Education Philosophy Movie

Wow!  Do you remember staying up late to read books as a kid?  Under the blanket with a flashlight maybe?  "Sneaking" in just a little bit more?  I know I'm not the only one.  This project was like that--stealing time from other things I should have been doing because I wanted to work on this project, "just at little bit more."  It's not even due for another week, but I couldn't stop myself from working on it.

What is this project?  I'm glad you asked.  I have created a movie that sums up my personal Philosophy of Education.  It's short--about 90 seconds or so, and consists of all still photographs arranged a la Ken Burns (camera pans/zooms over still photographs).  Intro title and trailing credits, soundtrack, and a personalized voice-over make this a full-fledged movie project.  I created it on a Mac using iMovie.  I've never tried the PC software, but I have to say that the Mac software was easy to use and well integrated. 

 But enough talk--watch my movie!  I'm quite proud of it.

"Tools for the Mind" -- Mary Burns

Computers were supposed to revolutionize learning.  Or at least that's what people thought was going to happen.  Mary Burns takes this expectation and dissects why technology hasn't had a huge impact on education (yet) and explains her thinking for how technology should be used in the learning process, or, as she puts it, how "...we can begin to bridge the gap between intention and implementation."

Mary Burns' main point is one of understanding, or rather, the lack thereof.  Technology, mainly in the form of computers, were plopped into the educational system mainly without a the benefit of understanding how they could aid learning.  Rather, technology was just supposed to make things better; as Mary puts it, computers were viewed as sort of "instructional talismans" that would magically make things better.  She argues for several reasons that this occurred: 

• Teachers trained in tech skill instead of in how to use the technology to enhance learning.
• Schools need to make more accommodations to allow full technology use (long-term professional development, tech staff, etc)
• Teachers have conflated the use of technology that engages students with improved learning.
• Teachers have not distinguished between levels of software in terms of low-order versus higher order thinking caused by the software.

Fortunately, she does not stop with pointing out the faults of the past; she also points out two main ways to effectively implement technology in the educational process.

• Teach critical thinking first, and technology later.
• Focus on curriculum, instruction and assessment.

In the first strategy, Mary wants instructions to have assignments that are educationally worthwhile.  If there is a technological tool that can help, wonderful!  But the point of the assignment should not be based around the technology.  In the second strategy is closely related to the first, but is more sweeping in scope.

I personally agree with Mrs. Burns assessment as far as why technology has not been the silver bullet is was expected to be for education.  Simply throwing technology at education is like throwing money at poverty.  It does not address the root issue.  However, Mrs. Burns lays a lot of the fault on the shoulders of educators.  Technology, however, has been on a rocket pace for development for the last few decades, and without a huge investment in keeping up, it's not at all surprising that its use in education has been less than optimal.  

I am not sure I agree with her analysis of how to best implement technology now.  I do agree that when it is used inside of other instruction, it should be "almost invisible."  She herself points out that a lot of higher-order software is not used because it is harder to learn, more time consuming, and harder for teachers to understand and integrate.  Unless some effort is made to teach students technology in increments (just the same as Math, English or any other subject), it not reasonable to expect them to have the tech skills needed to utilize the higher-order software when the time comes. 

Presentation of the Copier Energy Project

It's funny (funny strange, not funny ha-ha) how a video camera can make me more nervous than a room full of students now. Maybe it's because I know the intended audience is myself. How does the old saying go? "You are your own worst critic." Well today, I recorded myself presenting my Energy Project slide show. The good news is I overcame the various technologies involved (Powerpoint with remote, projector with remote, camcorder with remote, digitizing analog camcorder output, etc), and did a pretty decent job overall with the presentation.

• Well organized.
• Slides matched what I was talking about.
• Good explanation of research.
• Good voice, no ummmms.
• Good eye contact.
• Fairly attention holding

It is true that watching yourself is like taking off blinders though. There are lots of things I could do better.

• Have a clearer focus. I tried to mix the results with the scientific process too much. I should have focused on presenting results first and foremost.
• Lay off the Powerpoint animations, or practice with them more. When I had animations in my presentation, I ended up looking at the screen more than the audience. They weren't *that* exciting.
• My assumptions page was too long. It sucked me in, and away from my audience.
• I definitely needed to repeat my second slide at the end. Reviewing the initial questions was a good idea, but paging back through the presentation to find the slide I needed was not.
• I could have done better presenting the research process. Again, I needed to blend the results and the scientific process better. This problem was somewhat exacerbated by not having a real audience. I ended up trying to present to a generic audience, and, no surprise, I ended up giving a bit of a generic presentation.
• I was a bit fidgety. Typically, if I'm standing, I'm used to writing on the board. It was a little unsettling to have everything already written on the "board."
  

In all though, I believe this was a successful project. The process was good, the results valid, the topic engaging, and the presentation informative and relevant. I can't complain too much either about my students not coming in on a Saturday to watch. One of them brought me some deer meat from *his* successful project today.

Copier Energy Results

A few Sundays ago, I posted a musing on the topic of my copier. Specifically, I was wondering about how much energy my copier (in my school) was using. Furthermore, I wanted to know how much it was using when I wasn't using it.

I have good news for you all, the questions have been answered. With some old fashioned record keeping, a little bit of fancy Excel work (sorry, Excel 2008 stripped out the charts on the downgrade to GoogleDoc compatible versions), and plenty of diligence, I now know that my copier uses more energy just sleeping than it does actually copying. That is, if the manufacturer's specs are to be believed. But why take my word for it? Instead, you should take my presentation's word for it. It's much easier on the eyes anyways.

(Spoiler alert: The presentation shows that (with current usage patterns and current copier settings) it makes the most sense to turn the copier on and off for each use rather than just leaving it on. But there are a lot more variables that can be played with--these copiers are fancy!)