Dangerously Irrelevant

DRAFT - Statewide 21st century learning system

[cross-posted at the TechLearning blog]

Your assignment, should you choose to accept it, is to outline what it takes to get your state or province from ‘here’ to ‘there.’ In other words, what would it take to get from our current system of schooling to a robust, province- or statewide system of 21st century learning? Here’s my first attempt at this task (click on the images for larger versions)…

PART 1

What needs to be done

The first step is to figure out what needs to happen…

1. Curricula that emphasize 21st century skills. Instead of simply adding on 21st century skills to our existing content-based standards, put them at the core of new, more focused curricula.
2. Preservice and inservice training for teachers and administrators. Training in colleges and universities. Training on the job. Regular, frequent, strategic, and ongoing.
3. Robust statewide online learning infrastructure for students and teachers. Because of resources or geography, high-level and credit recovery courses aren’t available to many students. Training opportunities aren’t available to educators. A vibrant system of online courses can help.
4. Computing device in every student’s hands. Laptops. Netbooks. Smartphones. Devices that have some power, are mobile, allow students to type, and can access the Internet.
5. Statewide no-cost or low-cost broadband wireless access. High-speed wireless in every corner of the state.
6. P-20 coordination, cooperation, and vertical articulation. Curricular, programmatic, workforce development, and other alignment across the P-20 spectrum.

Environmental supports

Some supports need to be in place to facilitate effective implementation…

1. Federal, state, and local laws, policies, and funding support. A thoughtful, helpful array of legal, policy, and funding supports for what needs to be done.
2. Monitoring, assessment, and evaluation. Regular, frequent, ongoing. To inform practice, not just for accountability.
3. Mindset shift. The digital, global age is here. It’s time to learn how to survive and thrive in it rather than being afraid of it or ignoring it.

PART 2

Marketing

There’s also a marketing piece to this. Who needs to be informed about what needs to be done in order to facilitate a broad base of support and buy-in?

1. Parents and community members
2. School board members and P-12 educators
3. Postsecondary faculty and officials
4. Employers
5. Legislators and policymakers
6. Media

PART 3

Cost

I’m working on this part…

YOUR INPUT IS DESIRED

I could use some help on this not-so-theoretical assignment. This is a draft. I need a final version by November 5.

• What would your system look like? How would you organize things differently? What did I leave out?
• How can we calculate some rough, back-of-the-envelope costs of these activities (e.g., just how much would it cost to get wireless broadband across the state)? I could really use some assistance costing this out.
• How is my thinking flawed? What am I forgetting? What is particularly important to emphasize? What else should I be considering?

Angela Maiers and Mike Sansone have been of great assistance with this first draft (any mistakes or logic flaws are mine alone!). I hope you will be willing to lend your thoughts as well. Thanks in advance!

[Feel free to download and play around with these files: png1 png2 ppt pptx]

Help wanted: Digital citizenship resources?

I recently got this message from an international school:

I've organized [our] Tech Leadership Team to discuss and develop a Digital Citizenship program for our school. There are 27 members of the TLT and they will be exploring 6 elements, identifying issues associated with the element, brainstorming examples of appropriate and inappropriate use, developing guidelines for use (e.g., guidelines for e-mail, cyberbullying, social networks, piracy, health), and identifying how the concept and guidelines should be shared with the community.

1. Digital Communication
2. Digital Etiquette
3. Digital Law
4. Digital Rights & Responsibilities
5. Digital Health and Wellness
6. Digital Security

I'm looking for a good book for them to read -- any recommendations?

What resources have you found valuable regarding digital citizenship? Here’s my contribution…

• Darren Draper’s edublogger etiquette series

Slide - Should teachers get to choose?

[Download this file: png ppt pptx]

[a remake of an earlier post]

Introducing The Edjurist

Gawker Media has Gizmodo, Lifehacker, The Consumerist, Valleywag, Gawker, and seven others.

Weblogs, Inc. has Engadget, Autoblog, Joystiq, Luxist, Download Squad, and too many others to count.

Education Week and Teacher Magazine have eduwonkette, Bridging Differences, Web Watch, edbizbuzz, Digital Education, and a host of others.

CASTLE has Dangerously Irrelevant, LeaderTalk, and – now – The Edjurist!

Along with The School Law Blog, The Edjurist is a MUST-READ for anyone interested in K-12 school legal issues. We are absolutely delighted to welcome Dr. Justin Bathon (U. Kentucky) and The Edjurist to the stable of CASTLE blogs.

Here are a few of Justin’s recent posts:

• Finding free educational law information
• Johnson v. Poway shows why Garcetti doesn’t work for schools
• More on why Garcetti was wrong for schools
• Catching up … some weird dress code stories
• Thoughts on the California home schooling decision

Be sure to also see guest blogger Scott Bauries’ posts on the applicability of federal e-discovery rules to K-12 education:

• Intro
• Document retention systems

There’s no better way to stay on top of the latest educational law cases, news, and odd stories than to catch Justin’s Friday Snippets. Check him out!

Now, if I can only talk eduwonkette into being CASTLE’s education policy blog, then we’ll have some pretty good coverage of educational leadership topics (anyone interested in blogging on social justice, staff development, or school finance?!).

Note

CASTLE’s previous school law blog, At the Schoolhouse Gate, is being replaced by The Edjurist. If you were a loyal reader, thanks!

Publicly available v. readily accessible

The authors of Blown to Bits, an absolutely superb book on life ‘after the digital explosion,’ note that

There is a difference … between ‘public’ and ‘readily accessible.’

Public records such as real estate transfers, birth records, and business transactions often contain sensitive personal information, including Social Security numbers, birth dates, mother’s health information, credit card numbers, voter registration, fingerprints, professional occupations, and the like. While these data technically always have been available to the public, the difficulty of sifting through the paper records made large-scale aggregation and use nearly impossible.

What happens when those public records get digitized, however? What happens when public databases become easily accessible? What happens when paper records are turned into searchable text via optical character recognition and/or tagging? Or, as the authors, note, what happens when all of this public information gets merged with commercial marketing databases?

As the IowaLandRecords.org controversy here in Iowa shows, we need to do some tough thinking on this topic. Just how ‘public’ do we want our public records to be?

A few useful resources

• Arias, M. (2007). Internet access to public records v. privacy: What a complex clash to unravel.
• Bermann, S. (2006). Privacy and access to public records in the digital age.
• Center for Democracy and Technology. (1995). Public records: Access, privacy, and public policy.
• Electronic Privacy Information Center. (2007). Privacy and public records.
• Levitt, C. (2002). Regulating the availability of public records online.
• Levitt, C. (2005). How public are public records?
• Neave, M. (2003). International regulation of the publication of publicly accessible personal information.
• Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. (2006). Public records on the Internet: The privacy dilemma.

Not so irrelevant 012

Three great questions

I especially like the last of these three questions from Rodney Trice. We should be asking teachers and principals that question more often (and just that directly).

• How do you intend to bring the global community into your classroom?
• How will you prepare students for a future that is relatively unknown?
• How you will eliminate the racial predictability of achievement outcomes in your classroom?

This just in: Teenagers play video games!

All kidding aside, the latest report from the amazing Pew Internet & American Life Project confirms that kids - even girls! – are up to their eyeballs in video games.

We’ll stick to the tried and (not) true

Nope, sorry. iPods are not allowed. Back to the old way. Too bad it doesn’t work as well. Gotta do it anyway. Oh, and I love how the music players are categorically, by definition, a ‘distraction’ (if not in actuality). Who needs reality when we have these little educational policy fantasy worlds that we can create for ourselves?

Throw da bums out!

After attempts to bring in turnaround experts didn’t work, the state of Maryland is increasingly leaning toward completely restructuring schools that are academically unsuccessful. State schools Superintendent Nancy Grasmick says:

We are very comfortable being more aggressive about this. We have seen much better results [when the staff is replaced].

Blog like a farmer

I ran across an old post by Mike Sansone, one of my Iowa blogging buddies. I really like his metaphor that blogging should be like farming.

Scorecards

I bet parents and community members would really like to see scorecards like this one (maybe with different data) for their local schools. I know some schools and districts already do this. Hopefully they use line graphs rather than tables of numbers. Could you tell the essential story of a school district with 10 key, well-done graphs? I bet you could!

No writing in journalism class?

Check out this excellent article about the NYU journalism student who got in trouble for blogging about her class. [hat tip to Tim Stahmer]

I got no money, honey

Did you catch Edutopia’s advice on how to innovate without extra money or support?

Spend hours on content you can find with Google in 3 seconds!

One of my favorite things about Wes Fryer is his ability to highlight the ridiculous. I also enjoy his irreverance (“Behold! I hold aloft the holy words!”), particularly when I have the same experience at my kids’ school.

Speaking of Google…

Finally, I’m digging Google Chrome. it’s now my default browser and I’m using Firefox less and less (and I love Firefox). Chrome is much faster. I also like that each tab is a separate process; I have yet to have a browser hang…

Sparking some school board discussion

Apparently I sparked a little discussion by a local school board! You've got to give them credit for asking the right questions and also being willing to experiment publicly with what to them were new technologies...

Not so irrelevant 011

My latest roundup of links and tools…

The critics need a reboot

David Wolman’s article in Wired Magazine is a quick and effective rebuttal of those who claim that technology is making us stupid.

Social networking for babies

Yep, that’s right. Social networking for babies: Made a mess in my pants today. Slept. Made a mess in my pants today. Slept…

The $70 PC

Using a thin client model for school computers seems like an idea that has promise. And of course a $70 price tag per computer sounds great. Does anyone know a school organization that’s working with NComputing?

Should kids learn about 9/11 via cartoons?

Gary Stager’s got a vein pop about BrainPop…

Handheld learning

Thanks to Dean Shareski, I now know about the Handheld Learning web site. Thanks, Dean!

Youth, porn, and violence

Want the latest facts on youth exposure to pornography and violent web sites? Head to Harvard’s Berkman Center!

Speaking of the Berkman Center…

There is a LOT going on at the Center. Check out its list of projects (the list is clickable thanks to Kwout) and sign up for its news feed!

Karl Fisch is big in Germany

If you didn’t catch it, Karl recently posted about a German magazine’s story about his school and the Did You Know? video. Anybody read German?

Snow in the bathroom

And, finally, here’s a good rule of thumb: don’t read Doug Johnson while you’re supposedly participating in a serious meeting. Thy guffaw mayest disrupt…

Innovation monies by state

[hat tip to Richard Florida]

UNESCO defines research and development (R&D) as:

Any creative systematic activity undertaken in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture, and society, and the use of this knowledge to devise new applications. Includes fundamental research, applied research in such fields as agriculture, medicine, industrial chemistry, and experimental development work leading to new devices, products, or processes.

Greater investment in R&D activity is more likely to result in greater innovation. Sure, you might get lucky; every dog gets thrown a bone sometimes. But more often than not, greater payoffs come to those who invest more in R&D.

Using data from the National Science Foundation and the United States Census, I compiled the following table. Industrial R&D includes all monies spent on R&D activities by the federal government, corporations, and other entities.

Iowa is 31st on the list when it comes to R&D expenditure per capita. We’re not exactly a hotbed of innovation compared to other states, primarily because the only areas that attract significant numbers of creative talent are Des Moines (state capital), Ames (Iowa State University), and Iowa City (University of Iowa).

What’s the situation in your state? Do the numbers surprise you?

I don't like my district's AUP

Last night was Family Night at my kids’ elementary school. You know, that night when you visit your kid’s class with the other parents, learn about the curriculum and teacher expectations for the year, sit in little tiny chairs, etc.

Each parent was asked to sign the district’s Digital Resources Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the 2008-2009 school year. Not a single parent read over the AUP; everyone just signed it blindly. Except me, of course. I combed through it because, as a former attorney and technology guy, I want to know what I’m signing on behalf of my fifth-grade daughter. Here’s the part that troubled me:

The following guidelines for digital citizenship apply for all students in grades 3-12:

Inappropriate use includes but is not limited to online chatting, shopping, social networking sites (myspace.com, facebook.com, etc.), games, youtube.com, viewing of inappropriate material, bypassing school filters, downloading and installation of software, and harming the District’s digital resources in any way.

A categorical determination that computer games are ‘inappropriate use?’ A without-exception policy against YouTube, social networking sites, and online chats? I don’t agree! Now what? Do I make a stink with my daughter’s teacher? No, of course not. Do I refuse to sign it, thus preventing my daugher from using the computer in school next week for her class project? No, of course not [she’s already tired of me encouraging her to ask her teacher why she has to practice cursive writing!].

My uneasy compromise was to sign the form and then write under my signature:

I strenuously object to the District’s definition of ‘inappropriate use.’ Although I am signing this so that my daughter can use the computer at school, I reserve the right to contest at any time the District’s definition and this policy.

What do you think? What do you do as a parent when you’re confronted with a district AUP that you think is unnecessarily restrictive? How would you have handled this situation?

[Recently I was invited to serve on the district technology committee. Hopefully I can persuade them to rethink the AUP a little bit…]

Say no to Senate Bill 3325

Senators Grassley and Harkin,

I am writing to you as a citizen of Iowa. Senate Bill 3325, The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008, recently was introduced in the Senate Judiciary Committee. I strongly encourage you to vote against this bill if it comes to a vote.

This bill is a thinly-disguised attempt by big media companies to preserve their monopoly on media generation and dissemination. They’re so desperate to hang onto an old paradigm, they’re now trying to get the United States Attorney General involved rather than adapt to the new world in which we now live, work, and play. Media companies and policymakers should be working to figure out how to tap into the transformative power and potential of the Internet rather than trying so hard to preserve a past that will never return.

As the saying goes, “It’s not a revolution if someone doesn’t get hurt.” As Iowans and other American citizens realize that they now have voice and power, existing monopolies often get in the way of societal progress. This is one of those situations where we have to decide if we favor the people or change-averse corporations.

This bill does not serve the interests of Iowans or other Americans. Please say no to Senate Bill 3325 if it comes to a vote. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Scott McLeod, J.D., Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Iowa State University
Coordinator, Educational Administration Program
Director, UCEA Center for the Advanced Study of Technology Leadership in Education

[hat tip to Tim Stahmer and the EFF]

Recommended reading - Mindblowing

I often get asked by administrators for some recommended reading. Here are some of my favorite books about stuff that just blows my mind. If the Amazon widget doesn't load in a few seconds, here's a static picture of the list.

[Transparency disclosure: If you buy a book using this list, CASTLE gets 4% of the proceeds. Your cost doesn’t go up any. Amazon just pays us a little for the referral through its Associates Program.]

Recommended reading - Demographic shifts

I often get asked by administrators for some recommended reading. Here are some of my favorite books on demographic shifts. If the Amazon widget doesn't load in a few seconds, here's a static picture of the list.

[Transparency disclosure: If you buy a book using this list, CASTLE gets 4% of the proceeds. Your cost doesn’t go up any. Amazon just pays us a little for the referral through its Associates Program.]

Apathy, distrust, and nonparticipation

Linda Fandel’s blog at The Des Moines Register is focused on “world class schools for Iowa.” Kudos to her and the Register for devoting time and attention to this issue.

In a recent guest post advocating better civics instruction, former U.S. Senator John Culver said:

Many young people leave school lacking even a rudimentary understanding of how their government works and how it affects their lives. This lack of understanding leads to a lack of interest, a lack of trust and a lack of participation.

In my comment to his post, I said:

Another reason that students lack interest, trust, or participation in governmental affairs is that many of them are quite cynical about whether Constitutional freedoms even exist. As a 2003 report from the First Amendment Center noted, “Students will not learn the lessons of democracy if they cannot experience firsthand the freedom to make their own choices.” And yet so much of school (and, let’s be honest, home) is about control and lack of trust. Few students get a chance to meaningfully participate in decision-making about their own learning. School restrictions (and accompanying lawsuits) regarding student speech, expression, and behavior have escalated over the past few decades.

Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, ruling for the majority in West Virginia v. Barnette, said that the Court must ensure “scrupulous protection of constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes.” Why would we expect young people to be active, engaged citizens upon graduation when they rarely, if ever, get to see their supposed 'freedoms' at work? Are we surprised that young adults are apathetic (or is it just realistic?) when their primary interaction with government - school - is in a limiting, suppressive environment that, at every turn, tells them that their voice doesn’t matter? Unlike Athena, who was supposedly born fully-formed from the head of Zeus, our students need practice with both the rights and responsibilities of democratic citizenship before they graduate if we are to accomplish our desire to have an interested, involved citizenry.

What do you think? Do students get adequate opportunities in schools to see their Constitutional rights and responsibilities at work?

Stone Age Administrator award?

Sometimes a story is just so egregiously stupid that you not only have to post about it but encourage others to spread the word too. This might be one of those situations (hat tip to Jon Becker)...

This picture is of a 5-year-old kid named Adriel Arocha. His family wants to move to Needville, Texas. Adriel is of Native American heritage and has never cut his hair in his life. No big deal, right? Well, apparently it is because the superintendent of the Needville Schools, Curtis Rhodes, won't allow Adriel to enroll in kindergarten unless he cuts his hair. Why? Because - unbelievably in 2008 - the district doesn't allow boys to have long hair. Really.

Read the article in the Houston Press, particularly the part where the superintendent defends the school district's backwardness. Check out Adriel's family's blog about the situation. Feel free to publicly ridicule this school district because Curtis Rhodes is giving administrators everywhere a bad name. What university trained this guy?

Maybe it's time to create a Stone Age Administrator award...

Photo credit: Houston Press

Tracy Rosen is revisiting digital literacy

Head on over to Leading From the Heart and leave Tracy Rosen a comment on her thought-provoking post about revisiting digital literacy. Here’s the comment I just left her:

I am by no means a ‘literacy’ expert. For me, the idea of literacy means something like ‘fluency in the dominant information landscape(s) of your time, both as a consumer and as a producer.’ In the past, that has meant being an adequate reader and an adequate writer. It is increasingly clear that the dominant information landscape of our present and future is one that is digital, networked, interactive, hyperconnected, dispersed, rapidly-changing, multimedia, and so on. This new information landscape requires additional fluencies beyond those needed for a paper-based world.

Fluency in paper-bound text and graphics is still a necessary skill today. The need to be a high-level reader and writer is going to be around for a long while. But the dominance of the written word slowly will be eroded by other forms of audio/video expression. For me, the exciting thing about many of these new ‘literacies’ is that students and educators now have unprecedented opportunities to create things of value to the larger world, to have a legitimate voice, and to reach authentic audiences.

Like any good progressive, Chris Lehmann advocates emphasis on facilitation of students as digital citizens rather than emphasis on preparing students to be digital workers. I too am very much in favor of empowering students personally and on the citizenship front. But I also want my kids to have a meaningful, rewarding career (that, hopefully, also contributes to society in some way). And that means getting what Richard Florida calls a ‘creative class’ job – one that requires autonomy, independent judgment, creativity, innovation, creative problem-solving, and, yes, fluency with digital technologies. Creative class jobs are facilitated and enhanced by digital technologies, not replaced by them (as often happens with service or working class jobs).

So I empathize with your concern, Tracy, about respecting others’ approaches to sense-making. And I too am concerned with the differential access that developing countries and underserved student populations have. But I think the task for all of us is to bring them into the digital, global 21st century, not to define ‘literacy’ in ways that continue to disempower them socially and/or economically for decades to come (note: I’m not saying you’re doing this).

Here’s an old post of mine on social justice that might be of interest:

  http://snipurl.com/35ivk

Thanks for a thoughtful, thought-provoking post. I look forward to reading others’ comments!

No Facebook for you!

Over at the On Our Minds @ Scholastic blog, Tyler Reed is pondering the recent announcement by the Lamar (MS) County School District that it will prohibit teachers from communicating with students via social networking tools such as Facebook or MySpace.

The question in my mind is:

Why treat social networking spaces differently than any other means of teacher communication?

The issue is actual inappropriate teacher communication and/or behavior (which I'm guessing is already covered by board policy), not the method by which teachers communicate with students. A prohibition on use of social networking tools does absolutely nothing to prevent inappropriate teacher communication with students via other channels. So the district either needs to implement similar policies for telephones, snail mail, written notes, instant messaging, cell phone text messaging, e-mail, online video, blogs, wikis, podcasts, and the like or it needs to justify why social networking sites are so evil compared to all the other ways that teachers and students can communicate.

If the district is going to ban social networking and other 21st century communication tools, it's going to be awfully busy making policies since new tools pop up every week. Also, one of the first things you learn in law school is that you should never make a rule you can't enforce. How on earth would the district ever monitor this?

Facebook and MySpace are the 5th and 7th most popular sites on the Internet, respectively. Instead of exploring how teachers, students, and parents can use these sites productively, the district instead has turned into the social networking Nazi: no Facebook for you! Just for kicks, I took a look at the performance of the Lamar County schools. My suggestion for the school board is that perhaps its time and energy would be better spent raising the low academic performance of the students in the poorest school in the district rather than passing unnecessary and unenforceable policies.

This whole thing is just goofy...

Our policies have to shift

Al Gore said:

We have to abandon the conceit that isolated personal actions are going to solve this crisis. Our policies have to shift.

He was talking about global climate change but he might as well have been talking about our attempts to transition schools into the 21st century…

The personalization - and polarization - of America

[cross-posted at the TechLearning blog]

The personalization movement, enabled significantly by communication and design technologies as well as global manufacturing supply chains, is well under way…

If I want to, I can personalize – and often even custom design – my shoes, my clothes, my jewelry, my car, my house, my computer, my soda, my candy, my cell phone ringtone, and so on. Even when I can’t design myself what I purchase, the seemingly limitless choices that I have allow me to customize my lifestyle in infinite variations (how many kinds of toothpaste or dog food are there?). Sites like CafePress even allow me to custom brand my own goods if the current range of choices isn’t satisfactory.

The personalization movement applies to where we work as well. Richard Florida has written extensively about how we are sorting ourselves into communities of talent. Creative, talented people are migrating to certain cities and college towns. Companies are following people rather than the other way around. As a result, the vast majority of economic productivity and growth is coming from these ‘creative communities’ while smaller communities or non-creative cities are left behind.

Not only does the personalization movement extend to our jobs, it also applies to our homes. As The Big Sort describes, even within our communities we are clustering with other like-minded people. Whole neighborhoods reflect particular lifestyles and exhibit little ideological or lifestyle diversity. Finding someone in your neighborhood that doesn’t look, act, or think like you is becoming increasingly difficult.

Never before have our politics been so polarized. The so-called ‘independent voter’ is all but nonexistent. Voters that actually listen to both sides and then make a decision comprise less than 10% of the voting population. The rest of us already have sorted ourselves out on one side or the other. The key to politics today is mobilizing the voter base on your side, not persuading independents. The key to the 2008 Presidential election will be the Right’s mobilization of church groups, civic organizations, and other groups that traditionally exhibit stronger ties versus the Left’s mobilization of younger voters, urban areas, and other groups that traditionally exhibit looser ties.

Personalization even extends to education. Between private schools, charter schools, magnet schools, online schools, and home schools, the options for parents to customize their children’s education have never been greater. The same goes for our religious institutions, as churches, temples, mosques, and other places of worship increasingly segment their services to target particular groups.

As I noted in my earlier post about narrowcasting, we also are personalizing our information streams. Our magazines, music sources, television stations, Internet sites, and news channels all are more customizable and individualized than ever before. The likelihood that we might run into information that runs counter to our existing beliefs is less and less probable with each passing day.

So where’s our common ground? As we increasingly utilize digital technologies, employment choices, neighborhood selection, and other lifestyle decisions to segment ourselves, where will we find the glue that holds our country together? Shouldn’t we be talking about this as a society? Doesn’t this need to be discussed somewhere in our educational system?

Collaborative action? Not yet.

Chris Lehmann’s post last week regarding Clay Shirky’s Here Comes Everybody and educational change was particularly thought-provoking for me. If you haven’t yet read Chris’ post or the book, move them both closer to the top of your reading list. I thought Chris did an especially nice job of describing how the edublogosphere has been good at the task of sharing and is doing pretty well at community production (thanks, everyone, who’s contributed to the Moving Forward wiki) but has not yet done so well at collaborative action. Why? Because it’s hard to do, as Chris and Shirky note, particularly within communities that have loose ties like we edubloggers do.

Chris feels, however, that we possess the capacity to engage in collaborative action and that we maybe, probably, should be thinking in this direction:

The hardest challenge facing our community is that we've done a very good job at going after the low-hanging fruit. We've done what was easiest to do... and most of us would agree that it hasn't been easy so far. To take things to the next level is going to be hard. Not impossible... and a lot easier because of the tools we have at our disposal today, but hard none-the-less. 

But "hard" shouldn't be the reason we don't do it.

While I admire (as always) Chris’ good cheer and ‘we can do it even though it’s hard!’ attitude - and even usually possess a high concentration of those myself - right now I’m a bit more skeptical that our loosely-knit ‘community’ has the capacity, time, or even desire to begin engaging in collective action, at least at the level that Chris describes. I say this despite all of the incredible value that I gain from the edublogosphere.

At the very least, collective action is going to require a very focused target outcome and some folks who are willing to shoulder the heavy load of visioning / coordinating / re-centering focus. And I just don’t see that happening right now. I see a lot of good people who care a lot and are even willing to do numerous great things for kids, schools, and/or fellow bloggers. But I don’t see us as being in a place yet where collaborative action can occur on any meaningful and important scale (and I’m also not sure what that place would look like so I’d know that we were there).

Of course I’d love to be proved wrong…

[I confess that I’m also feeling a bit despondent today about the whole prospect of influencing American policymakers regarding K-12 education. After all, if an initiative with a $60 million budget and the backing of billion-dollar foundations isn’t getting much traction in terms of putting educational issues on the political radar screen, what the heck are our chances?]

NECC 2008 - Other notes from the ISTE Digital Equity Summit

Here are the rest of my notes from ISTE’s annual digital equity summit at NECC…

Discussions

• Wyatt Sledge, Forth Worth (TX) ISD, told me that the district just hired a dedicated technology trainer for its administrators. Awesome!

Expert panel

Lara Sujo de Montes, New Mexico State University

• Digital divide v. digital equity
• Divide = lack of access to equipment
• Inequity = lack of access to benefits of learning and using that equipment
• Digital inequity reproduces existing social and socieconomic inequities
• The Internet is 2/3 in English but only 10% of world population speaks English
• Developing countries: rural, unemployed, uneducated farmers or unskilled wage laborers, subsisting on $1 or $2 per day, ethnolinguistic minorities
• Request distance learning courses for high school students, develop online materials yourself (even for a traditional course), install Moodle
  

David Thornburg, Thornburg Center

• Digital equity and space exploration as a STEM curriculum
• Half of workers at Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman will retire in the next decade; 15% of Boeing engineers are eligible to retire right now; we don’t have enough new people to replace them
• We need to go beyond teaching about STEM and help students see themselves in those jobs
• There is a lot of beauty and joy in STEM
• In prison they let you out early for good behavior. Schools don’t do that.
• I’m tired of corporations thinking of children as wallets with bodies.

Ashanti Jefferson, Chicago Public Schools

• Described some of the work CPS is doing with its kids

Al Byers, National Science Teachers Association

• NSTA Learning Center: significant gains in the learning of science teachers who participate in its online learning modules
• Teachers must have a voice in their own professional development if we want to see positive results
• If you include elementary and middle school teaches (who teach science but don’t think of themselves as science teachers), there are 2.1 million science teachers in the USA

Discussion

• Thornburg: Students in affluent schools use technology in creative, innovative ways. Students in disadvantaged schools use computers for decontextualized drill-and-kill exercises.

NECC 2008 - From digital divide to digital opportunities

Here are my notes from ISTE’s annual digital equity summit at NECC. There is too much information to fit in one post so I’m breaking it up…

From Digital Divide to Digital Opportunities
Dr. Paul Resta, U. Texas-Austin

• Current estimate of world repository of pictures/words/movies = 7 exabytes (Library of Congress is largest in world = 20 terabytes)
• It’s not just more information. More is now different.
• UNESCO Digital Opportunity Index allows the tracking and comparison of countries in different aspects of the information society
• Essential conditions – access to…
• Basic literacy skills
• 26% of world adult population (1 billion people) is non-literate (2/3 are women)
• ICT devices, software, and sufficient bandwidth for Internet connectivity
• Most of Latin America, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East has less than 10% of the population with personal computers
• High-income economies are far ahead (International Telecommunications Union, World Information Society 2007 Report)
• The top 1,000 companies in the world have over 70 million computers to dispose of
• Low-cost laptops: OLPC (600,000 orders from Birmingham (AL), Peru, Haiti, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Mexico, Uruguay, Mongolia), EeePC, Intel Classmate (150,000 orders from Nigeria, Libya)
• Cloud computing (virtual servers) means not much power has to reside on the computers themselves
• Asia and Europe both have more Internet users than North America; a near-perfect relationship between Internet use and income
• Broadband access takes up 2.1% of high-income (and 909% of low-income) yearly wages
• USA is now 15th in broadband penetration (see www.itif.org)
• Wireless access is increasing exponentially in many developing countries
• Meaningful, high-quality, culturally-relevant content in local languages
• 68% of Internet content is in English; next highest is Japanese (6%)
• 4Directions project is an indigenous model of education to create culturally-relevant curriculum resources
• Virtual museum partnerships
• Creating, sharing, and exchanging digital content
• The majority of the 7 billion videos streamed on the Internet each month are user-generated
• The number of blogs has roughly doubled every 6 months
• We need to enable indigenous voices and to use the Internat to foster cross-cultural understandings and share knowledge
• Educators who know how to use digital tools and resources in pedagogically-sound, culturally-responsible ways
• UNESCO ICT Competency Standards for Teachers
• Development of National Plans for ICT in Teacher Education
• Teacher Learning in E-Learning Age (UNESCO, forthcoming)
• Effective leadership in policy and planning
• Removing policy barriers and formulating new policy frameworks
• Broadband challenges require new thinking
• There is a need for ICTs customized to the needs of the poor in the developing world
• How do we ensure that the USA stays competitive?
• What is our role as educators to help address the global digital divide?
• From the Digital Divide to Digital Opportunities

NECC 2008 - SETDA PD Roundtable

Here are my notes from Tuesday’s Professional Development Roundtable sponsored by the State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA). This was an EXCELLENT conversation.

Effective professional development for educators

• Peer-to-peer training is particularly effective for teachers and administrators. Training also should be job-embedded. The focus should be the project or task, not the technology.
• Alabama has found that the graduates of their Gates grant initiative constitute the bulk of the innovative school- and district-level technology leaders in the state.
• Dr. Mary Ann Wolf, Executive Director of SETDA, asked me to talk about CASTLE! Administrators need dedicated funding, training, and TIME to learn.
• Coaching models for professional development (PD) work extremely well.
• New York City has a comprehensive PD model that includes principals, teachers, etc. Principals want to see best practices and what’s working in other schools. In contrast, teachers want people to come to their classroom, to discuss ‘what works here.’ Having an in-school professional developer works really well for teachers. It’s important to have both the in-class and the off-campus components.
• A lot of people don’t really know what high-quality PD looks like.
• Brenda Williams, West Virginia Department of Education: If you get professional development right, student learning will improve.
• Steve Andrews, Intel: The politics of cost is incredible. EDC has found that If you can get one PD coach per building, the results and progress are amazing.
• Project-based administrator training needs to involve the team, not just individuals. The principals need their assistant principals, teacher leaders, etc.
• We need to get teachers into other classroom via learning walks, observations, lesson study, etc.
• Principals need to have an actionable theory of change.
• There are a number of strong PD models in existence. SETDA is going to try to collect and then disseminate some of these models.

Barriers to effective, scalable professional development

• Lack of adequate, large-scale Internet access in training facilities. The West Virginia Department of Education forced state hotels to step up or risk losing all of its workshops!
• IT people still aren’t talking to curriculum people, assessment people, etc.
• There is a fairly large number of obstructionist teachers.
• Time, perceptions of endurance, perceptions of efficiency. Teachers wonder if it’s worth investing in a technology because it is changing so fast. Teachers have seen a number of technologies come and go [and they have resisted all of them!].
• Lack of exposure to effective models for technology-related PD.
• Many teachers view technology as a classroom distraction rather than as a meaningful learning tool.
• We don’t bring IT people into the process soon enough. They need more lead time and more involvement.
• Statewide programs have trouble ensuring consistency and implementation fidelity.
• Intentionality is important. Technology training that’s driven by subject learning goals (e.g., we need to get our math scores up) is more successful. Dedicated time and focused assessment also are necessary.
• Leadership turnover and program sustainability are issues.
• Leaders need help translating models of effective PD and time reallocation to their local implementation context.
• Content area people need to be involved in the tech training. Instruction first.
• Tom Carroll, NCTAF: Are we applying the right treatment to the right teachers? One technology PD model does not fit the learning needs of all teachers (just like students).
• Students need to be the ultimate focus of teacher PD efforts. It’s not about the tools, it’s about how it benefits the students. Having students demonstrate and discuss can be a powerful motivator to teachers. Clayton Christenson: The disruptive innovation in education is not charter schools or online schools. It’s student-centered learning.
• New teachers are effective users of personal technologies and are comfortable with instructional technologies. However, they have few models of good technology integration in their schools and they also probably had instructional technology courses in their pre-service program that were separate from their content methods courses.
• Preservice teachers do not come out of college as instructional designers.
• Steve Andrews, Intel: One of the most incredible opportunities of our lifetimes is before us.
• We need to use pride, greed, hope, love, and guilt to get teachers moving.
• Schools’ poor use of technology is having negative impacts on the retention of young teachers.

Policy and practice recommendations

• Specific guidelines of 1 instructional coach per 1,000 students.
• Concrete strategies for changing how we do business (at all levels), maybe differentiated by setting, size, and locale.
• Strategies for informing and engaging parents / community members.
• A comprehensive K-20 vision and agenda – state level and/or national level – that drives forward movement.
• Mandatory interactions between K-12 and higher education. [NCATE requires that colleges work with schools?]
• We need to pay more attention to our leaders!
• Colleges of education are not going to accept any responsibility (for technology training, outreach, service, PD) until legislatures, departments of education, and/or accrediting agencies make them do so. [U. Minnesota performance review: ‘Dr. McLeod’s work with schools is exemplary but inappropriate.’]
• We need to follow up statements of ‘It’s so expensive to do this’ with the reply ‘What is the cost of not doing this?’ We need to think more in terms of investment (not cost) and return on investment.
• We have to figure out what to take off educators’ plates (the idea of prioritized abandonment).
• Most high-functioning companies spend about 4% of their budgets on employee training. We come nowhere close to this in K-12 education.
• We need to remember the interconnectedness of the success of the whole. We don’t want others to cherry pick components of what should be a comprehensive approach to systemic school reform.

So what if schools don’t prepare kids for the 21st century?

[cross-posted at the TechLearning blog]

I’m going to do something I’ve never done before as a blogger: resurrect an old post. Over the past few months I’ve read all or some of Innovation Nation, Five Regions of the Future, Sixteen Trends, and The 2010 Meltdown. I then decided it was time to finally read Teaching as a Subversive Activity and The End of Education. So I started on the former and then today I picked up the latest issue of Educational Leadership, which is focused on reshaping high schools. As the echoes of K-12 naysayers reverberated through my head, I found myself asking once again:

So what if schools don’t adjust to the demands of the digital, global economy? So what if schools don’t prepare kids for the 21st century?

As McLuhan stated, school may be irrelevant. As Wiener noted, schools may shield children from reality. As Gardner said, schools may educate for obsolescence. As Bruner stated, schools may not develop intelligence. As Rogers noted, schools may not promote significant learnings. As Friedenberg said, schools may punish creativity and independence [all closely quoted from Postman & Weingartner, 1968, p. xiv). And yet the economy chugs along, sometimes up, sometimes down, but mostly up. And the overall well-being of most citizens continues to improve by most historical measures.

So, without further ado, below is my post from March 2007, which I’m hoping will spark some additional conversation 14 months later, particularly now that both the TechLearning blog and Dangerously Irrelevant have larger audiences. I hope you find the post to still be as challenging and relevant today as I do.

– – – – –

Overblown alarmism and empty rhetoric

[cross-posted at the TechLearning blog]

[Law students learn to argue both sides of any issue because as attorneys they may be hired for either side of a case. Knowledge of the other side’s arguments also allows attorneys to counter those arguments and thus strengthen their own side. So with that in mind, here’s a little contrarian perspective on School 2.0. As technology advocates, we must be able to offer real solutions, not just empty rhetoric.]

Dear School 2.0 advocates,

We’ve heard it all before. The sky is falling. America is in danger of losing its role as lead actor on the global stage. What else is new?

National commissions? Esteemed task forces? Corporate leaders as education critics? We’ll see your Bill Gates and raise you a Sputnik.

We heard it in the 1950s:

We are engaged in a grim duel. We are beginning to recognize the threat to American technical supremacy which could materialize if Russia succeeds in her ambitious program of achieving world scientific and engineering supremacy by turning out vast numbers of well-trained scientists and engineers. . . We have let our educational problem grow much too big for comfort and safety. We are beginning to see now that we must solve it without delay. - Admiral Hyman Rickover, 1959

We heard it in the 1980s:

The risk is not only that the Japanese make automobiles more efficiently than Americans and have government subsidies for development and export. It is not just that the South Koreans recently built the world's most efficient steel mill, or that American machine tools, once the pride of the world, are being displaced by German products. It is also that these developments signify a redistribution of trained capability throughout the globe. . . If only to keep and improve on the slim competitive edge we still retain in world markets, we must dedicate ourselves to the reform of our educational system for the benefit of all--old and young alike, affluent and poor, majority and minority. Learning is the indispensable investment required for success in the "information age" we are entering. - A Nation at Risk, 1983

We heard it in the 1990s:

America’s education system is broken. - IBM CEO Louis Gerstner, 1994

And we’re hearing it again today:

Whereas for most of the 20th century the United States could take pride in having the best-educated workforce in the world, that is no longer true. Over the past 30 years, one country after another has surpassed us. . . . While our international counterparts are increasingly getting more education, their young people are getting a better education as well. . . . Our relative position in the world's education league tables [continues] its long slow decline. - The New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, 2006

America’s high schools are obsolete. - Microsoft CEO Bill Gates, 2005

And yet, somehow, despite our educational system’s long history of alleged mediocrity, our country and our economy keep chugging along quite nicely. Our standard of living is the envy of most of the world. Our gross domestic product per capita literally dwarfs those of China or India, the latest international competition du jour. Despite our country’s creativity-stifling schools, our citizens and workers continue, quite astonishingly, to build upon our nation’s well recognized and long-standing traditions of innovation and excellence to create new products, new systems, and new markets.

We’ve heard it all before. Creative thinking. Problem solving. Independent, self-directed learning. Daniel Pink, Richard Florida, John Seely Brown…

Ho hum. Ever heard of progressive education? The turn of the LAST century? Summerhill? John Dewey? Neil Postman? The 1960s? Been there, done that. Why is THIS time any different? Why is it that THIS time we should replace the entire system?

Yes, we get it. Most kids think schools are boring. Big surprise. John Goodlad told us that long ago. As if we needed ANYONE to tell us that. Isn’t that just the way school is?

Fine. School 2.0 is the “right” thing to do. Technology has the potential to transform education. Our educational institutions could be doing so much more. Educators should feel more of a moral imperative to do things differently. Blah blah blah… Let’s be honest: isn’t this true for ANY bureaucratic government entity? Do we really expect our public schools to be any different?

We’ve heard it all before. The status quo is inadequate. Too many kids drop out, our assessment systems are all wrong, and we’re squandering our children’s future. The problem is that you offer no concrete, tangible, publicly- and politically-viable alternatives.

It’s easy to throw stones at glass houses. It’s much harder to replace a venerable system that’s served us well for a century with something else. The old saw, “Never make a complaint without offering potential solutions” applies here in spades. Just for argument’s sake, let’s say that we “tore down the walls” tomorrow. What would education look like instead? How would we ever get there from where we are now? How are you going to persuade educators, and politicians, and your local community members that this is worth moving toward? That it’s not just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking?

What’s your plan? We mean a real plan. Not just “kids learning independently on matters of personal interest, taking advantage of the power of digital technology to help them do so.” What will the structures look like? Policies? Laws? Funding streams? How will we know if kids have learned anything important? How will we handle parents’ very real needs for someone to take their kids while they go to work?

Quit offering us wishes. Quit offering us dreams. Quit preaching to us about what is morally right and educationally appropriate. Help us realize, in terms we can understand, what this new thing might actually look like AT SCALE and how we might reasonably get here. Even if we agree with you that this is important, without a vision AND a plan we’re just as stuck as you are.

We’ve heard it all before. What else you got?

[cross-posted at the TechLearning blog]

[Law students learn to argue both sides of any issue because as attorneys they may be hired for either side of a case. Knowledge of the other side’s arguments also allows attorneys to counter those arguments and thus strengthen their own side. So with that in mind, here’s a little contrarian perspective on School 2.0. As technology advocates, we must be able to offer real solutions, not just empty rhetoric.]

Dear School 2.0 advocates,

We’ve heard it all before. The sky is falling. America is in danger of losing its role as lead actor on the global stage. What else is new?

National commissions? Esteemed task forces? Corporate leaders as education critics? We’ll see your Bill Gates and raise you a Sputnik.

We heard it in the 1950s:

We are engaged in a grim duel. We are beginning to recognize the threat to American technical supremacy which could materialize if Russia succeeds in her ambitious program of achieving world scientific and engineering supremacy by turning out vast numbers of well-trained scientists and engineers. . . We have let our educational problem grow much too big for comfort and safety. We are beginning to see now that we must solve it without delay. - Admiral Hyman Rickover, 1959

We heard it in the 1980s:

The risk is not only that the Japanese make automobiles more efficiently than Americans and have government subsidies for development and export. It is not just that the South Koreans recently built the world's most efficient steel mill, or that American machine tools, once the pride of the world, are being displaced by German products. It is also that these developments signify a redistribution of trained capability throughout the globe. . . If only to keep and improve on the slim competitive edge we still retain in world markets, we must dedicate ourselves to the reform of our educational system for the benefit of all--old and young alike, affluent and poor, majority and minority. Learning is the indispensable investment required for success in the "information age" we are entering. - A Nation at Risk, 1983

We heard it in the 1990s:

America’s education system is broken. - IBM CEO Louis Gerstner, 1994

And we’re hearing it again today:

Whereas for most of the 20th century the United States could take pride in having the best-educated workforce in the world, that is no longer true. Over the past 30 years, one country after another has surpassed us. . . . While our international counterparts are increasingly getting more education, their young people are getting a better education as well. . . . Our relative position in the world's education league tables [continues] its long slow decline. - The New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, 2006

America’s high schools are obsolete. - Microsoft CEO Bill Gates, 2005

And yet, somehow, despite our educational system’s long history of alleged mediocrity, our country and our economy keep chugging along quite nicely. Our standard of living is the envy of most of the world. Our gross domestic product per capita literally dwarfs those of China or India, the latest international competition du jour. Despite our country’s creativity-stifling schools, our citizens and workers continue, quite astonishingly, to build upon our nation’s well recognized and long-standing traditions of innovation and excellence to create new products, new systems, and new markets.

We’ve heard it all before. Creative thinking. Problem solving. Independent, self-directed learning. Daniel Pink, Richard Florida, John Seely Brown…

Ho hum. Ever heard of progressive education? The turn of the LAST century? Summerhill? John Dewey? Neil Postman? The 1960s? Been there, done that. Why is THIS time any different? Why is it that THIS time we should replace the entire system?

Yes, we get it. Most kids think schools are boring. Big surprise. John Goodlad told us that long ago. As if we needed ANYONE to tell us that. Isn’t that just the way school is?

Fine. School 2.0 is the “right” thing to do. Technology has the potential to transform education. Our educational institutions could be doing so much more. Educators should feel more of a moral imperative to do things differently. Blah blah blah… Let’s be honest: isn’t this true for ANY bureaucratic government entity? Do we really expect our public schools to be any different?

We’ve heard it all before. The status quo is inadequate. Too many kids drop out, our assessment systems are all wrong, and we’re squandering our children’s future. The problem is that you offer no concrete, tangible, publicly- and politically-viable alternatives.

It’s easy to throw stones at glass houses. It’s much harder to replace a venerable system that’s served us well for a century with something else. The old saw, “Never make a complaint without offering potential solutions” applies here in spades. Just for argument’s sake, let’s say that we “tore down the walls” tomorrow. What would education look like instead? How would we ever get there from where we are now? How are you going to persuade educators, and politicians, and your local community members that this is worth moving toward? That it’s not just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking?

What’s your plan? We mean a real plan. Not just “kids learning independently on matters of personal interest, taking advantage of the power of digital technology to help them do so.” What will the structures look like? Policies? Laws? Funding streams? How will we know if kids have learned anything important? How will we handle parents’ very real needs for someone to take their kids while they go to work?

Quit offering us wishes. Quit offering us dreams. Quit preaching to us about what is morally right and educationally appropriate. Help us realize, in terms we can understand, what this new thing might actually look like AT SCALE and how we might reasonably get here. Even if we agree with you that this is important, without a vision AND a plan we’re just as stuck as you are.

We’ve heard it all before. What else you got?

Painters ... pipefitters ... principals?

Why does it bother me so much to see principals on this list?

• St. Paul (MN) Public Schools Labor Agreements

Blocking the future

My latest article for the American Association of School Administrators is now online. Titled Blocking the Future, it’s only a page long but I’m really excited about it. Here’s an excerpt:

[S]chool district leaders have a critical choice to make: Will their schools pro-actively model and teach the safe and appropriate use of these digital tools or will they reactively block them out and leave students and families to fend for themselves? Unfortunately, many schools are choosing to do the latter. . . . I can think of no better way to highlight organizational unimportance than to block out the tools that are transforming the rest of society. Schools whose default stance is to prohibit rather than enable might as well plant a sign in front of their buildings that says, “Irrelevant to children’s futures.”

Hopefully this will be a useful reading for your administrators and teachers. Feel free to distribute liberally!

Low ability teachers, low ability students?

[cross-posted at LeaderTalk]

Here are some research findings for you…

Smart people leave teaching?

Of the teachers who had high college entrance exam scores, almost a fourth of them leave the profession within a decade. In contrast, only about 11% of the individuals with low scores leave the teaching profession within 10 years. Similarly, more than a third of the teachers with low college entrance exam scores are still teaching a decade after they started, while only 15% of the teachers with high scores are still teaching ten years after they began (Anderson & Carroll, 2008; see also Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley (2006), who note similar results for university selectiveness and certification exam scores). In other words, the percentage of teachers with lower academic ability increases in schools over time. The brightest go elsewhere.

Teacher smarts matter?

• Higher teacher ACT scores positively influences student reading scores (Ferguson & Ladd, 1996)
• Teachers’ verbal ability influences student performance (Greenwald, Hedges, & Laine, 1996)
• [S]tudents learn more from teachers with higher test scores. Test scores matter…” (Wayne & Youngs, 2003)
  

Discuss among yourselves

Let’s assume that, generally speaking, these studies are correct: 1) smart people are less likely to stay in teaching (thus resulting in a concentration of teachers with lower academic ability), and 2) the academic ability of teachers impacts student learning outcomes. Now what?

References

• Anderson, S. E., & Carroll, C. D. (2008). Teacher career choices: Timing of teacher careers among 1992-1993 Bachelor’s degree recipients (NCES 2008-153). Washington, DC: United States Department of Education.
• Ferguson, R.F., & Ladd, H.F. (1996). How and why money matters: An analysis of Alabama schools. In H.F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 265-298.
  
• Greenwald, R., Hedges, L.V., & Laine, R.D. (1996, Autumn). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361-396.
  
• Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 173-208.
  
• Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73(1), 89-122.

Not so irrelevant 008

My latest roundup of links and tools…

I read blocked blogs

• I’m gettin’ me some of these super-cool buttons (made by Stephanie Sandifer; inspired by Bud Hunt). What a great thing to hand out to administrators!

Are you up to the challenge?

• The 2008 Comment Challenge is now on (and, hey, recognize a fantastic commenter!)

Why K-12 educators shake their heads at academia

• Rick Hess perfectly captures one of my primary complaints about academia, which is that much of what we do is completely inaccessible (and/or meaningless) to K-12 educators

No hand-held electronics in front of the kids!

I was incredulous to read ... the decision by the London Catholic School Board in Ontario banning hand held electronic devices in schools. . . . Even more bizarrely ... school board employees are only allowed to use these devices "in areas from which students are excluded." Taken to its logical extent then this includes staff also being unable to use digital cameras to record student work or projects, create and listen to podcasts and so on.
– Gareth Long

Like Alfie Kohn, Dan Meyer forces us to rethink / justify

• Who do we think we are?
• The difference between us and them
• Sobriety

New tools I’m finding quite useful

• Taboo Firefox extension
• FeedDemon RSS reader

The impetus is on us, not them

Help a teacher develop an integrated lesson [that] ... focuses on a local issue of real importance, in which they, their families, and/or others in their community have a genuine stake and interest. If their learning is situated in that type of context, I think you’ll find the impact of their learning experiences will be far greater, and many more of them will learn digital literacy skills alongside traditional literacy skills. Teaching in a problem-based learning environment is a lot more work than simply lecturing and delivering content to students, but it is the type of learning environment our students need to remain engaged in school work. Too many kids today are BORED by school. As the adults running our schools, it is our responsibility to remedy this situation.
– Wesley Fryer

A couple of gems from Clay Burell…

• Muhammad Ali: A D- student or an F- school?
• Education as pretense: Schooly “speeches” versus real “talks”

And a couple more from Gerald Bracey

• Proficient readers: Dear Strong American Schools (be wary of those NAEP proficiency levels!)
• A test everyone will fail

We are a little egocentric, aren’t we?

• Fujitsu’s world map (thanks, Brett!)

And, finally, a reminder from John Pederson

• Don’t count your Twitter followers

One year ago: Well, what's your answer? and Principal blogging not allowed

Questions for Michael Vitelli, CEO of The Gaming Krib?

Lately there's been a bunch of conversation on this blog about The Gaming Krib, a service designed to help parents and children 'balance ... playing time and learning time.' Most of the comments (both here and on Twitter) about the company and/or its underlying paradigm have been pretty negative. Michael Vitelli, President and CEO, has kindly agreed to do a podcast interview with me on May 9 to talk about the need his company is addressing as well as its approach to solving that need.

Check out my previous post and The Gaming Krib web site. Then, in the comments area for this post, please submit some questions that you'd like me to consider for the interview. Rather than answering them here, Michael and I will save them for when we chat. Thanks!

The Gaming Krib

Bud Hunt posted in Twitter about The Gaming Krib. Here’s the basic premise of the service this company’s trying to sell:

1. It has the ability to shut off families’ electronic media (television, computer, cell phone, etc.). [I’m not clear how it does this]
2. Parents sign up for the service for their wayward children who’d rather play than do schoolwork.
3. If a kid tries to play a game or watch TV, he is told "Sorry, you cannot run game, go online, turn on TV, or use phone until math questions are answered."
4. Kid does math problems and earns time credits for use of electronic media.
5. “Both parent and child happy.”

Check it out, particularly the endorsements (Daniel Pink saying “good luck” is an endorsement?). Also be sure to see the hilarious pictures for Steps 1–3 on the home page.

I like the idea… but for adults. Sorry, Mom or Dad. Too bad that you had a tough day at the office today. You can earn 10–minute allotments of time to watch TV or use the phone, though. You just have to first do the dishes, scrub the toilet, clean out the garage, run your errands, wax the floor, fold the laundry…

Some thoughts on math

From Roger Schank at The Pulse:

[T]there is no evidence whatsoever, that accumulation of facts and background knowledge are the same thing. In fact, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. Facts learned out of context and apart from actual real world experience that is repeated over and over are not retained. . . .

[K]ids don’t like math much and it is clear why. They find it boring and irrelevant to anything they care about doing. If you think math is so important, then why not teach it within a meaningful context, like business, or running a school doing the kind of math you had to do to do that – which certainly wasn’t algebra II. There is plenty of evidence that shows that teaching math within a real and meaningful context works a whole lot better than shoving it down their throats and following that with a multiple choice test. . . .

[T]here is no evidence whosoever that says that a nation that is trailing in math test scores will somehow trail in GDP or whatever it is you really care about. This is just plain silly, but we keep repeating the mantra  that we are behind Korea in math as if it has been proven that this matters in some way. . . .

[N]early every grown adult has forgotten whatever algebra he or she ever learned to pass those silly tests, so it is clear that algebra is meaningless for adult life. I ask every important person in public life that I meet to tell me The Quadratic Formula. No one has ever been able to do so.

From David Thornburg at The Pulse:

Recent pronouncements from Washington regarding math education have suggested that pedagogical points of view don't matter in the teaching of mathematics. For example: "There is no basis in research for favoring teacher-based or student-centered instruction," Dr. Larry R. Faulkner, the chairman of the panel, said at a briefing last Wednesday. "People may retain their strongly held philosophical inclinations, but the research does not show that either is better than the other."

Well, actually, Larry, if you read the “Rising Above the Gathering Storm” document (National Academies Press, 2007) you will likely be shocked to learn that, in fact, there are two methodologies proven to improve math proficiency: Statewide specialty high schools (e.g., IMSA) and inquiry-driven project-based learning (e.g., constructionism.) Now it may well be that Dr. Faulkner has more reliable sources than those at the National Academy of Science and other groups that contributed to this 591 page report on the challenge faced by the US in the areas of science and math education. However, let's assume for the moment that the National Academies tend to use fairly reliable folks to generate their reports. In this case, then Faulkner is simply flat out wrong. There IS research showing that one methodology is better than another, and I just cited it. The fact that this research was reported by the same government that claims it does not exist is a puzzlement at best, and an example of the “big lie” at worst. Faulkner's strategy seems to be that, if you lie to the American public loudly enough, it will believe you.

Cell phone cameras in the K-12 classroom: Punishable offenses or student-citizen journalism?

[cross-posted at LeaderTalk]

Take a look at the seven YouTube videos below, all taken by student cell phone cameras in classrooms. Do we want students bringing to public attention these types of classroom incidents? Should students be punished or applauded for filming and posting these?

Yes, there should be an economic aspect to schooling

Many folks are concerned that schools today are mostly about churning out worker bees for uncaring corporations who are more than happy to chew up employees and spit them out in favor of others, perhaps overseas, who are cheaper. Like Mike Parent, my guest blogger this week, they are worried about mission statements like that of the The New Jersey High School Redesign Steering Committee, which states that it is ‘working to build public awareness and support for a more rigorous high school experience, one that allows students to succeed in the workforce or in pursuing higher education.’

I’m not one of those people. Although I, too, want my children to be happy, creative, caring, self-directed, intellectually curious, and environmentally aware, I also want them to be contributing members to society. And, if they decide to challenge certain statuses quo, I want them to have the tools to be able to do that successfully. I think that means preparing them to be powerfully productive in the technology-suffused, globally-interconnected future in which they’re going to live. If they can’t play, work, thrive, and influence others in that world, they’re going to be marginalized, impotent outsiders.

So, with all due respect to Clay Burell, I see Did You Know? 2.0 as a conversation starter for how the world is changing around us but, like Karl Fisch, I don’t see it as an overt call for preparing students solely for economic competitiveness. Nor do I think it is fair to label William Farren’s excellent Did You Ever Wonder? video as a ‘vital counterpoint’ to the issues in the Did You Know? video. I see no reason why equipping students with 21st century skills is in opposition to preparing them to be ecologically-responsible citizens. In fact, a strong argument could be made that it is only by equipping our students with 21st century skills that they will be in a position to solve the massive problems that we are bestowing upon them.

Collins and Porras note that we should be embracing the ‘genius of the and’ rather than the ‘tyranny of the or.’ I agree. I will be preparing my children to be productive 21st century citizens and employees. I will be preparing my children to be environmentally-aware and economically-productive. I am hoping – and, indeed, counting on – many others doing the same.

One year ago: Online multimedia textbooks: A strategic investment and Online multimedia textbooks: Follow-up

DABA: eduwonkette

I was recently a guest blogger for eduwonkette. She’s pushing up against my guideline of having a Technorati authority of less than 100, so I figure now is as good a time as any to name her as the next recipient of the crimson megaphone. For those of you who are unfamiliar with her, eduwonkette is the pseudonym of an anonymous professor somewhere. I don’t know much about her other than that she’s super fun to read because of her willingness to inject levity and attitude into her blogging. This, of course, makes her blog one that deserves a bigger audience (DABA). You’ll also see that she often sparks fascinating discussions in her comment areas. If you’re looking for a lighthearted, and yet somehow still serious, look at major policy issues in education, eduwonkette’s a great bet.

Here are a few posts to get you started (see also her posts before she moved to Education Week):

• It’s a Small World After All
• Social Studies, Science, and NCLB
• My Value-Added Bucket List
• Americans’ Attitudes on Inequality: A Teacher’s Dilemma
• Professors Strike Back?
• The NYC Teacher Experiment Revisited
• Do Schools Matter?

Happy reading!

• See list of DABA blogs
• Read DABA posts on a web page
• Subscribe to DABA posts via RSS
• Subscribe to DABA posts via e-mail
• DABA clip code
• DABA blogroll code
• The Crimson Megaphone

Hanging change agents out to dry

At the request of her principal, Pam delivered a presentation to her staff on technology tools. At a follow-up meeting, she faced a lot of criticism from members of the Faculty Council who claimed that she ‘wasted their time.’ Rather than supporting Pam, her principal simply sat there and nodded her head as Pam absorbed the blows.

Here is the comment I left at her post:

Your administrator cut you off at the knees. She essentially set you up. NOT cool. Does she do this to others or is it just you? Either way, it should be a huge warning sign that you're not going to get the kind of support you need. I suggest you either call her on it (and judge her reply very critically) and/or start looking for another building. As an educational leadership professor, I say be very, very wary of a leader who breaks trust with you like this.

Do you think I was too harsh?

How Many More Graduate Hours Do I Need?

I’m tired of going to school.

I don’t mean the elementary school where I work. I actually like that.

When I entered the classroom I was told that the state appreciated me having an undergraduate degree already (B.A. in Psychology, 1983) and that it was especially nice that I even already had an M.S. (Adult & Technical Education, a non-certification degree designed to further my career at the college level, 2003) . They thought that my 18-hour graduate diploma in linguistics was interesting but told me that the Australian National University wasn’t accredited in America, and that they couldn’t do anything with those hours and it didn’t really matter whether the ANU had produced Nobel Laureates, they weren’t accredited. So with 54 graduate hours already to my credit, I went back to school. Night school. Summer school. The school of inconvenience….

I learned stuff. It was good for a time.

It was also two grand a class because I live out of state and West Virginia won’t give me a break on tuition just for teaching their kids. In three years I spent $30K to keep my license.

If you know what HQT stands for, you can probably guess part of where I’m going. I’m not, technically a highly qualified teacher. With three degrees to my credit, I had to send home a note with a third grader this year explaining to the child’s parents that I’m not actually qualified to teach him math or reading despite my eleven or so years of college.

One of the things that most ticked me off about going to school myself was that there seems to be a plan in place to prevent teachers from going past the masters degree level. I can take classes that count toward a certification (for $2,000 a pop) or I can take classes that lead to an Ed.S. (for $2,000 a pop). But not both.

There was a time in my life when I actually wanted to be Dr. Cruey. The material in this piece pretty much put me off that for good.

At some point I started asking why I had to keep going to school. I have 108 graduate hours and a GPA better than 3.8. Can’t I, like, take a test or go to a workshop? Especially since I’m not pursuing any academic credentials?

I was pleased recently to discover that the answer is “yes.” I recently discovered a state where, if you already have a license in something, you can add other certifications based on a test alone. I’ve passed the test there for a PreK-5 certification, for a middle school math certification, and for some increased special education credentials. In March I go take the test for reading certification.

I don’t understand why there isn’t a national program to access what an educator knows and could be allowed to teach. If I’ve passed the Praxis test for the Principles of Learning and Teaching, and I’ve worked in the classroom, and I’ve had positive evaluations, and I can pass a test on middle school math, why shouldn’t I be allowed to teach math without taking 21 graduate hours of math? The cynics among us at the classroom level sometimes argue that it’s because the colleges would go broke if such a system was in place.

In the face of a teacher shortage in specific essential areas, eventually there will just have to be a better system for licensing teachers. And academic credentials will have to be separated from professional ones.

Greg Cruey, Guest Blogger

Black Wednesday (Dressing for NCLB)

Because education is largely a government function, there seems to be little hope of ever disentangling politics and education.

Today I'll wear black to school. I've worn black to school almost every Wednesday since November 3, 2004. Why that date? On November 2nd of that year I spent 13 hours helping people cast their ballots for President in a polling place in Virginia. I went home, had a short but sound night of sleep, and woke the next morning to discover that George W. Bush was still President. I wore black to work that day, and I've worn black almost every Wednesday since - 168 out of the last 171 Wednesdays. The exceptions? The day after Democrat Tim Kaine won the governor's race in Virginia I wore more festive colors to work. (Since I work in West Virginia, half my co-workers never fully understood why.) I also dressed quite colorfully on the Wednesday after the most recent midterm election - the one where Democrats won back Congress.

There was also a day earlier this year when we had Monday off and I just lost track of what day of the week it was. My co-workers thought that was funny...

I know that President Bush has his fan club. And I know that there are plenty of people who dislike him for reasons other than education policy. But in my mind, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is among the low points of Bush Presidency.

I have several specific complaints about NCLB.

• I don't like the way it has reduced the scope of curriculum. I think it has de-emphasized the arts, for example, in favor of the most basic, pared down core.
• I don’t like the focus it brings on mediocrity. The goal of education under NCLB is to move students who are barely failing on high stakes tests to the place where they are barely passing on high stakes tests. There is no reward for excellence. getting by is the goal.
• I don’t like the unrealistic and punitive nature of the accountability provisions. The eventual goal of NCLB is 100% grade level mastery. Every fifth grader, for example, should function at the fifth grade level (unless they have some profound disability). Schools that don’t comply, don’t meet this standard, are punished. The problem is that so many of the factors related to a student’s performance fall outside the school’s reach. Basic issues of poverty and social fabric impact a school’s ability to achieve these goals; but the school has little power to address them. The simple truth is that there will always be at least one or two kids who don’t make the grade no matter what teachers do. And eventually NCLB’s accountability provisions will result in almost every public school being deemed a failure. It is a standard no other modern nation strives to achieve. It is unrealistic.
• I think the law is underfunded. The requirements of NCLB at onerous in terms of both time and money.

You don’t have to be a complete cynic to think that maybe, just maybe, NCLB’s accountability provisions are a poison pill in the law. The intention could be to make public schools look bad – worse than they are – to justify the privatization of education through the use of vouchers. And right there in Bush’s 2009 budget, what do we have? Proposed funding for a voucher program.

NCLB has failed. The task now is to replace it with a law with broader vision, a law more supportive of public education. Hopefully Congress will be wise enough to call for far more input from the educational community than they did in 2002.

Greg Cruey, Guest Blogger

Can We Prevent Learning Disabilities?

Is it possible to prevent learning disabilities? There’s a policy push to do just that, and it was the main focus of the 2004 revisions to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

My afternoon today was consumed with meetings. When I worked at the college level we used to joke that meetings were the logical alternative to work. But today’s meetings were less frivolous…

Normally I spend my afternoon working through some very scripted reading interventions with small groups of students that I pull out of their classrooms – some fifth graders, some fourth graders, and a mixed group of first and second graders. Today those students stayed in their classrooms, and my afternoon was instead spent in a series of IEP meetings.

If you’re not familiar with IEP meetings, let me introduce the concept. The acronym stands for Individualized Education Program. Students who have been determined to have an educational disability under IDEA have an IEP, a document that describes how their school is accommodating that disability at the moment.

The meetings were chaired by my principal and they took place in her office. A specialist for the central office was present today. Obviously I was in the meetings. The classroom teacher that has the child also sat in on each meeting and contributed to the discussions that took place. And when we’re lucky, the child’s parent comes to the meeting. At this school, we’re generally lucky in that way; but today we didn't have parents in most of meeting - although we'd talked to them about what was going to happen in the meetings.

Five of the six meetings today were routine, almost formalities. We had meetings to discuss whether a particular student needed to continue seeing this or that specialist for a particular problem. We had two meetings to discuss the status of a child’s disability; a requirement that comes around every three years.

One of the meetings was not particularly routine. It was a meeting to decide whether a particular student had a disability – whether, under IDEA 2004, they were eligible for services as a special education student. For obvious reasons of confidentiality, I can’t say much about the child or the meeting. But I can tell you that the process of identifying some disabilities is vague and slippery.

Emotional disturbance (some states call them behavior disorders) are very real. But federal law is so vague that they are almost impossible to legally define. Children with emotional disturbances make up only a very small portion of those who qualify to be served under IDEA. But students who have learning disabilities make up a much larger portion of the special education population.

Until 2004 we had a pretty clear definition of learning disabilities. It wasn’t a very good one. We called it the discrepancy model. It was clear as a bell – a mathematical definition of a disability. Unfortunately, it was a time consuming definition to satisfy and it often meant allowing a child to fail a grade as proof that they needed help. For years we did this to kids…

IDEA 2004 came up with an entirely new definition of learning disabilities. Conceptually, it’s rather clear. A learning disability is evidenced by the failure of a child to respond to academic interventions designed to bring his or her achievement up to grade level. Those are my words, not a technical quote. The difficulty now is that we are grappling with just what those interventions should be, and what level of response is sufficient to avoid the determination that a child does in fact have a disability. And as a result, there’s not nearly as much certainty in the process as there once was.

If you are an idealistic optimist you will say that one of the main goals of the new law is to use intervention to prevent a child’s problems from ever developing into a disability. If you are a cynic you will scoff that the new law’s goal is just as I phrased it above - to avoid the determination that a child has a disability, even if they really do. But either way, you are begging the question of what actually constitutes a learning disability. It's a question I expect to keep begging for a few years.

So I go back to my original question: Is it possible to prevent learning disabilities?

The irony of the new law is that a breakthrough in medical research that occurred at about the time the new law was passed challenges some of its assumptions. Somewhere between two-thirds and four-fifths of children classified as having learning disabilities are thought to be dyslexic. And about the time the President signed the new law on educational disabilities, a medical researcher published findings that showed that a dyslexia gene exists. A year later, two more genes connected to dyslexia were discussed at a meeting of the American Society of Human Genetics.

The question of whether we can prevent learning disabilities may now be largely a question of whether or not we can prevent a genetic condition. And as for identifying them, a cheek swab or simple blood test at birth may soon accomplish that.

I suspect that the policy makers will all have to rethink learning disabilities again soon – maybe before the 2004 revisions to IDEA even get fully implemented in most states…

Greg Cruey, Guest Blogger

Same rules, different marketing

As Seth Godin notes, there's a huge difference between this:

THERE ARE NO REFUNDS, NO EXCEPTIONS.
THERE ARE NO EXCHANGES ON PLANTS.
ALL LISTED CONDITIONS MUST BE MET IN ORDER TO RECEIVE EQUAL OR LESSER VALUE EXCHANGE. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS. MANAGER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS.

and this:

At Surroundings, it's really important to us that you be delighted (not just happy). Please keep your receipt and be sure to bring it with you if there are any problems. We'll be happy to exchange any cut flowers that aren't just right--we'll give you a store credit or any other item in the store of equal or lesser value. Unfortunately, we can't exchange plants. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask any of us for help.

I think it’s safe to say that most of our school rules are written like the former, not the latter. No wonder students grumble about the rules so much. Couldn’t we find ways to make our rules, policies, and guidelines more palatable, more positive, and more pleasant? They might go over better with our intended audiences…

School law blogs

For those of you who are interested, here are some blogs that cover school law issues:

• At the Schoolhouse Gate
• The Edjurist Accord
• The School Law Blog
• School and Education Law Blog
• Education Law
• Texas Teacher Law
• Connecticut Education Law Blog

These blogs also often have posts related to school law topics:

• BoardBuzz
• Blog from the Capital

Here are a few special education law blogs:

• Special Education Law Blog (Charles Fox)
• Special Educaion Law Blog (Jim Gerl)
• The FAPE Page

And here is a higher education law blog:

• UnivAtty

Want to read all of these at once?

• See list of school law blogs
• Read all school law posts on a web page
• Subscribe to all school law posts via RSS
• Subscribe to all school law posts via e-mail
• Clip code (for web pages)
• Blogroll code (for blogs)

Let me know if you know of a school law blog I missed. I’ll add it to the feed!

One year ago: Gone Fischin'

Copyright morality of youth

I just finished reading David Pogue’s fascinating article on the copyright morality of today's youth (thanks for the link, Ian Jukes!). Here's the key quote:

Right now, the customers who can’t even *see* why file sharing might be wrong are still young. But 10, 20, 30 years from now, that crowd will be *everybody*. What will happen then?

Read the comments to Pogue’s post too!

At the Schoolhouse Gate: Re-launch

After a hiatus of several months, I am pleased to announce CASTLE's re-launch of At the Schoolhouse Gate, a group blog dedicated to legal and policy issues in K-12 schools. We have several new contributors. Recent posts have addressed states' teacher discipline databases, cyberbullying, students' rights to post pictures taken in class, and a boy's right to wear a dress to prom.

I hope that you will join us. We welcome all new readers, commenters, and contributors.

Model AUPs for student empowerment?

I received this e-mail earlier in the week:

My name is [anonymous]. I am a Library Media Director at [high school] in [city, state]. We are a small community, who until recently underwent tremendous growth in the number of students and buildings in our district. I am writing to you because I have been an admirer of your blog and writings on how we, as educators, can shape the educational direction of students using technology. Your posts on Dangerously Irrelevant have inspired me to no longer take a back seat and wait for changes to occur in our district. Now, I'm trying to lead the charge. I have for several years been met with the proverbial "brick wall" when attempting to get the district to allow more access to technology tools on-line. We currently do not permit access to many Web 2.0 sites that actually help with our student's education. With persistent badergering, our Central Administration is allowing me to rewrite our Acceptable Use Policy so students can supplement class instruction with blogs, access academic content from YouTube and similar video sites, and post information on wikis. I would love to know what you believe should be in an AUP that addresses the concerns of today but is still conscious of the technology access of tomorrow. I'm sure you are very busy, but any help you can provide to me and my students would be greatly appreciated.

Here is my rather lame response:

Hi [anonymous], I haven't really seen any good model AUPs, but then again I haven't gone looking. Here are a couple of links:

http://www.doe.state.in.us/olr/aup/aupmod.html
http://tinyurl.com/2s7o8o

I would find some tech-savvy districts in your state and see how they're handling their AUPs. They may be better resources for you than I am. Maybe the edublogosphere has some suggestions for us both?

So, how about it? Does anyone have, or know of, a good student AUP that can serve as a model for others? One that seems to appropriately address the safety concerns of districts while simultaneously affording students access to the digital tools that are revolutionizing the rest of society?

You know, NSBA, AASA, NASSP, and/or NAESP (and their state affiliates) should be helping districts with this. Maybe some of these leadership organizations are and we just need to bring their efforts to the forefront?

XOs for my XO

I'm one of the lucky ones: my XO arrived in time for Christmas (thank you, Betsy!). I wish I knew to which country the other one went. For those of you who are so inclined, you still have time to give one and get one.

My kids and I have been playing with the XO a lot over the last couple of days. It definitely requires a mind shift for those of us who are used to computers with the Microsoft Windows interface. I've been reading up on the Sugar interface so that we can better understand how to think about this new computer. I've also started bookmarking some helpful XO resources in my del.icio.us account. As others have noted, the key is not to judge the XO by the standards of a more expensive, mainstream laptop but rather to recognize it for what it is (and then marvel at the form factor and functionality that you get for the price).

Now that it's in my physical presence, I already have LOTS of questions about my XO (e.g., how do I find files that I download? can I add some of you as friends in an XO group?). Doug Johnson, Tom Hoffman, Anne Davis: who else out there in the edublogosphere has/ordered an XO? Should we create an edublogger community around this thing, maybe as a group blog or as a social network in Ning?

Notes

1. I tried to wow my 89-year-old grandmother with the XO yesterday. She said, "Oh, I know all about that thing." My mom had heard about the OLPC project too. Awesome!
2. I'm the third person in Iowa to add myself to the XO Frappr map!

Observing religious holidays in schools

I was interviewed for NASSP's new article on observing religious holidays in schools:

• Ho ho no: The December dilemma

I blogged about this last year in regard to the holiday e-card from Miguel Guhlin's team. The NASSP article includes some good resources on the topic. I would add three others:

• Schools, holiday decorations, and the law (my 2002 article for the  Minnesota School Boards Association Journal)
• Christmas curriculum: Unintended consequences
• Tips on celebrating year-end holidays

The Principal's Policy Blog is sponsoring a dialogue about the article. Add your two cents here and/or there!

School video that mocked student with disabilities posted on YouTube

[cross-posted at the TechLearning blog]

A video production teacher at Montville High School in New Jersey had her students create a public service announcement (PSA) as a class assignment. The students decided to make an anti-bullying video and assigned roles for the skit. B.B., a junior with multiple cognitive and social disabilities, was selected to be the victim. Other students then emptied garbage cans on his head, slapped him, and pushed him to the ground. The video concluded with a teacher breaking up the bullying activity and an anti-bullying message.

Sadly, the video was then edited by some students and posted on YouTube. The YouTube version omitted the anti-bullying aspects of the video and only showed B.B. being bullied. The YouTube version was viewed over 3,700 times before it was taken down. B.B. became the subject of taunts and teasing in school, severe enough that he missed school for a month. His mother has now sued the teacher, principal, superintendent, and school board under the state’s anti-bullying law for failing to sufficiently protect her son after the teasing began.

This incident raises multiple issues worthy of consideration. In no particular order, here are a few questions and thoughts…

1. Where did the original video file reside? Presumably the editing of the PSA was done at school since it was a video production class. What precautions, if any, were taken regarding storage and/or possible dissemination of the PSA? Did each student involved in creating the video get a copy?
2. Who owns the original video? The school? The students who made it? Both? What rights does each party have to do with the video what it wishes?
3. Was the edited YouTube version of the video created at school? If so, the school’s AUP should cover the offending student’s behavior. Although the offending student was identified, it is unclear what disciplinary action, if any, was taken against him/her.
4. In addition to the state law, presumably the school has an anti-bullying policy. Can a minor student with multiple cognitive and social disabilities legally consent to “fake” bullying? Is there any argument of consent or assumption of risk for this situation?
5. One of the necessary elements of a defamation claim is that the victim’s reputation was harmed substantially enough to warrant a legal remedy. Is this harder to prove for a minor student than it would be for an adult, particularly given the rampant teasing that occurs in schools?

There are lots of issues here, but these are the ones that initially jump out at me. I think B.B.’s attorney was right when he said that B.B. never should have been selected in the first place to be the bullying victim. That said, any of the students conceivably could have been teased if they were in his place. B.B. just appears to be a particularly sensitive student because of his disabilities.

As teachers and students in schools continue to create more digital content as part of coursework, we will see more stories like this. The portability and modifiability of digital files, combined with the openness of the Internet and the ready availability of content creation tools, make these types of situations difficult to prevent. The challenge for schools will be to balance appropriate safety and supervision concerns with the pedagogical advantages that often accompany the use of digital technologies. Think about the digital content that is created in your school: is your organization at risk for similar inappropriate appropriation of content by a student or staff member?

[thanks to Jim Gates at Tipline for pointing me to this story]

Dangerously innumerate

In what may be the best word play yet on the name of my blog, Tom Hoffman had issues with my previous post on GDP overachievers. Check out the conversation: the phrase 'jibber jabber' was used!

Just Say No to Wikipedia

A middle school librarian in New Jersey has gotten some media attention for her anti-Wikipedia campaign:

Linda O'Connor regards Wikipedia the same way former first lady Nancy Reagan campaigned against drugs. . . . She put up a sign saying "Just Say No to Wikipedia" over the computers in the school library. . . . Wikipedia is blocked on all computers in the Warren Hills Regional School District.

I’m highly skeptical.

If the district is going to take a principled stand against Wikipedia because some information is biased or incorrect, is it also taking out all of the encyclopedias (which research has shown, on average, to be as inaccurate as Wikipedia)? Is it removing all of the news magazines and newspapers? The article makes a big deal about how school librarians preview materials before they’re placed on the shelves, but I can guarantee you that librarians and media specialists do not have time to screen every word of every incoming publication. They miss errors and biases just like the Wikipedia community does. Also, it’s ludicrous to pretend that the school library vetting process is free of bias. Oh, and I challenge you to find a school library that doesn’t have old, outdated (and thus inaccurate) non-fiction and/or reference materials on its shelves.

This is all of a bunch of hooey. This shouldn’t have even been a story. When is the Associated Press going to run this story?

Schools teach kids how to wisely and appropriately navigate 21st century information channels

Or this one?

New Jersey school district blocks kids from using one of the most important and powerful information resources in existence because of mistaken beliefs about inaccuracy and bias

Or maybe this one?

Wikipedia is an amazing contribution to the body of human knowledge. New Jersey school district says ‘No thanks.’

Or is it asking too much of the newspaper press to avoid bias by showing the other side of this issue?

GDP overachievers

Yesterday Karl Fisch and I were e-mailed a link to a video from Shocking Economics. Although I’m neither a demographer nor an economist, the video got me thinking… (bear with me here; there’s a point at the end of all of this!)

As you can see in the spreadheet I made [.xls or .pdf], there is an extremely strong positive correlation (cell E2) between a state’s overall population rank (column D) and its overall GDP rank (column F). In other words, the more people in the state, the bigger GDP it has. California has the most people and it has the biggest GDP. This makes sense.

However, some states seem to be more GDP-efficient than others. For example, Connecticut is ranked 29th in overall population and 23rd in overall GDP, but is the 4th-ranked state when it comes to GDP per capita (column G). In contrast, Alabama is ranked 23rd in overall population and 25th in overall GDP, but is the 45th-ranked state in terms of GDP per capita. Connecticut’s GDP over/under (column H) is +19 (23 minus 4). Alabama’s is -20 (25 minus 45). Connecticut appears to be a GDP overachiever, while Alabama seems to be an underachiever. Dollar for dollar, person for person, Connecticuters are contributing more to the overall national economy than Alabamans.

As the spreadsheet shows (cells K26:K29), states in the Northeast and Pacific regions (as defined by the U.S. Census) are, on average, more GDP-efficient than states in the Midwest or South. There are moderately strong correlations between states’ over/under ratio and their overall population rank (cell E4), overall GDP rank (cell H5), and GDP per capita rank (cell H6). States with smaller populations are moderately more likely to have a higher GDP per capita rank and a better GDP over/under ratio.

So here are 10 select states [click on image for larger version or download the PDF]:

While some of the states (Montana, Maine, New Jersey, and Maryland) have overall GDP ranks and GDP per capita ranks that are congruent, you can see that there are large discrepancies in GDP over/under between the lowest states (Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Arizona) and the highest states (Wyoming, Alaska, Delaware, and Rhode Island). Florida is #4 in overall GDP but #34 in GDP per capita. Wyoming is #48 in overall GDP but #5 in GDP per capita. The lower states seem to be under-contributing to the national economy.

So how does a state like Michigan or Arizona increase its GDP per capita? Well, in today’s day and age, I think these states need to follow the lead of West Virginia (over/under of -9). West Virginia is making strategic, long-term investments in 21st century skills initiatives for its schools. To its credit, it sees that a focus on digital technologies and preparation of a globally-competitive workforce is the best solution for an anemic state economy. It’s probably no coincidence that five of the first six states to join up with the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (in red on the spreadsheet) have neutral or negative GDP over/under ratios.

I don’t know if all of this would make sense to an economist, much less a ‘shocking’ one, but it sits well intuitively with me. Although the video points out that our system has worked well for us to date, it also is true that our world is transforming itself in revolutionary ways. Don’t we want our state educational systems to be proactive rather than resting on their laurels and one day waking up to find that their economic models no longer work?

Youth violence and electronic media

This arrived in my e-mail inbox yesterday:

CDC REVIEW OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA AND YOUTH VIOLENCE
Research Shows Increase in Electronic Aggression

In September 2006, experts from academic institutions, federal agencies, and nonprofit organizations gathered at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia, to better understand the varied ways new media technology – blogs, instant messaging, chat rooms, email, text messaging and the Internet – influences youth aggression. The two-day meeting, "Electronic Media and Youth Violence," was held to review current research and to discuss the implications for youth, parents, school staff, and educational policymakers. Data from the review show although rates of electronic aggression are lower than rates of physical and verbal aggression, these rates seem to be increasing. In 2000, 6 percent of internet users ages 10 to 17 said they had been subjected to online harassment; by 2005, the percentage had risen to 9 percent – an increase of 50 percent. 

The complete review can found in the December 2007 supplement of the Journal of Adolescent Health. To access a complete copy of the Journal and the supporting issue briefs, which summarize the research and discuss the implications of these findings for youth, parents, school staff, and educational policy makers, please visit www.cdc.gov/injury.

A few thoughts…

1. Most parents probably don’t do near enough at home to teach and monitor children’s appropriate usage of electronic communication tools. We know that schools and religious institutions don’t when kids are with them. So why should we be surprised that some children and adolescents are using these tools for inappropriate purposes? It’s like Lord of the Flies out there when it comes to adult supervision!
2. The JAH research articles on this topic are impressive. It’s going to take me a while to read through them all. My first scan, however, is that while there seems to be a bevy of top notch, peer-review-quality research there, it’s all on the harmful effects of communication technologies and none on the empowering effects of the same. We need good, data-based information on this topic, but I’d like to see academia provide some counterpoint research on the positive aspects too, not just more fear-driven research. I want to also see a two-day meeting on Electronic Media and Youth Empowerment. We’re not going to back to a tech-less society. Why can’t we get info on both sides of the coin so that we can make intelligent decisions about this stuff?
3. ‘An increase of 50 percent’ sounds ominous. An actual rise from 6 percent to 9 percent doesn’t. Presentation makes all the difference.
4. The policy implications from the expert panel crack me up. Essentially the panel said ‘The federal government should do very little. The states should do more. School districts and schools should do the most.’ In other words, they could have just typed the word ‘federalism’ on a piece of paper, handed it in, and gone out for coffee. Nice job, folks!