"The Overdominance of Computers" -- Lowell Monke

Students need to be prepared for the challenges of the high-tech 21st century, right?

And schools are supposed to prepare students, right?

So schools should have students start using computers and technology as soon as possible, right?

Maybe not......

Lowell Monke makes a good argument that perhaps immersing students in computers throughout their entire educational process may not only not be a good idea, it may be harming the student.  What students really need, he argues, is to have a good foundation in non-technological areas first, before they are ever presented with the challenges that go hand-in-hand with the power available in high technology.  Students need to be solid with ideas like:

• Commitment
• Loyalty
• Tradition

Obtaining these qualities, Monke argues, is accomplished through real experiences with real people, and not with unfeeling, uncritical, un-personable machines.  Only after laying such a foundation will a student be in a position to make ethical choices about the use of technology.  Similarly, such a student will know that they do not need technology to learn, but will rather view technology as a tool for their learning.

It is quite refreshing to see someone thinking critically about the use of computers in the classroom -- someone willing to *gasp* take computers out of the classroom.  Monke's analogy of teaching a six year old to drive because they will need to know how to operate a care in order to participate in society is an excellent illustration of his point.  I also agree that software is in such a state of flux still that trying to keep a student current throughout their entire pre-collegiate education is both ridiculous and unnecessary.  Let's help kids develop into people who have the ability to choose their own path before we imprint on them the supremacy of technology.

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!)

The Educator's Guide to the Read/Write Web -- Will Richardson

You don't have to be very old to be able to say, "I was there when the web first came along."  There are different definitions of when "the web" first sprang into being, but the first widespread graphical web browser, Netscape 1.0 came out in 1995.  For me, that's when "the web" really started.  And that was less than 15 years ago.  In that time, we've come to expect our computers to become twice as fast every year or so.  We've come to expect cell phones to shrink in size and explode in functionality.  We've come to accept technology in just about every aspect of our lives (honestly, digital toilets?--you bet! and if you're honest with yourself, you're not even surprised...)  But what about the web itself?  Has it changed in the last 13 years?  Oh yes it has.  As Will Richardson clearly points out in his article, "The Educator's Guide to the Read/Write Web," the web has gone from a read-only source of information to a wide open canvas on which ideas and content are painted everyday by people all over the world.  More relevantly, students are using the emerging two-way nature of the web more than ever and Mr. Richardson hones in on some of the effects this has on teachers.

New tools that have turned the World Wide Web into the Read/Write Web:

• Blogs--like the one you're reading now.  Allow people to publish to the web with almost a single mouse click.
• Wikis.  Allow web users to collaborate in the creation of online references.
• RSS.  Really Simple Syndication.  With this snazzy software, users can collect new information off the web automatically--without having to actively go searching for it.
• Social Bookmarking sites.  Now web surfers can save and share webpages.  When like-minded surfers  start getting together (hence the social bookmarking moniker), the amount of relevant information to be found can be impressive.
• Podcasting.  The web isn't just text anymore.  Now users create their own audio/video programs and publish it to the web.  All available anytime, anywhere.

What all this means to Educators:

• Literacy doesn't just mean being able to read anymore.  To be literate in today's society, a student must know how to edit, collaborate, and publish on the web.  This is the new way ideas are exchanged.
• Audience.  Students used to create papers for their teachers to grade (judge).  Now students create content that is potentially available to the world.   
• Guidance.  Teachers cannot match the wealth of information available on the web.  But they can, and must, be effective guides to teach their students how to navigate.
• Reflection.  Combining the storage capabilities of the web, along with its emerging easy-use publishing portals, it is possible for students to maintain a "portfolio" throughout their education.  This makes "metacognitive reflection" (Mr. Richardson's term) possible for students.  What a difference this could make in education.

Prior to reading this article, I knew, in a yeah-someday sort of way, that I would need to get my students up and running on publishing to the web.  My particular school is situated such that their exposure to the web, for the most part, has been somewhat limited.  However, Mr. Richardson's point about "metacognitive reflection" is an eye-opening idea.  If the students are creating their own content, keeping their own content, managing their own content--year after year--the reflection that is inevitably going to occur will be fantastically valuable.  How often do educators struggle at the beginning of the year to "refresh" kids?  What if instead, the first day of school was spent going over a student's blog/rss/podcast/furl content from the year before?  Imagine the collection of information a student would have by the time they graduated.  This idea, more than anything else in the article, inflames my imagination.

What is my Copier doing while I sleep?

Can you trust your copier?

No really, it seems innocent enough, but do you really know what it's doing while you're not looking?  My copier is fancy, fancy, fancy.  It will make me copies, double sided if I want,  I can feed documents in from the top, or on the glass the old fashioned way.  It will scan (in color!) and email or ftp the file wherever my little heart desires.  But while I'm not watching, what is it doing with all of its brainpower?

Or more to the point--how much Energy is it using while I am not using it?  How much energy does it take to keep all of that brainpower going?

Time to find out.  I want to know how much (if any) energy I can save by turning my copier off while I'm not using it.  Lots of people have asked similar questions and posted their answers all over the web.  However, most of them have been concerned with energy efficiency, not the amount it didn't use because it was turned off.   I have no way to meter just the electricity my copier uses.  Heck, my community has no electrical meters on any of the buildings even.  But with Google, I was able to find the manufacture's specifications for my copier.  If I only turn the copier on when I need it, and turn it back off again when I don't, and by keeping track of how long that is each time, I'll be able to tell (with some assumptions) how much energy the copier is using.  I can compare that to how much energy it would have used (again with some assumptions) if I had just left it on all the time.  Collecting this data will be simple and old fashioned--a clipboard and a pencil next to the copier.  Once I have my info, a little math and I'll know!