tools in a practical hands-on approach that targets a specific objective in the classroom. The teacher immediately sees the value of the tool, and resistance begins to melt away. The teacher focuses on the tool that will help him and his students.

Timing is also critical. The training should be closely tied to the time when a specific lesson will be taught. If you are doing a training in September that won't be used until March, then the training is not relevant. You can't go deer hunting when it's not deer season (just to keep the metaphor alive).

A teacher's time is valuable. We need to respect that. Let them pick up the rifle and throw the shotgun and the blindfold away.

To Filter or Not to Filter

Yesterday, I was training at a SW Podstock conference. The conference was held at a neighboring school district. The campus is relatively new and is equipped with the latest technology. However, as I began setting up for my class, I noticed that the filtering restrictions were much more limiting than what I am used to. Now you need to understand that my basic philosophy is that when in doubt a site ought to be unblocked. For example, I believe that YouTube should be unblocked in my school district, even though as Dean Shareski, a digital educator, thinker, and lecturer with the University of Regina in Saskatchewan, Canada, stated in the keynote address, 99% is garbage. But that 1% is useful and so ubiquitous (aren't you impressed) that I believe it should be opened. Now back to my complaining about the filtering in this school district. I expected YouTube to be blocked. That is pretty standard in most school districts. However, in this district all streaming video is blocked. I also noticed that my Dropbox account was not working. (This was critical for me because this was one of the places where I had saved my presentation for that day.) Gmail was blocked. A lot of popular educational sites were blocked.

Now I know that many administrators are in the protect your tail end at all costs mentality, but there comes a point when you have to ask yourself, how far is this going to go? And if we are not going to use the technology, why are we spending billions of dollars to get it into our schools? Maybe we should just sell it and save the taxpayers a lot of money.

I don't think that is the best solution for our students, but what is a constructive approach to allowing our students to use the technology? Angela Haynes, a conference presenter from Northwest ISD, Roanoke, Texas, asked her principal why all these sites were being blocked in her district. He said that they were dangerous. Angela responded by saying that she hands out a pair of scissors to her 2nd grade students all the time and the scissors are dangerous and pose a possible threat to her students. She went on to explain that she is responsible for monitoring the students so that they don't hurt themselves or others. She is also responsible for teaching the students how to use the scissors properly. Now why can't we be just as sensible in our approach to allowing students to use technology? First, we make clear what is acceptable and unacceptable to do on the web. Second, we monitor the students carefully to make sure that they are not viewing inappropriate materials and are on task. Finally, if they persist in viewing inappropriate sites, they lose their privileges to use the technology.

One last thing.... Whenever students use computers, they should have an instructional purpose for being there. If students are bored, then they are going to get into trouble. That is just a part of human nature. Teachers cannot use computers to baby sit their students. The teacher must be well prepared to extend the lesson for those students who finish early. Give them the guidance they need. Vary the tools and make learning fun.

Moodle, a tool to leverage technology integration

I have been aware of Moodle as a platform for creating online course materials for several years now. However, it has only been about a year since I began actually using it to create online content for professional development. What impresses me about this program other than it is free, is that it so easily lends itself to technology integration. For the most part, when an assignment is made, it requires a student to use technology to create, produce, research, share, collaborate, or communicate to complete the assignment.  That means that the student will be "using technology to achieve academic goals."

Up until now I was not sure about how to help high school teachers to get a handle on integrating technology into the curriculum. However, I think Moodle is one part of the solution. [Even as I say this, I am reminded that Mary Cooch (Moodle Fairy) has written a book entitled Moodle 1.9 for Teaching 7-14 Year Olds: Beginner's Guide. It can be ordered at https://www.packtpub.com/beginners-guide-moodle-1-9-for-teaching-7-14-year-olds/book. This book is well written and an excellent resource for using Moodle to create online course work for both elementary and middle school students.]  Using this tool may be yet another way to hook our teachers into technology integration. 

Now I am sure that some teachers are wondering why they would use an online course management system when they meet with their students everyday. One good reason is that current research seems to link the use of online learning to improved student achievement. 

"Students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction. The difference between student outcomes for online and face-to-face classes... was larger in those studies contrasting conditions that blended elements of online and face-to-face instruction with conditions taught entirely face-to-face."   Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning

 For me Moodle is just another tool in the arsenal for leveraging teachnology (I know I misspelled the word. I did it accidentally, but I kind of like it.) into the curriculum. In the coming weeks I will share other approaches on how I am working to get our teachers to jump on board.

Diigo a Social Bookmarking Tool for Education

Getting teachers to allow their students to use technology to achieve academic goals is a challenge (my definition of technology integration.). Every now and then I run across a tool that is so good that many teachers will recognize its worth immediately. Technology tools in and of themselves are usually not transformative of educational practices. However, I believe that Diigo is just one of those tools.

Diigo is a social bookmarking site. I have known about Diigo for quite some time, but until recently I hadn't realized how powerful an educational  tool it really is. It is possible to highlight and annotate web pages and share those annotations with others. You can also sign up for an educator's account and create accounts for all your students. What a great tool for student research projects, collaboration among students, and project based learning! If you looked at my last blog entry, I included an annotated version of Thomas Paine's Common Sense. Check it out.

Here are two websites that will give you more information on this subject.
Two Uses of Technology to Improve Literacy and Critical Thinking

Teaching Social Bookmarking with Diigo Education

Religious Implications of Global Citizen First

Here is another question that was posed about the global first initiative, "Have you considered the question from a religious perspective?"

The religious question in this is quite interesting. Thomas Paine in his pamphlet Common Sense wrote, "government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an intolerable one." Paine went on to write that the design and end of government was to provide security and freedom. In other words Paine believed in limited government that should interfere in the lives of people as little as possible. What is fascinating about Paine's view is that even though he was a deist, he used the Bible to show that God "disapproved of government by kings." To prove his point he referred to two incidents in the history of Israel, a nation that had no king at this time. The first incident was the victory of Israel over the Midianites led by Gideon. Following that battle, the people wanted to make Gideon king. Paine points out that "Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you, THE LORD SHALL RULE OVER YOU. Words need not be more explicit; Gideon doth not decline the honor but denieth their right to give it; neither doth he compliment them with invented declarations of his thanks, but in the positive stile of a prophet charges them with disaffection to their proper sovereign, the King of Heaven."

The second incident happened about 130 years later when the people of Israel came to the prophet Samuel and demanded a king. Paine writes, "But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, give us a king to judge us; and Samuel prayed unto the Lord, and the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee, for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, THEN I SHOULD NOT REIGN OVER THEM....Now therefore hearken unto their voice, howbeit, protest solemnly unto them and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them."

This demonstrates the mindset of many of our founding fathers and their views toward limited government, and how they would cringe at the thought of adding another layer of government. By the way, you can read my Diigo annotated web page of Thomas Paine's Common Sense by clicking on this link: Diigo Common Sense.

The second intersection with religion relates to biblical prophecy and the creation of a world government. (Note: Rischard does not say that he is in favor of a world government. However, in order to create these GIN panel of experts, one would have to create a bureaucracy that would support these panels, including some kind of enforcement mechanism.) Many Christians believe that towards the end of time as we know it, a world leader will emerge (referred to as the antichrist) and create havoc on the earth. For at least one viewpoint on this issue, you can read the following article: Bible Prophesy and World Government.

These are just two of the ways that this issue can be looked at from a religious perspective. This is certainly not a comprehensive look at the subject.

What Does Global Awareness and Cooperation Look Like?

Here are some questions asked by one educator after viewing my rants against the global citizen first movement. "How can we support teachers in making the connections for these [global] collaborations? How can we look at our curriculum and determine where these types of collaborative conversations fit well and support the learning taking place in our schools?" These are good questions, and I will try to give you a concrete example of how to get a handle on some of these global issues and support our teachers.

Another of Rischard's 20 global crises is deforestation particularly the destruction of tropical rain forests. How do we stop a country like Costa Rica from destroying its tropical rain forests? These forests are important for many reasons including the number of medicinal drugs that come from plants in these rain forests.
Check out this site: Welcome to the Rain Forest.

There is a technology integrated lesson plan that comes from EasyTech (adopted Technology Applications TEKS curriculum in the El Paso Independent School District) called Bake Sale Spreadsheet. One of the introductory activities to this math lesson plan is to read a chapter from the book It's Our World Too! by Phillip Hoose entitled "Founders of the Children's Rain Forest," pp. 83-93. It tells the story of how "forty first and second grade students from a small school in Sweden became upset when their teacher told them that rain forests were being destroyed rapidly throughout the world. They wondered what they -- so young, so few, and so far away from the tropics -- could do that could really matter. Their answer has helped to preserve rain forests around the world." What the children decided to do was raise money to buy rain forest land in Costa Rica to preserve these forests. You can check out their story here: Dream the Forest Wild.

From this introductory activity, the lesson plan calls for students to create a bake sale spreadsheet to calculate how much money they could raise. Of course, the extension for this lesson suggests that students actually do a project to raise money for saving the rain forests or some other worthy cause. Here is a handle to help our students to develop global awareness and support our teachers in this effort. Notice that we are using the tools of technology to help our students achieve these academic goals. Also notice that a GIN panel of global experts was not needed to come up with a solution  to the crisis or to pressure these students to act. What we need are globally aware citizens of sovereign states to step up to the plate. It is our responsibility as educators to help our students become globally aware, NOT to indoctrinate them in the political mindset to become Global Citizens First!

Not All Experts are Created Equal

I want to deal with another issue as to why I am so diametrically opposed to the ISTE leadership position on being a Global citizen first and Rischard's proposal to create Global Issue Networks to dictate solutions to the issues that threaten the world. Rischard lists economic collapse as one of his top 20 crises. Now I agree that the economies of the world are linked together. However, we are not all equal in the impact that we have on the world economy. We in the United States have no business telling Greece how to solve their economic crisis. We do need to solve our own problems which would greatly help the world economy. How do we do that? The answers are not difficult to find. The problem is the will to do something about it. For example, deep down everyone knows that the one key step we have to take to solve our economic crisis is to stop spending more than we take in. That seems simple. I have to do that everyday in my family budget. What makes it so difficult on a national scale? The national scale is complicated by the power that is generated by money. How else can you explain the millions/billions of dollars spent on such projects as researching pig odor in Iowa, tattoo removal for gang members in Los Angeles; Polynesian canoe rides in Hawaii; termite research in New Orleans; and the study of grape genetics in New York. Now all these problems may be major issues for the people in these states, but why do I, a Texan, have to pay for it? If they are really critical issues, then let those states take care of it. It is certainly not a federal issue. However, these politicians can garner votes by passing bills that spend this kind of money. So there you go. The solution to the problem is obvious, but we don't have the political will or the character to make the right decisions.

The present administration continues to make excuses about what a bad situation they inherited when they entered office. Certainly, there were problems, but these problems then and now are no where near as severe as during the Carter administration. It seems that people have forgotten that time. I remember waiting in long lines at the gas station and wondering if I would have enough gas to get to work. Inflation was at 13.5%. I was afraid to look at what prices had shot up to each time I went to the grocery store. Unemployment was over 7% and interest rates were at 21%. Try to sell a house under those conditions. I was stuck with two house payments for several years.

When Reagan came into office, he cut taxes and unleashed the power of free enterprise. Surprisingly to some, federal revenue increased dramatically, and all these economic indicators began to decline. In contrast the present administration has decided to pour trillions of dollars into the economy (Keynesian economics) raising the national debt to levels never imagined before. I can't even remember hearing the word "trillions" being used to describe government spending until just recently. Now it seems common place. Even though we have burned through over a trillion dollars without effect, the only solution offered by the so called economic "experts" that the current administration is relying on is to spend more money. Will the madness ever stop?

Solutions reached by the so called "experts" will not fit every nation and would probably be counter productive to economic growth in our country. Each country needs to face up to its own responsibilities and resolve its unique problems.

In conclusion, global cooperation is desirable. Global interference and enforcement is not. The United States can set the example by balancing the federal budget, reducing deficits, and creating a sound fiscal policy. The solution is easy, but I don't see Democratic or Republican politicians who are willing to take a stand and do what is necessary to correct the problem. Every now and then you will find a politician like Chris Christie in New Jersey who will have the courage to say and do what is necessary. (Keep your eye on what happens in that state.) However, such politicians are few and far between.

What's wrong about solving Global Crises?

It sounds rather bigoted and short sighted of me to be against what seems on the surface an admirable goal of solving world problems, especially if these crises will destroy the world. To explain myself, let me give you an example of some of the problems with these Global Issue Networks (GIN) proposed by Rischard. The first problem is agreeing on what or what is not a global crisis. Take global warming, one of Rischard's top 20. Check this link from Fox News. This article tells us how the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England has been distorting the evidence that would confirm global warming. If global warming is such an undisputed fact, then why do these scientists have to fudge the figures?

Nevertheless, Rischard wants us to form a panel of "experts" such as these scientists from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England to come up with a solution and then cram it down the throats of the nations of the world. I am not sure what the agenda is but it is not just about the environment.

Now you may think that I am for doing absolutely nothing about the environment. You would be wrong. I am very much in favor of responsible stewardship of the resources of our planet. I personally believe it is a God given mandate. While I believe that global warming is contrived, I also believe that we should strive for cleaner air. However, I don't think that we have to destroy our economy and way of life to do it.

Having said this, I am not in favor of the United States or any other sovereign nation submitting to the dictates of a so called panel of experts. Nations can and should cooperate with one another in times of crisis. When Haiti was devastated by an earthquake, the United States and many private citizens were quick to respond. Many other nations followed suit. Those that did not missed out on an opportunity and that is their loss. Nations can lead by example and need no panel of experts to tell them what to do.

Now what does this have to do with Instructional Technology? Already there are many educational projects going on warning of the dangers of global warming. EPals, the student email system for our elementary students, has a project on this issue. I know of at least one teacher who wants to use this material. Obviously, that is his choice, but I do hope he presents both sides of the issue. Next time I will talk about the "global economic crisis."

Global Citizen First???? What's wrong with this?

I have just finished listening to the opening session of the ISTE 2010 keynote address by Jean-François Rischard. He is the former vice president of the World Bank. You can get some other background information about him at this URL: http://center.uoregon.edu/ISTE/2010/program/keynotes.php#opening. You can also Google him to find out more information.

The title of the address was Global Problem-Solving and the Critical Role of Educators and Technology for Education. I was deeply disturbed by this address for a number of reasons, but one which really irked me was his call for us to become Global Citizens first so that we can address some 20 crises that he identified, including global warming, depletion of fisheries, economic collapse, etc. His proposal for solving these issues is to create committees that he calls Global Issue Networks. Each GIN would be composed of experts from around the world who would come up with solutions to these "global problems." These solutions would be published and nations would be rated based on whether or not they cooperated and submitted to the dictates of these GIN committees. Nations who did not submit to these rules would receive a black rating and other nations might decide to punish them in some way like taxing imports or in some way (ambiguously) shame them into compliance.

Now what does all this have to do with technology in the classroom? Technology does give us the power to collaborate with people from all corners of the world. In fact, I think it is great that we can use a student email program like ePals that facilitates our students getting to know students from other parts of the world and even collaborate on projects. Skype is another tool that makes this a possibility. However, what Jean-François Rischard is saying is that we must indoctrinate our students with the mindset that they are global citizens first. What was shocking to me was that most of the people in the auditorium didn't seem to be outraged by what this guy was saying. In subsequent days I will outline what I think is wrong and dangerous about this kind of thinking, but I would like to know what other people think about this? Are we as Americans citizens to become Global Citizens first? Should our loyalties be to these panels of experts called Global Issue Networks?