Bring Your Own Device? Nice!

Darren Kuropatwa's recent post on his "A Difference" blog regarding his blueprint for a "BYOD" class really got me thinking about the coming September and the next five or so years, when I begin to assume that every student will have a personal electronic device with them in school. Instead of arguing when and why this should happen, I'll just dream along with Kuropatwa's wish list of apps and work flow.

Well, to be honest, I still don't follow the entire flow of the class, although I do suspect he teaches Math not a computer course per say. Having him outline the way he would like to see his class function if he where in a liberating BYOD situation makes me question why I am not more clear with my own work flow via technology plan in my media literacy course? Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that the first generation iPads we have have given me a number of hiccups with regards to interaction with our school's Sharepoint portal. But that would be a simple excuse for the time I've been able to put in for work arounds. That said, as I read over Kuropatwa's ideal class, I feel further conviction to abandon the clunky and limited Sharepoint site and instead employ some of the vast number of free Web tools that are out there today. Well, to remain honest, that another of my issues. Yes the Internet is being swarmed with brilliant, free tools, but I almost wish that students would be able to bring their own devices in with them.

Allowing students to take possession of devices for our daily hour of class time is a positive response to their need for technology to be integrated into their education. However (and I do not begrudge the folks who funded our iPad program) the fact is that the devices stay at school and remain the property of the school in the same way a badminton racket is used for a purpose and shared so other can access it too. The big hold up here is that I'm really starting to see the importance of an individual really taking possession of a device to best work with it. I've been blessed with a laptop for the duration of this summer course and have made blogging and other Web 2.0 tools a daily thing. If I had to leave my house to access the Internet and could only do so for an hour a day, how much would I have learned this summer?

Bring your own device to class for technologically supported learning in school? I'm being very serious, quite optimistic, and in no way sarcastic when I say, "That will be the day!"

  

KWL 2.0?

I appreciate hearing new ideas, but I really truly appreciate hearing a new idea that is build upon a proven, sound idea. Such is the case with Silvia Rosenthal Tolisano's blogpost concerning the new, 21st century KWL chart. The KWL chart has been around for a while and as Rosenthal Tolisano suggests, it was certainly time for an "upgrade".

But what is gained? KWHLAQ infuses three processes to the learning process and while the ideas are not particularly new, the additions are welcome in my opinion. K still stands for what is known about the subject, acting as an anticipatory mode. W stands for what information you want to learn. H is a new addition and stands for how the information will be found. L remains to stand for what has been learned. A is a new addition and stands for what action will be taken, asking learners to apply their knowledge. And finally Q stands for questions, as in what new questions are generated by this inquiry.

The easy to memorize acronym is gone, but the additional components do reflect the information literacies that are increasingly necessary in the digital information age. What are your thoughts on this "upgrade"?

Rosenthal Tolisano suggests her new chart ought to hang on your classroom wall.

Flipping Education

I've been reading a lot more lately about the concepts of blended education and flipped classrooms. While the two processes are compatible, I'm really getting on board with the later and have begun aligning my classroom procedures considerably towards flipping. Recently reading Jonathan Bergmann's post retelling the genesis of the idea, I was captured by his earnest conversation with a co-worker that led to the idea's birth. I had a strikingly similar conversation this year past with a colleague that led him to screencasting a number of his lessons and demonstrations. He wasn't doing it to seek out a challenging new pedagogy, it was to save himself some time. While the capturing process is time-consuming at the initial on set, the payoff was immediate and well worth it.

Observing my colleague, I saw that him being freed up from repeatedly lecturing and demonstrating the same concepts and skills during class time to deal more directly one on one with students' concerns. This was an obvious win-win scenario. It was also awesome to see students arrive for class having viewed his tutorials the night previous. The learning had been offloaded, to become the students' responsibility and the teacher's role truly became supportive. That's when I really started thinking about the cleverness of the "flipped" moniker.

For whatever reason, this is the visual representation I see for the flipped model. Imagine an inverted triangle, with the teacher representing the bottom point and the many students sitting precariously above, relying on the teacher to make their learning experience equal to all the others balanced up on top. Now imagine the triangle sitting with the base (students) at the bottom. The teacher is now able to offer each and every student the same basic tutorial or lecture without being smothered by the needs of students to review and recap central concepts. Instead, students are in at the base-level and need to take the weight of ownership in their learning.

Perhaps this visual doesn't work for you, but to me it illustrates the freedom being offered to educators in adopting the inverted, perhaps counter-intuitive classroom procedure. Would it likely be challenging? Yes, myself and my students have to reconfigure the way we do learning and school. Does it mean throwing out everything that has worked in my classes? No, certainly not. Instead, it's a matter of capturing the traditionally repeated instructional elements of my classes and allowing students to view and review them in a take-away format. Am I likely to be "flipping" this semester? I'm certainly going to try the flipping practice in my media literacy course for starters, given the individualistic nature of the course and its employment of 1 to 1 technology. If this practice is successful for me like it was for Bergmann and my colleague, I'll be flipping my other more traditional English courses shortly after. That is, if my students are not "flipping out".

iPad @ Work

So, I'm actually on a short summer vacation at the moment. And I've snuck away from my sleeping children (and supportive, beautiful wife) to hit a cafe with wifi and do some blogging. I'm not that into public computing, but what choice do I have? I've bought a coffee and noticed that the server rung in my order using an iPad. I suppose she caught me staring at the device, because she quickly jumped into what I assume is an often-used little info chat informing customers that the iPad IS the cash register. I mumble something about having seen this sort of thing before, wander to find the coffee cream, and sit down.

So here I am... wondering how does an iPad become a cash register? I assume they have an app for that. And after a little digging, I find out that the app is called Poslavu.

Now I'd love to tell you that I used my mega-hyper Internet searching skills to pin-point this nugget of information, but I simply asked the guy restocking napkins, who it turns out is the owner/manager of the cafe. We quickly fell into a conversation of experiences of restaurants past and expensive order management systems with one or two exclusive, bulky input stations and serving personal line-up to punch orders in. Listening intently to the owner speak about his set-up and operating costs, I am again surprised to see a server attend a table and notify the kitchen of a new order at the adjoining table before pocketing her iPod.

Why am I so surprised to a multi-functional devices such as iPods and iPads being used in a workplace? I shouldn't be. I know that software developers are pushing the limits of such devices. With the Poslavu system carrying a cost of roughly 1/4 that of a traditional industry type, I'm excited to hear that not only is the wireless way to go more slick and quick, but it is quite economical as well. The owner continued to tell me how even a novice server can simply touch menu item's icons and the Poslavu system will lead them through all options applying to their menu item. He says that server and kitchen errors have been reduced to a minimum as deciphering unique server shorthand is no longer and accurate order summaries are at the fingertips of each server.

After the conversation with the innovative owner, I finished the luke-warm dregs of my medium-roast coffee, and recalled a few of my colleagues scoffing at my class’s use of iPads. They questioned me about the practicality of such devices and the skills associated with them. The coffee has me buzzing, but it was this stimulating café experience that has refueled my engine for exploring new uses for technology in (and out) of school.

Check out a quick demo of Poslavu's capabilities.

Social Media Arms Race in School? Seriously

An unnamed blogger who posts under the header "What's the PONT?" recently threw out a title that really caught my attention. And then it got me thinking. And then it got me researching who he or she was to make me think so. And then it led me to write the following sentence starter, which I shudder to think of how many times will be written.


According to Wikipedia, "The term arms race, in its original usage, describes a competition between two or more parties for the best armed forces. Each party competes to produce larger numbers ofweapons, greater armies, or superior military technology in a technological escalation. Nowadays the term is commonly used to describe any competition where there is no absolute goal, only the relative goal of staying ahead of the other competitors, essentially the goal of proving to be "better".


Now to jump back, I like to think that I am above my students with regards to critical thinking abilities, so when the aforementioned blog above ran the headline "Stop the Social Media Arms Race in School",  I needed to evaluate the accuracy of such a statement. The blog even went on to include a photo of Wikileaks leader Julian Assang, asking who is he the pupil of? At first I thought this may be another person advocating against social media because of its potential use in bullying, but upon further reading the author draws out an establishment vs. students vs. teachers scenario with some telling truthfulness. So I will examine this three sentence definition as I see it applying metaphorically to schools today.


First, is there a "competition between two or more parties for the best [technology]" in schools today? Certainly there is. Nearly all stakeholders in education are jockeying to get increased and improved technology into schools. Budgets are fiercely debated to maximize the coverage of technology, pilots programs are offered looking for innovative ways to leverage technology, teachers write proposals for new devices, and kids smuggle their often "against the rules" devices in daily.


Second, in our schools does, "Each party competes to produce larger numbers of [devices] greater armies, or superior military technology in a technological escalation"? No, but I almost wish this were the case. Imagine for a moment if students were able to use all the "weapons" at their disposal? I bet there would be some significant increases in engagement if students knew they could use any media platform and device to demonstrate their learning. I know many students can text blindfolded, but struggle with penmanship. Why not allow them to put the "weapon" they can brandish with frightening accuracy in their hands for learning? Rules that are counter-productive to the escalation of technology.


Lastly, "Nowadays the term is commonly used to describe any competition where there is no absolute goal, only the relative goal of staying ahead of the other competitors, essentially the goal of proving to be 'better'." Sadly I would say this applies in the reality that the "What's the PONT?" author cites noting that students are keenly aware how to get around blocked websites and rise to the challenge of accessing information of diverse sorts. I would also contest that staff often are in competition with one another, IT departments and administrators when trying to gain access to devices or install software. Again I believe this comes back to the outdated rules governing access to much of the emerging technology of the Internet and fear to change things.


So when all is said and done, is there something like an arms race occurring in schools today? Yes, I would say that metaphor is quite applicable. This doesn't make me particularly happy to write given the outcomes of historic arms races. But it does help me to identify the two areas in which I feel progress is needed with technology in our schools. One, remove barriers to students and staff possessing or seeking information technologies. And two, support those students and staff with relevant guidelines that clearly model and enforce the ethical use of technology.


Image "Late 50s Cold Warriors" by X-Ray Delta One http://www.flickr.com/photos/x-ray_delta_one/4142181603/sizes/m/in/photostream/

Google+ Video Review

Here's a quick but informative video review of the new Google+ UI (user interface) by IIJERiiCHOII. I suspect that many early adopters and soon to be immigrants from Facebook, will simply enjoy the "upgrades" to other social network's such as differentiating between friend groups (circles), group chatting (hangouts), and great feed update controls.


I'm still not invited to Google+, are you in? Drop me a line.


<


P.S. I've added Protonotes just as a tester. Please feel free to click the header and add a note!

Google+/-

So, what are the negatives of the new Google social network? Is it all pluses? Nothing is all positive. So, because I am not yet invited to the Google+ party, I started looking for those who are looking critically at the new cool kid on the block.

One such person I found was Ira Socol in his Eduptopia post on this matter. I found Socol's perspective to be interesting but not really where I would sit in the opinion camp. Socol's hesitation with celebrating a (soon-to be) new social media leader has largely to do with his concern for the groupings, Google+ calls "circles", Socol believes these could lead to greater segregation and elitism when he writes,

"Social networking sites like Google+ present powerful classroom opportunities, but they are also designed to create hierarchies... The power to "friend" and "unfriend," to draw groups which include and exclude, is a difficult thing to resist, online or off, for people who have very little power over any other part of their lives. And so I thought about bullying as I began to use Google+ over the last few weeks. I thought about it every time I dragged a name into one circle or another, or chose not to do that at all. I thought about it when I left a trail of who I'd been "hanging out" with."

While I share Socol's concern regarding the potentially harmful use of social networking, I am again newly motivated to guide and equip young people in skills of critical thinking instead of condemning new media. Google+ will boom or bust based on an incredible number of factors, very few of which are related to being nice or inclusive to all. This argument against social networks could also be made against books, they don't necessarily promote unity or understanding unless the author instills such messages.

While Socol does not condemn Google+ entirely based on the concept of grouping friends by circles, it seems to be the sticking point. He writes, "Circles have no sides, except inside and outside. And the students in your classrooms will be on one side or the other." I appreciate the poetic device here, but must contend that life does not have sides either. I think that human being DO in fact live in circles and Google+'s articulation of this is an opportunity for critical discussion and learning. In my media literacy course, we openly discuss the differences between the criteria used in choosing "friends" and "Facebook friends". I've enjoyed the puzzlement on students faces as they attempt to articulate their criteria, and the friendly debates that take place between students (friends or not).

I welcome the "new" circles component of Google+ as it simply asks people of all ages to reflect, choose, and practice different levels of relationship as opposed to "friend" or not. I think this can be a healthy, thoughtful action that students can learn, adopt, and apply to other spheres of life. Opps, I got 3 dimensional there.

Google+'s circles, much like any other media tool, need not be necessarily exclusive or bad. Circles can combine, overlap, and compliment one another to create a much richer realistic picture of life.

"Christmas Bokeh 2" image by "no3rdw" http://www.flickr.com/photos/no3rdw/3131851573/