I’ve finally edited it for the web… a tedious task as I tend to use a lot of slide transitions that do not convert well to individual slides. I shared a few presentation notes on this Slideshare, but not too much. This is a great feature I’ll probably use more in the future.
Here again is the Ustream: This version was done for student teachers at Simon Fraser University. As a video, it has a slow start with student teachers discussing a statement, and sharing ideas until about the 13 minute mark. Also, the slides in this video won’t match perfectly to the Slideshare above as I had to explain some of the slides for the stand-alone slide show, but it would be easy to connect the two presentations.
I’ll be using some of this presentation as the intro to one of my BLC09 presentations:
The P.O.D.s are coming!
What are PODS? They are Personally Owned Devices, and they are already infiltrating our schools. For now they get tucked away in lockers and backpacks, but as the saying goes, “If there is an elephant in the room, introduce it!” Students are bringing small machines with huge potential into our schools. It is time to introduce these tools into our classrooms and also to make sure that we have the knowledge and the infrastructure to use them to their fullest potential.
I chat with some ‘familiar’ people, Alec Couros and Kelly Christopherson, and ask them to help me out with a Pro-D session I’ll be running with student teachers on the 25th. Chrissy says to ‘Twitter’ her and she will help out. (She actually says, “Twitter us and we will help”). I don’t follow Chrissy on Twitter so I go to my open Twitter window and request to follow her.
I see that I have a new Gmail message in my inbox so I open another window to find out that it is Kris. She is asking if I had seen her new post, which is titled Web2.0 Compatible.
I’m listening to the meeting, I postpone popping open windows to the links Vance is referring to, or checking the live chat on uStream so that I can read Kris’ post. I notice a small typo in Kris’s second paragraph. I also notice a green dot by her name in Google Chat indicating that she is online. I open a chat box and quote her typo back to her.
Kris replies back minutes later that the typo is fixed, (I hit refresh and it is). Kris’ post is about how ‘her generation’ is totally web2.0 compatible.
I continue following the meeting where a participant is talking about how these new applications are now ‘net’ applications and not ‘pay-for’ software. I realize that other than my computer and Internet connection, all this linking and watching and listening and engaging is free.
The most amazing part to all this: It was almost midnight here and I was ‘chatting’ with a student, reading her writing, and offering (minor) feedback… while ‘sitting in’ on a staff meeting at the International School Bangkok, Thailand… ‘talking’ to Kelly in Saskatchewan and Alec in Regina, as well as others in Australia and The UK… and ‘meeting’ Chrissy, a new connection from New Zealand, who has offered to Twitter-in and help demonstrate networking/connectivity at my Pro-D session next week in the suburbs of Vancouver.
All this happened in a shorter time than it took me to write this post!
- – - -
Postscript:
While getting links for this post, I discovered that Chrissy also wrote about this experience. Here is a great image she uploaded. Click on it to get to her post.
…and back again moments later. Apparently this was not a staff meeting, but a session in an un-conference. Kim just linked to the conference wiki page via Twitter.
Originally posted: January 16th, 2008
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
This was a very powerful expression of how my learning has shifted from searching for information to seeking interaction. It also speaks of ‘richness’.
I want students to know this kind of learning… in school. I want them to be active members in a global learning network. I want them to follow their own interests, to make choices about what information they will choose to pay attention to, what to check later, and what to filter out. I want students to be 21st Century learners.
I’ve bounced some digital immigrant/native ideas around a fewtimes. Now I have one more thing to add.
When I was young my sister had dolls that spoke. This was so amazing! You pulled a string in the doll’s neck and as it recoiled the doll said, “Hi Ma-ma” or some other short phrase. Later the dolls would say a series of phrases, changing with each pull-of-the-string. Now my daughters have My e-Pets and Webkinz. Next comes this video:
It seems that the ‘Immigrant/Native’ argument is moot. I called the digital range in competency/capability of students a spectrum, not a dichotomy, (I think the correct word should have been continuum -note the reflection/comments on the post to see why I now think ‘spectrum’ is better than ‘continuum’). The fact is students can’t be lumped into general categories such as this. George Siemens summarizes this point better than I can, so read his post, and I’ll move on to the point of this post.
There is an issue of ‘digital exposure’ that many (but not all) of today’s kids have that simply wasn’t available when we were young. Despite my new distaste for the ‘digital native’ catch phrase, I am back to liking my Batman/Borg quote:
“I come from the Batman era, adding items to my utility belt while students today are the Borg from Star Trek, assimilating technology into their lives.”
My daughters interact with their toys in ways that I never could. In the same vein, two year old Paige from the above video will expect her toys to interact with her, to provide her with choices that I never had. Does it not follow that she will expect the same interaction and engagement in school?
Basically this is about ‘exposure to’ and ‘integration with’ digital technology at a young age as opposed to ‘adaptation to’ digital technology later on in life.
When Paige is 9, she will have peers that instant meesage each other on their PDA‘s… they will be more likely to communicate online at a younger age… they will be more likely to connect to like-minded social groups digitally. They will be continually exposed to ‘new technology’ that they won’t ever remember living without. (Technology and tools that we name, and they participate with.)
Meanwhile, I will continue promoting the value of integrating technology into the classroom to teachers who have “enough on their plate already”. I will offer out some ‘delicious‘ tools for their utility belts… while Paige plays with an iPhone and learns to connect to the world around her in ways many of us are now learning about… learning side-by-side with a two year old.
Originally posted: December 11th, 2007
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
In any given Grade 8 class, I have had students at a Grade 4 to Grade 10 competency in Math. The gap has been equally as large in writing and reading skills… and it follows that I will have similar competency level issues with students’ abilities in connecting and communicating digitally.
Digital exposure will lead to greater digital competency, but that competency can be very focused or limited in scope. For some, (like the students I highlighted in the reflection on a recent post), digital exposure has sparked an interest in understanding how computers, technology, and/or the internet work. These students will be digitally competent in most, if not all, areas. For others, competency will be very limited and demonstrated, for example, in the ability to play games, even ones that they have never played before, at a competent level very quickly. Yet others will be able to text messages without needing to look at their phone, and yet find themselves lost when trying to embed a video onto a blog.
We’ll have both Batman-like and Borg-like students in our classes.
- – - – -
The Digital Immigrant/Digital Native dichotomy is untenable.
Gaps in Digital Exposure and Digital Competence will be no different than the gaps we see in basic skills or content areas when we enter a classroom.
After my last post I went to hear Alan November speak at an afternoon Pro-D session. I then read Brian Kuhn‘s blog post and added a comment, which I have edited slightly and included below. In the process of writing this comment I realized a valuable lesson, which I will discuss below the comment:
The afternoon session With Alan November was great!
It was wonderful to hear Alan November again. His webcast for the district was one of the things that lit a fire under me and encouraged my to explore technology as a means for students to learn ‘new things in new ways’.
This weekend I was listening to some of his podcasts and I wrote a blog post about them : Looking back at it, my reflections were somewhat sarcastic and negative… A product of feeling like things just haven’t been moving fast enough.
Tuesday afternoon changed that for me. There are a lot of great teachers out there doing wonderful things, and there are many more teachers out there feeling overwhelmed by how much there is to learn, who are still willing to take the next step forward. On a more personal note, the world of web2.0 has given me wings , but I realized that I too have a long way to go before I am doing all the things that I can to give my students wings too!
Thanks to Jill Reid for the invitation, to all the leaders who helped make a day like today possible, and to Alan November… I am refueled and ready to continue my journey of learning along with my students.
Here are some notes about today e-mailed to me from Joni, a true leader in our school. She may not be tech savvy (yet), but teachers like her who offer their leadership, guidance and support are what will help ‘us’ move forward using technology ‘for learning’ rather than just using technology to teach!
1) Answer questions from class. This kid needs to answer all questions, if he can’t, he needs to find the answer on the web, then post the answer.
2) Continuous researcher through class
3) Official scribe: takes notes for the class every day. Post them to the site.
4) Create a Wiki site. Allows children make a contribution to the world. wikipedia, or your own space like www.wikispaces.com [My attempt - ScienceAlive.]
5) Contributing any source that they find on he web to the class: use a social networking site. eg. www.diigo.com create a diigo account for the class or every student has their own account and then “share to group”. [I used delicious and am now moving to diigo]
Reflect and Learn
Here is the sentence from above that has hit home with me over the past few days, “the world of web2.0 has given me wings , but I realized that I too have a long way to go before I am doing all the things that I can to give my students wings too!”
I currently have a private Ning network for my students, but it is really driven by me! The blog posts, the groups, the forums… all initiated by me! Yesterday I read a post by Konrad Glogowski. The post, “Conversation with Pre-Service Teachers – The Set Curriculum“, was about just that, ‘the set curriculum’ (something I have written about a few times) but a specific section struck a chord with me:
“It seemed logical to me that my responsibility as an educator was to prepare a collection of texts, resources, diagnostic and assessment/evaluation tools in order to achieve specific learning outcomes. I saw myself as a subject expert whose primary responsibility in the classroom was to teach a very specific set of skills and competencies. I saw myself as someone who possessed knowledge and perceived my students as individuals who needed to acquire it.”
I am new to teaching planning 10, and I am trying to launch a specific program, YPI , that I am learning about with the students. So, I did what many teachers do when they are unfamiliar with the curriculum… I teach to it.
In the last little while my posts have been peppered with negative undertones about things not moving fast enough and technology limitations that I have found frustrating. Well, although those things are legitimate concerns, they are things that are for the most part beyond my control. What I can do is create an engaging classroom environment that actually gives my students wings.
Another thoughtful lesson inspired by Alan November , and realized through my blogging/web2.0 experience.
Originally posted: November 23rd, 2007
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
After reading Konrad’s post, I went into my classroom and wrote a forum post for my ning networks titled, “You lead the way“, and this is what it said:
Here is your chance to be the teacher today.
What do you want to learn more about? What questions do you have? What interests you?
This can be about Planning 10 or anything else. It can be questions that you often wonder about or just a thought in your head.
You have 2 choices.
1. Respond to this forum
2. Create your own forum discussion
Then I would like you to read what others have written and join in the conversation.
Some of the student discussion choices were (in my opinion) silly. Others good, and still others were heated, including a thoughtful discussion on the Death Penalty, where I had to bite my digital tongue…and sure enough a student came up with a perspective that I thought needed to be shared. These ‘free’ conversations gave the students some ownership of the site and encouraged a greater amount of online conversations afterwards.
I have 2 blog posts on the go right now that I can’t get myself to complete.
One is on Digital Citizenship which looks at a post by Vicky A. Davis. The concepts I am formulating are in need of some more deep thought, and I don’t know when I will get to it?
The second post is on a 1-1 project in our district. I invited myself to a presentation for parents of students receiving computers for the project. Although the post is almost done, (and sitting in a Google document), I’m feeling bitter about my lack of availability of computers to teach my Planning 10 classes and so I don’t think I can complete the post until my frame of mind is one that can frame the post in the positive light I feel it deserves. (I feel childish admitting that, but that’s where I’m at right now.)
A third post has been looming in my head, but my feedreader fed it to me in the form of someone else’s post: It’s time for some perspective here by Kelly Christopherson.
Here is a little more perspective: I am attempting to fully engage, but still can’t keep up… I’ve been to Second Life, but can’t find anything useful there… I don’t Twitter (yet?)… and to me Ustream seems like nothing more than a car accident that everyone is slowing down to look at…
All these tools are technological with only the potential to be pedagogical… but they aren’t designed with pedagogy in mind. And so with regards to education, I wonder if those in the lead are actually worth following? Will Richardson has a great blog, but I’m not going to give him and his buddy 45 minutes of my time to get information that a 4 paragraph summary of their talk could give me!
…And as for the big hype around backchannels… why do people think this is something worth having transcribed? If a backchannel is used correctly -in my humble, ‘perspective from the outside looking in’, opinion- then it would influence the presenters, and so the meaningful components would be integrated into the presentation. As for any ‘interesting sidebar conversations’ that happen- they are mostly relevant in context with the presentation and if they are worth expanding on and investigating… great, investigate them and blog them for me, just don’t ask me to read 200+ comments to find a gem in the rough. Backchannels have tremendous value in the ‘here-and-now’, during a presentation, but what’s with all the analysis after the fact? My point is that not only do I not have time for all these new tools, these new tools are time consumers that don’t add to my learning experience in a meaningful way.
Looking at Kelly’s post, he states:
“Primarily, little has changed with education despite all the tools. I firmly believe that until we examine the curricula, change some of those objectives and rework others, making it relevant to the students, no amount of cool tool is going to create change.”
I couldn’t have said it better!
[Pink Floyd tune in my head... clocks ticking/bells chiming] The coordination of the Graduation Transitions Program at our school is consuming so much of my time. I have to be realistic about what else I can do!
How much of the K12Online07 conference will I participate in?
Am I Ning-ing for my Planning 10 class project or blogging?
When will I finish my other posts?
I could go on but I think my point is made, and I want to turn my questions outward…
Am I the only one who feels like a 30 hour day would still be too short?
Are there others out there who wonder what kind of commitment it will take for a teacher to be technologically savvy enough to meaningfully engage students with all these new tools?
Are we focusing too much on the tools and not enough on pedagogy?
Will educational structures change fast enough to provide our students with a relevant education?
… and for that matter… What would an ideal education look like today?
Here are the bulleted criteria under 1. Rationale …
“authentic teaching” that involves students in “authentic intellectual work” outside school.
…pass the test of authenticity because they meet the following criteria:
They are rooted in issues, challenges or decisions that people face in the world.
They are genuine.
The act of wrestling with these challenges is purposive – saturated with meaning and significance.
A student can see a payoff in the future for work well done and skills acquired.
In short, authentic intellectual work passes the test of “so what?” It is meaningful, worthy and generative – in the sense of provoking ongoing growth and development.
I think that if the use of technology is authentic in this way, then the technology is being used appropriately in education. (Rather than just to play with the newest toys, as I seem to be noticing with Ustream- more on this misguided ‘use of technology in education’ in my next post). Also noteworthy, the author’s Anti-Prensky article.
Originally posted: October 15th, 2007
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
In his post, Kelly linked to Stephanie Sander’s post over at Change Agency, which fits well with the quote above that asks (in the last sentence) “so what?”
Stephanie’s post asks “What?, So What? and Now What?” and is well worth the read!
- – - – -
An interesting aside… the 1-1 presentation I invited myself to in October, ended up being at the school I was promoted to in February. I introduced Mr. Mak to wiki’s and this amazing teacher has made the class wiki into a class portal for almost every subject for his class and in some cases his team. Hard to believe that he just got the laptops in February!
More thoughts after the comments…
- – - – -
Comments on the original post:
We must always be willing to innovate. I have found that the backchannel is very useful in my classroom and at conferences. It is not a transcript but a place where people may become involved in the conference — see Diane’s post today about the experience.Yes, there are a lot of things to try out and learn. I think that ustream gives us a couple of capabilities — #1 a live view into a live presentation — sit in if you wish — or check the 4 paragraph blog post later (but does the blog post really contain everything — probably not and #2 instead of an incredible speaker skype videoing into my classroom — why not connect to 10-15 classrooms or more — why should I horde those opportunities.Yes, we’re playing with some of these new tools, but that is what happens on the bleeding edge. I am using backchannelling in my classroom as well as twitter for flat classroom.And no, there isn’t enough time in the day. Just don’t let it overwhelm you and make you cynical about it all. There is a time and place for innovation and it rests squarely where there is room for improvement in the classroom… students need to be a part — not just receivers. That is what the backchannel offers.
I’d love to answer your questions and share thoughts about these emerging fields. But don’t forget a great teacher will be a great teacher anyway — we all have to do the best we can with where we are — and if you join twitter — let me know. Would love to make your acquaintance.
Vicki Davis on Tuesday, 16 October 2007, 00:48 CEST
I too share your need for more time. I am a dabbler with these tools and thus my full understanding is stunted by the lack of depth. If backchanneling is similar or actually like the chat that went on as people downloaded and watched Warlick’s pre-conference keynote, then I am in agreement with you Dave. The nonsensical chatter that went on instead of real discussion of the issues being presented drove me bonkers. In fact, it became apparent that few people had actually watched the presentation and were using the conversation like a kiss and hug chat room. Very annoying. Another example was the fireside chat with Warlick…I felt like a kid with ADHD trying to listen to David, watch the whiteboard while being distracted by the chat box. I know that the digital natives are able to multitask, but that was ridiculous. Multi-tasking is another way of saying – hit them with as many mediums as possible and hope one holds their attention long enough to give them information. I say….say something worth saying and you will hold their attention.
Just my “2cents”…
Dave MacLean on Wednesday, 17 October 2007, 06:15 CEST
What appears to be opposing views of the last two comments is something that interests me.I see the value in a backchannel! There are many times, as a student, that I wished I had a way to ask questions or clarify my perspective, without interrupting the patter of the teacher. A backchannel could also be used as Vicki is using it, to share what she is teaching with others along with a video stream so that they too have a part in the presentation rather than just receiving it one-way.I also see the caution of throwing more ‘information’ out without it having any pedagogical merit. That was my rant. However, in hindsight, I was to quick to pounce. Educators are now experimenting with tools like Ustream… it is a new boundary teachers are playing with. As I said above, “Backchannels have tremendous value in the ‘here-and-now’”, what I don’t understand is the transcribing of the backchannel. The overanalysis of an unstructured stream of information… it seems like too much. Also, as Dave says above, “say something worth saying and you will hold their attention.” But these are NOT two sides of the same coin. They are two different coins all together. One is about tools, and exploring their potential. The other is about information, and its’ ability to overload a learner. Together these two perspectives offer opportunity and suggest caution. Both are needed.There’s my pair-a-dimes worth!
David Truss on Thursday, 18 October 2007, 08:40 CEST
- – - – -
In my comment above I mentioned ‘pedagogical merit’ and to be honest, I have been on a bit of a focus in that direction recently. What I really mean by that is finding the right tools and structures for the right job in order to meaningfully enhance learning and engage learners. That said, I think that it is important to read George Siemens post:
…Pedagogy is not the starting point of planning to teach with technology. Context is.
…Pedagogy should not even be a consideration during the planning stages of technology use. Harsh statement? Perhaps, but it’s a reality. Few Utopian situations exist where our decisions on how to teach can be based exclusively on pedagogy. Resources, expertise, technology, needs (of learners, educators, society), and funds impact what we choose to do. In a world: context. The mix of multiple, mutually influencing factors determine what we types of technology we select.
…Let’s abandon the somewhat silly notion of pedagogy first and recognize that the choice of technology is driven by many contextual factors and therefore context is what we are evaluating and considering when we first start talking about possible technology to use. Then, after we have selected technology, we can start talking about pedagogy. Pedagogy is just not a practical starting point for deciding the technology we should use.
So the context is more important than the pedagogy. It is more important to design the learning space, to create a learning environment that is friendly, useful and meaningful to the learners, than it is to focus on the content or intended outcomes.
In a recent presentation I did to teachers in our district with 1-1 Laptops, I talked a lot about Scaffolding. Creating structures in your technology/web-based projects that supported student learning and engagement. (I’m reworking this to be in one of my presentations at BLC08.)
So, now this is what I think:
‘Context‘ is where you start. ‘Scaffolding‘ is the structure(s) we build in order to increase the effectiveness of the technology use. ‘Pedagogy’ is the artful things we do to enhance learning regardless of technology use.
I’m not sure if scaffolding as described is fundamentally different than ‘good pedagogy’, but the term scaffolding suggests that we build something onto the context, rather than just add something ‘pedagogically sound’ to it… whatever that means!
Well, I decided to go ahead anyway! I can’t use our useless communal teacher lab, but I got to spend the 2nd half of the first class in the library using the computers there, and the next 2 days in our Computer Teacher’s lab. Although I won’t be able to use any lab again until next Wednesday, my students (who all have computers at home) have all started blogging.
In fact, it is 12:15am and a peek at my Meebo chat box I put on the site tells me that there are at least 2 students on the site right now!
Here is a very interesting dialogue that has started on one of my student’s blog posts:
Christina K
Mona Lisa?
here are two pictures.
One of a guy named John (i’m not sure who he is though)
And the other of the Mona Lisa
I was reading something on a website and it was talking about how they look alike. I noticed this too.
So I’m wondering whether they are brother and sister, or if they are the same person.
They have similar noses, forehead, similar bone structure, similar smile or smirk and if you look closely they have similar eyes. I’m not sure if they are siblings, but they might be the same person.
ChristinaL on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 02:22 BST # |
Wow, their facial features look almost identical! I researched about the painting on the left and found out that it’s called the “John Gesture” and is a portrait of John the Baptist. As for why he’s raising his index finger, many historians think that it’s because Jesus was always shown raising two fingers while he blessed people. Therefore, John wanted to show people that he was superior to Jesus as one comes before two. I don’t really see any connection between John and Mona Lisa but I guess Da Vinci must have had some reason for placing these two paintings within sight beside his deathbed before he died.Viola C on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 02:47 BST # |
But why would Da Vinci make John the Baptist look like Mona Lisa? Da Vinci couldn’t have actually seen John the Baptist…
ChristinaL on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 03:19 BST # |
They really do look identical. So if one was John the Baptist, and the other the Mona Lisa…what’s the connection that could possibly relate to the two paintings being of the same person in a different form? Was John the Baptist in a different time than Da Vinci? If he was then that’s just crazy that these two people look identical. Again the two ideas were that they could be siblings or they could be the same person. I just don’t understand why they would be the same person..
Christina K on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 04:52 BST # |
I can’t believe how John the Baptist and Mona Lisa, two people from totally different worlds, could look identical. I think it’s more than a coincidence that Da Vinci painted them so similar. I guess it’s just one more secret that Da Vinci didn’t want to share with the world.
Viola C on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 05:29 BST # |
Well, this is what I think. As a humanist, he opposed the church in telling how other people should live their life. Could it be that he wanted to show his dislike for the church secretly through many little things he did. Could it be that by drawing John the Baptist with similar facial features as Mona Lisa, he is showing that he may have seen John, therefore completly going against what the church and the Bible says. But then again, my ideas are crazy….
Jessica N on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 08:03 BST # |
Da Vinci was a very mysterious man, so it’s not very surprising that he made Mona Lisa and the John the Baptist look the same. No one would understand his geinus mind and like Viola said, this would be one more secret that Da Vinci wouldn’t share with us and the world.
ChristinaL on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 21:17 BST # |
Take a look at Mona Lisa’s shoulders, compared to to other picture. They are practically the same in every way! Mona Lisa’s shoulders are large and manly (no offence Mona Lisa). Now look at the other picture. Can you spot a dramatic difference?
Sara on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 21:18 BST # |
Woah thats pretty interesting Christina!The picture of the guy, is probably another painting byDaVinci. He probably didn’t want to show it to others, and hid it somewhere
where he thought no one would find it.
It also can be a painting of him when he was younger!
Yeah thats all. Good Job!
Tijana M on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 21:20 BST # |
also if you look in the picture of the last supper
there is a man holding up one finger like
the picture of John the Baptist
JessicaT on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 21:26 BST # |
I was just looking at the picture of Mona Lisa.http://www.artchive.com/artchive/ftptoc/leonardo_ext.htmlI observed her close up at 200% and I noticed a really weird line going across her forehead… the line seemed really out of place. From my discovery I looked a her hair on the left side and I noticed that there was a veil type thing, maybe she was getting married, or she was getting married to John the baptist Any other Ideas?
Katie Z on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 21:32 BST # |
This is amazing. If I was to first see these pictures I’d think they were twins. There smile is identical. Also there noses look exactly the same. Only if there hair was the same I would think that it was the same person.
Amrit C. on Thursday, 17 May 2007, 21:33 BST # |
There are some great observations here. My emphasis in the class is on Da Vinci the inventor and scientist, but look at the student generated interest in his artwork! Would this kind of [off topic?] interaction happen in a classroom? Would it happen if this was a paper assignment
Now here is the challenge for me… LET THE ‘CONVERSATION’ HAPPEN!
When I read, “…maybe she was getting married, or she was getting married to John the baptist…” I really wanted to post a little timeline. Earlier I actually started typing a comment suggesting that perhaps Da Vinci used the same model for both paintings, then erased it rather than posting it… I forced myself to ‘bite my tongue’.
The fact is that I am not used to letting students take ownership of their learning in this way. I want to ‘teach’ them… isn’t that my job?
But if I had put that “perhaps Da Vinci used the same model” post in after the 5th or 6th comment, would the other comments have followed?
If I chose now to comment on the century-and-a-half millennium-and-a-half chasm in time preventing John the Baptist from marrying Mona Lisa, then who will I be taking this away from? Whose voice will I be stealing? Who will I prevent from asking ‘Exactly who is John the Baptist?’ Who will I be stopping from researching and answering that question?
Would JessicaT have been inspired to write this post?
In Christina K’s blog is the picture of John the Baptist and how he
is pointing his finger, I did some research and in the picture of the
Last Supper, there is one of the 12 deciples on the right side to Jesus
is pointing one of his fingers out. Also in another picture by Da Vinci
two versions. One was rejected by nuns, and one wasn’t (the picture
above was the rejected one)
Posted by JessicaT
Comments
Interesting research you have done! Thanks for putting all these together to compare! Are you going to look into the meaning behind the ‘pointing finger’?
Mr. Truss on Friday, 18 May 2007, 04:54 BST #
As you can see, I did comment here. Perhaps when the conversation lulls on Christina’s blog, I may ask ‘who was John the Baptist?’
I am hoping to promote inquiry.
It is the classic ‘guide on the side’ rather than ‘sage on the stage’ issue. However, it isn’t easy to stand back and let all this learning happen without me. But, in a web2.0 world, where students are meaningfully engaging in Learning Conversations, we really must bite our [digital] tongues.
Originally posted: May 18th, 2007
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
Konrad’s post, Learning to be Myself, mentioned in comment #9 below, is well worth the read!
My thoughts on this post are very scattered and commenting on them would detract from what this post is about. This quote from the post puts a lot into perspective:
The fact is that I am not used to letting students take ownership of their learning in this way. I want to ‘teach’ them… isn’t that my job?
While reposting this Chris Lehmann announced his newest post on Twitter… it is Brilliant!
It gets to the heart of what our real job is… challenging our own practice and doing what’s best for our students!
Comments from the original post:
Lots of things accomplished by biting your tongue:
Your students thought, guessed, were amazed, asked questions, made up stories, drew conclusions, doubted, did research, were surprised, connected things, made deductions, analysed, observed…
And all this about Da Vinci’s work!
Have you considered falling in love with your lousy computer lab?
Thanks for the great post. This is a prime example of the role that we as teachers need to remember to play as we move our students into classrooms of the 21st century. Whatever we call it-coach, mentor, “guide-on-the-side”-it represents a shift from the role of teacher as purveyor of knowledge, a skill you describe above.I am teaching a class about blogging this summer, and I would love to use this post as an example of the interaction between students on blogs. Would you be opposed?
What a wonderful conversation that is taking place. It demonstrates what can happen when students begin to converse about topics and take them beyond what would ever happen in class. Now, one thing you might suggest to the person who is blogging is to look at a timeline to see when things are happening and hopefully the student might make some connections with that and the comments. Given the person you are studying, what is part of his art could indeed be part of the science – a study in body/facial similarities that turns into Mona Lisa and John the Baptist. Very interesting stuff.
Thanks for the great comments! Gabriela, a working lab would actually make things better, but the forced adversity has not hindered my enthusiasm, (or the students’ and that is wonderful to see)! The good news it that the lab is one of the next in line in the district to be replaced… this summer.
Patrick, no need to ask, go right ahead and use it. I am working on a ‘presentation’, (one of the tools on this blog), to put together a ‘My Web2.0′ presentation… It is a work in progress and may look very different from day to day until I figure out how best to use it, but it has links to all my wiki and blogging experiences as well as on-line resources that you are welcome to tap into. [Link removed due to spam issues, this will be rebuilt on DavidTruss.com soon.]
Kelly, you are always so encouraging, and insightful. Connecting Art to Science is a mini-lesson that I give during this course, (Arte/Scienza – The development of the balance between science, art, logic and imagination. “Whole-brain” thinking- remind you of some reading we have done recently?), and I will be sure to make the connection to the highlighted post- thanks!
Diane Hammond said…Very interesting! As hard as it is to let silence reign long enough to push thinking in this online environment, it’s still do-able. I find it much harder in a f2f class situation to stop long enough for processing time. In f2f the silence feels uncomfortable, like the point at which you lose control. I know I’m guilty of too quickly supplying the “answer” or pushing the next step. Excellent interaction here!
Skip Zilla said…Diane got at the heart of the matter of inquiry. It suspends time which is usually clocked by classroom structure; it contemplates connections in what is observed which is suppressed in the give and take of predetermined answers. Seven students engaged in a timeless conversation. –Skip
Carolyn Foote said…I do think when we give students opportunities to teach one another, they will come forward and have conversations like these! Kudos to you for giving them that space!We tried a research project where students shared topics across class periods and used a wiki to collect their information. In addition to being a great learning experience, it was a fascinating social experiment to see how some students emerged more as guides, some as the comics, some as the organizers, some as the designers…but it was nice because they could all play to their own strengths.Again, kudos for creating a space for students to guide one another!
- – - – -
It never occurred to me before that the reason it was so hard to ‘bite my tongue’ is that this is actually harder to do face-to-face, and that asynchronous contributions by students permits and promotes more meaningful dialogue than what would be forced within the limited time-frame of a classroom.
Thanks to all of you for your great contributions!
David Truss on Wednesday, 23 May 2007, 08:01 CEST
how is this wonderful or good learning? their speculations are inane and so completely off course, yet they are trying to “solidify” these concepts into some sort of working model. These are college students? Have they lived in remote caves their whole lives? I would think by their age they would at least have a cursory idea of history and religion, if for no other reason than being aware of the world around them.Oh, and nice call, teach, on the “century and a half” discrepancy. I rather hope you meant millenium and a half…
Dave Thomas on Monday, 20 August 2007, 02:24 CEST
To Dave Thomas,These are 13-14 year old Grade 8 students. After I asked the question in class, “Who was John the Baptist and why is he famous?”… my young students’ answers (the next day) helped them to clarify a small aspect of their ‘working knowledge’ in both history and religion.
My gut instinct was to return your cheeky tone here, but you were commenting to someone who allows ‘inane’ and ‘off course’ conversations to happen in his college class. It is my belief that your assumption of the age of my students led to that line of thinking. My students were making assumptions too… however these assumptions led to learning opportunities far beyond what they learn from day-to-day in many classes (including my own). I cannot apologize for their lack of knowledge, and will not apologize for allowing this online ‘conversation’ to happen. I think our adherence to the Prescribed Learning Outcomes can, all too often, do a disservice to our students’ child-like inquiry, and can squash Socratic questioning/thinking. Is it not conversations such as this that allow us to provide students with the opportunity to develop more than just a ‘cursory idea of history and religion’?
Oh, and as for the “century and a half” error – thanks for pointing it out! I should have realized my error before submitting my post. The correction is now duly noted (above). Thanks again!
David Truss on Monday, 20 August 2007, 08:52 CEST
Dave Thomas,
I hope you took the time to read Mr. Truss’ response to your comment. For from error comes learning and without error there would be no need for learning. I take solace in the fact that you took the time to read the comments made by the students and furthermore you took the time to comment on them. I hope that his students will read your critiques and find a lesson in them.
As a principal, I covet teachers who help students to delve into domains that are new to them. These students had never used digital conversations before and regardless of what was being said, they were taking risks using a new communication medium. I say good on Mr. Truss and way to go Teach!
And as a bonus, his retort to your comment modeled self-effacing class. Something all grade 8 students need to see.
Dave MacLean on Thursday, 30 August 2007, 07:25 CEST
David,This is a fascinating post. I agree that biting our tongue is a challenge. I’ve been struggling with this ever since I started building blogging communities with my students. On one hand, I want to be part of their conversations and direct them. On the other hand, I want to see what happens when I remove myself from these interactions. I find that once the students see themselves as bloggers, once they start commenting on the work of their peers, it is very difficult (and not always wise) to enter the conversation by using my teacherly voice. That’s whhy I’ve been writing about the process of losing my teacherly voice on my blog. Recently, however, I’ve discovered that, in my class blogging community, I am present in two different modes – as a subject expert and as an individual learner. Both, I believe are important. Here’s a more detailed explanation (a response to your comment on my blog) and another comment on Leigh Blackall’s blog.
I really enjoyed reading this and I hope that you will continue to address this on your blog.
Hi Dave,On the “John Gesture” your students might enjoy an interesting art history alternative:
“The intellectual influence of Renaissance Hermeticism on art, rather than a depiction of Mary Magdalene at the Last Supper, is the basis for A Different da Vinci Code. This is an alternative explanation of Leonardo’s symbolism, which proposes the typical use of transgender figures in various artworks of the period as a veiled reference to the alchemical androgyne (cf. Sophia/Baphomet), representing the keenly anticipated rebirth of classical knowledge and culture. Similarly, Leonardo’s use of the up-pointed finger of Mercury/Hermes, also referred to as the John Gesture, is proposed to denote the universal Hermetic motto, “As above; so below.”
After an incident delayed getting feedback from my students until last Monday, things got extremely busy with preparation for the Renaissance Fair and my Grade 5 Transition Retreats [the subject of a future post]. All this included 3 afternoons out of my classroom at other functions… I blinked and it was Friday afternoon. And only now have I noticed that not everyone has given me feedback yet. What I do see there is very encouraging.
I have just given my students the opportunity to study any topic they choose in Science for their wiki pages we just started. Short of one pair of overachievers (that I mentioned in my blog), the group seems very apathetic.
However I think “choose your own topic” can be very difficult for students who have spent years being fed criteria checklist style assignments. I am constructing a post now (in my mind- & hopefully on my blog this long weekend) that looks at the pedagogy involved in such assignments. As Carolyn says (above), “it’s easier if the content comes first and then they are using the technology to communicate the content.” …But I think it is more than that, it is setting clear objectives, ‘ownership’ of the criteria, and clear expectations around expected outcomes… So much to consider!
I think that I am guilty of seeing the value of using technology in guiding learning, but not effectively guiding learning in my technology use.
Carolyn Foote, mentioned above also added this comment after mine:
These situations are ones I see frequently as a librarian as I mentioned.
But I think most of us, if told we can research anything we want, might be stumped for a little while if it was that open ended. I think that you’re right about setting clear objectives.
And I think it is more than just the fact that kids are used to having defined assignments. Even the assignment to “do whatever you want” is still an assignment–it’s not their own motivation driving them, it’s ours.
I think somewhere in there, we all know what we’d like to know more about, but it’s hard to start that “cold”. I think any kind of prompts, strategies, and discussion we can use to help students start thinking about their own interests is helpful.
Having them clip newspaper or magazine articles on some topics ahead of time—having them bookmark three websites that interest them ahead of time–brainstorming with the whole class–all these are strategies that help them get started on realizing they do have interests.
Carol Kuhlthau has some interesting work on the research process, and part of what she talks about are the emotional stages students/all of us go through during the research process. The anxiety at the beginning of a project and inability to think of something is one of the normal stages she defines. We all get more confident as we catch on to an idea and then start researching it, and our motivation gets stronger to do more. I think her work is really helpful in helping understand how students feel and why they don’t perform the way we might expect, especially in the beginning stages, and why they need some scaffolding to internalize the process.
This is brilliant feedback. It isn’t rocket science for a seasoned teacher that really should know this, but scaffolding that is student directed is something we should all be reminded of from time-to-time. I think that in my excitement to get things started, and my desire to have students choose their own topic, I let technology supersede pedagogy.
Reading the Science Alive feedback now I realize that the comments above are fuel to make a good project great. The students loved Science Alive, and choosing their own topic was a huge highlight. Add a healthy dose of scaffolding, a little better structure with respect to time lines and expectations, and a few experts to help us out along the way, and we have a delicious recipe for one heck-of-a project pie.
I intended to put some student feedback highlights here, but I won’t. If you are interested, READ THEIR WORDS.
Here is a very short summary:
• Students really liked this project. Some of them considered it the best ever!
• They loved that they got to choose their own topics.
• They felt challenged.
• They hated the issues we had dealing with crappy computers, and yet they were willing work through the frustration.
• They thought this was a valuable experience… so much so that many of them wanted to do another similar project and/or suggested that I should do this again next year.
• And finally, using their words: They enjoyed being able to share their ideas, “What I am most proud of the most from the page is when I was how I typed out information to let others read it and learn from what I learned,” and being able to see what others did, “I thought this was a great project because it was always fun, and when you needed inspiration, it was easy to just click on someone else’s page, and see all the neat stuff that they’ve done, and then it makes you want to make your page just as good (or, it did for me).” Also another student commented about how a different group’s project touched him, “I learned a lot of stuff over the period of time that was given. I especially enjoyed learning about the diabetes because my aunt has diabetes so it was interesting to see what she goes through and how she’s affected”.
I’m proud of my students and I am very happy with our first attempt at creating wikis. I believe that for many of my students we truly did bring Science Alive!
What I will focus on now are the comments that can give me perspective on my teaching, and on doing a project such as this in the future. Three key things come to mind, the first of which has already been discussed.
1. Scaffolding
Here are some comments: [Their words/spelling/grammar, no editing on my part. Students can't edit a Discussion topic like they can their wiki page.]
“Next time I would give us students not necessarily more time, but more of a guideline of what you want our final project to be. Rather then it being ‘we become experts’, a guideline that would help us in seeing our destination of a final product.”
“For some groups, I don’t think they knew what to do first and how, so maybe there could be more guidence on the Scientific Method.”
“The advice I would give you to improve this project would probably be to have more criteria and guidelines and really help people on what experiment they have chosen.”
“Next time it’ll be a bit better if you gave us an idea of how the “final product” should be like”
“I would suggest doing a little less conferencing, but just maybe asking people how they’re doing informally, and maybe narrowing the topic you can choose just a little (there are so many options that it’s a little overwhelming, in my opinion).”
“The only thing that I would change about this project is as much as I did love the freedom I would have helped a little bit if you had givin us a brief overview of what you wanted to finished product to be. I think this would be good because some people did not even know what to start with on there page. Other than that I thoroughly enjoyed this project.”
Since Carolyn made some great topic development suggestions above, I will look more at some other ideas.
I realize now that I didn’t really give them enough of an outline. This is a challenge for topics like this… especially in a middle school where the students are still young. So many times in my teaching career I have shown a creative exemplar to students and then had a dozen photocopy-like replicas handed in. Also, in all honesty, I didn’t really know what to expect from my students and so it was hard to tell them what it was I expecting! I think that if I spent more time getting them involved with their topic and exploring possibilities early on, some of this stress would have been alleviated.
I did a lot of conferencing with groups and discussing ideas, but often I didn’t relate this back to specific things I wanted to see on their page. [Notice the control-freak teacher in me said "specific things I wanted to see" rather than suggestions that would enhance their learning. This is a learning curve for me as well as them.]
One frustration for me was that I taught Science for just 40 min. classes (a first for me this year having taught 80 min. classes in previous years). Take away login and log out times and sometimes it seemed that I would have just 2 or 3 really good conversations about projects and the class would be over.
Here is a very interesting comment:
“We faced a few challenges like the one that really affected us mentally, this was when we found out that Mr. Truss didn’t like our ideas but it turned out that; that comment fueled our fire to prove him wrong. It was rather difficult figuring out what exactly Mr. Truss wanted out of us for this project but in the same way it made us interested even more in the project because he left us hanging he let us figure most of it out on our own. “
The specific thing that I didn’t like in this case was that the experiment that they wanted to do had way too much variability and opportunity for chance to influence their results… this group did the experiment they wanted to do it anyway. Although I don’t think it was a great decision, I am glad they realized that I really did give them a choice.
The task at hand is to offer support to those that need it, and challenge those that don’t – not much different than any other project. The difference from other projects is that criteria is very hard to offer when you open up a project and allow everyone to demonstrate their learning in different ways. (Note Gabriela Sellart‘s and Claudia Ceraso‘s comments on my Some Assembly Required post- found in the reflection section.)
More from my students:
“Another thing that I really liked about this project was that there were very few guid lines and know that we have finished the project it feels like we did everything with almost no help at all.”
“This one has definitely been different from the other projects I have done because, the other projects I have done in the past were ‘assigned’, and very directed, you had a topic chosen by the teacher and that’s what you did. This one had more choice and a sense of freedom, even if you chose the topic, you were still responsible for completion. But having chosen something you’re interested in, it makes the project more fun to do.”
Scaffolding not instructions and criteria lists.
2. Time Line
“I think we should have gotten a due date, so we know when to get the project done in time.”
“I would tell the classes the timeline for the experiment, if they have a rough timeline, maybe they’d know how to space out their experiments and project idea’s making everything more even.”
I had no idea how long this project would take. It went longer than it should, but I wanted to give ample notice when I finally did choose a date. Looking back, I gave the students notice on a Monday that it was due the following week Friday, then gave them until the following Monday… a lot of time! Yet, the lack of a stated completion date really seemed to bother students. I would love to see students keep updating their projects even now- why can’t they continue to pursue their interests? However, in the future I will start with a specific due date. Will this light the fire under students’ seats and get many of them on task, and/or more focussed, sooner? I don’t really know?
3. Experts
“I think it was better to have a chance to meet experts really, so we can learn more and be interested in things we are researching.”
I had students research who were experts in their fields and intended to have them contact some of these people. Reality sunk in when I realized that I didn’t know these adults and I would have Grade 8 students contacting strangers directly. In the future, I would want to create a specific contact page for field experts to use to contact us. Then I could route initial contact through me. I would also notify parents that this would be happening well in advance of doing it. I think that this could happen in a safe way if it is well thought out, not flying by the seat of my pants as I was doing in this first attempt.
I could also have used some experts of my own. I’ll point again to Brian Crosby’s Learning is Messy post, Working, Breathing, Reproducible, Intriguing Models and once again beg for a Web2.0 service like Fieldfindr. (I created this mock site in February and it has had over 1,200 visits since the middle of March… who can make this a reality?
Grades
So being neglectful and completely guilty of not creating any rubric or marking scheme for this project, you might wonder how will I mark this project?
I plan on sitting down with each group over the next little while and coming to an agreed upon mark with them. I will ask them, “How have you shown me higher order thinking skills?” and then we will have a discussion. Their written feedback (or lack of it) will play into this as well. In the end, I am starting to believe more and more that we should abolish marks altogether.
Imagine giving a ‘C’ to a student who writes:
“What I enjoyed right away was the fact that we could pick virtually what ever topic that we wanted to. This to me put a whole new spin on things. All of the sudden you are interested in what you are researching and you are excited to start your experiment and find out what your results are going to be. Another thing that I really liked about this project was that there were very few guid lines and know that we have finished the project it feels like we did everything with almost no help at all.”
Is a ‘C’ meaningful feedback? What are you telling that student about lifelong learning? What does the mark accomplish?
A Sad Note
The Renaissance Fair starts this week. Early last year I saw an Alan November webcast and decided to take the plunge with my Renaissance project… I had the students blogging! I spent hours learning how to set everything up, and more hours again developing blogging rules and lessons on using tools such as del.icio.us. The experience was wonderful! It opened my eyes to the potential of web2.0. To start off this school year I went to the computer lab and couldn’t get things going again with our out-dated computers, (Mac OS9 and web browsers that need OSX). I resorted to this wiki project after two blogging experiences failed with my students due to our lack of tools. And so, after yet another success with my wiki, here I am about to abandon the blogging aspect of my project… sad indeed
…And a Happy Note
I can’t get myself to end this post on a sad note, so I will end with a very positive observation:
This year has been cathartic for me.
• I have fully embraced using this blog as a learning tool since about November.
• I have read more and thought more about education in the last 6 months than in any given 5 years of my life.
• I am embracing technology like never before.
• I am engaging students in their learning like never before.
• I believe that we will see some (very exciting) fundamental shifts in education over the next few years.
…And Back to the Science Alive Wiki
If you have any observations that I may have missed, then feel free to be my teacher. Thanks!
Originally posted: Mary 14th, 2007
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
I did get to blog with my students again for the Renaissance Fair! I negotiated with the other project teachers getting them to use the horrible computer lab for research, along with a trolley of books from the library, and I got to use the PC computer lab in the library. You will see some more reflections on this in my next post.
This post evolved into a short presentation that I did with 1-1 laptop teachers at a pro-d session recently. It is evolving into what will be the 2nd half of my 2nd presentation at BLC08, titled ‘Learning Conversations’ (named after this post).
Part 2. It is the questions we ask ourselves and our students that help make Project 2.0h’s great. This take-it-with-you powerpoint presentation will help you provide the scaffolding for engaging digital projects.
The thoughtful/reflective effort it took to write this has made this one of the most powerful things I’ve done for professional development as a teacher.
Comments on the original post:
Observations? Being your teacher? Sorry, not right now. Too busy learning from you.Thank you so much for sharing these reflections on your experiences. I am still amazed -perhaps I should not be by now- to see how similar our issues can be when integrating technology in spite of teaching different subjects with different objectives.
Your reflection goes beyond teaching science, no doubt. Perhaps that is a result from blogging to an audience of teachers at large. You have learnt how to spot the core edu-issues to be discussed.
Perhaps this happens to you as well. I find that when I am thinking, reflecting, my inner voice is talking to someone other than myself. Blog readers and commenters become part of the network of your thoughts. They help us to refine ideas, express them in a precise manner and direct them to the people who may continue developing them.
Enough. I’m afraid I am going a bit away from the post with my comment. Or perhaps we could consider this another bullet in your final Happy Note.
Wow, what an incredibly reflective post, and how lucky your students are to have you as a teacher. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on what did and didn’t work well. Your mindfulness about trying to approach this project differently and trying not to “steer” students too much was fascinating. Glad to have helped in some small way!
Dave, I really enjoyed your authentic reflection and willingness to share your learning with all of us. It is this that is probably your greatest success with this project.In terms of student learning, I agree with your conclusion around scaffolding student learning to a greater degree. you may consider presenting or exposing students to a specific concept in science like “gravity” and then encourage them to “connect” gravity with something meaningful to them (which probably will not be hard, e.g. skateboarding). This way, they will be able to narrow their focus much easier and their Wikis and/or Blogs will have a common element for which they can interact and build knowledge around the concept (gravity) across topics. Just a thought
I think you make some obvious comments around timelines, expectations and grading that are often overlooked when utilizing a new process – “I let technology supersede pedagogy”. Remember it only takes a conversation and a someone taking notes:)
Overall, from the students comments, it appeared that you made a great leap and had a very successful start to facilitating some “authentic learning” for students.
BTW, do we really need to give a grade – why can’t we just comment and question so the learning never stops!
Here is the write-up for the 2 hour Professional Development seminar that I ran today for 9 dedicated teachers who showed up on a sunny Saturday, after a full day of Pro-D on Friday.
Start Your Own Blog A practical session that will introduce you to blogging.
You will see how others use their blogs and you will get a chance to create your own blog.
You will also learn just how easy it is to create links, add pictures and even movies to your blog.
Also, you will learn a bit about web2.0 and very easy to use tools that make your time on the web faster and friendlier.
I did my best to make these resources that could be: a) used by others to structure their own Pro-D sessions; and b) used as a self help tutorial.
… any feedback would be appreciated.
The session went very well with the teacher participants asking great questions and showing enthusiasm. Overall, I spent too much time talking about the tools, and didn’t get onto creating their blogs until we were rushing against time. Feedback from one participant was that we should build the blog first, then talk about the tools- an excellent idea, and I will change the wiki sometime soon (well, not too soon, I’ve spent enough of my life collecting resources and building these tools over the last couple weeks!)
The power of WE: Special thanks goes to a few people who saved me hours of time by helping me out, and by having great resources already built, so that I didn’t have to create them myself.
• Kris (Wandering Ink) for helping me find worthy links for my example page: A variety of bloggers, blogging mostly about blogs and blogging. Kris also edited my ‘Making a Splash‘ post. I hadn’t published it yet so I threw it into a Google Document, where she edited it. We chatted on MSN throughout and then I cut-and-pasted the edited sections back into my post. It was easy to do – especially with our dialogue via chat. A teacher and a former student collaborating, (late on a Friday night), to create a tool for teachers, in a way that was impossible not too long ago… very cool!
• Mike Temple for his blog Edublog Tutorials. This blog linked to another great resource: MSU (Michigan State University) video tutorial. Mike has done a great job with this blog!
Thank you to these people, and all the wonderful people that I linked to in on the wiki.
Personal Reflections:
-This was the first time I tried to do technology based professional development, beyond introducing a few tools to my staff, and I am happy with how things went.
-We only had about 1:45 minutes and this would be a great 3 hour Pro-D. A typical teacher blunder when trying something out of your comfort zone… pack too much in!
-As a mac user, I need to be a little more familiar with a pc lab.
-I really should have them make their blogs first, as was suggested.
-I only got the e-mail address of 4 of the participants and none of their new blog addresses- I’ll have to hunt these down for a feed I created. I think this is a good idea to offer support and community for new bloggers, and I should make the collection of this information more formal.
* I invite feedback on the Start Your Own Blog tools… and I hope that others will find them useful!
Thanks,
Dave.
Originally posted: April 22nd, 2007
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
Why on earth did I do a Pro-D on ‘start your own blog’ instead of on ‘start blogging with your students’? Of the participants, one started a blog with her students in an elementary school (in the interior of BC… I offered her some help last year, but have lost touch this year. I don’t think any of them maintain their own personal blog.
In the post Darren asks a few questions including:
How do we transform OpenPD so as to attract the kinds of teachers that aren’t the most technologically savvy?
How do we garner the participation of additional groups of teachers? Sure, individual participation from wherever you may be is fantastic, but a class of multiple classes would be ideal.
Here, in my comment, is one possible direction I could see Pro-D going if we want more people to engage meaningfully with technology:
If you want to capture a ‘new’ crowd then you need to offer them low-hanging fruit. Twitter has a difficult introductory stage. RSS takes time to develop… why not just have a few educators sharing with Google Reader on a resource wiki and let that be an initial introduction to RSS… challenge participants to add to the resource page.
I think wiki’s are a great entry point. They are easy to use AND when students begin to learn from their peers, or take responsibility for their own learning on a wiki that excites the teachers to want more!
Give them a project with easy-to-find success within reach. For example, a fully developed 2-3 week student project with rubrics they help develop (with your help too) – something with a start, and a finish, and a lot of opportunity to build student buy-in, to get support and to find success.
It is a fallacy to say that a networked teacher does less, or has an easier time engaging students… that takes hard work and good teaching. So, don’t pump-it-up as the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Instead, provide an opportunity for teachers to see and experience the transformative nature of these tools on LEARNING (as opposed to ‘teaching’). Once this happens it is difficult for a teacher to go back into their pre-technology cave of shadows… they’ll be hooked and they will seek out the new tools, and take the time to develop their own network.
I thought I was going to spend the long weekend reading my book for our book club, but I had a Whole New challenge instead: Putting together a million piece puzzle for my kids to play on in our back yard…. swings, monkey bars, slide, fort, climbing wall, and picnic bench all neatly packed in boxes Ikea style… ‘some’ assembly required!
Today I was back at school and boy has reality hit! Tomorrow morning our Grade 8 team has to get the ball rolling for our yearly Renaissance Fair (coming in May); Tomorrow at lunch I start training a Leadership Crew to run a Grade 5 leadership retreat/afternoon at our feeder schools; Some time in the next two weeks I have to set up an afternoon to introduce this program to other middle school leadership teachers/admin; I am running a Pro-D session on ‘Starting Your Own Blog’ a week from Saturday and I still have a number of hours work to do to set things up; I have a sleepover fundraiser at the school in just over two weeks; and my kids are in musical theatre plays (playing at alternating performances) this Thursday & Friday night as well as two shows Saturday… yikes!
And then there is my class Science Alive! wiki. As I said in a comment earlier this week, “I think that I am guilty of seeing the value of using technology in guiding learning, but not effectively guiding learning in my technology use.”
I have done a pretty good job of getting my students going… but now as momentum builds I have come to the realization that I don’t have a marking rubric to guide me, or my students, as we move towards a final product.
My class is assembling a lego model without the instructions, or even the image of the final product on the front of the box. This isn’t a problem for the creative/motivated students; they will assembly a better model in ways that I could never have ‘instructed‘ them… but some students need structure, they have been fed it for years and expect it (even from yours truly – this isn’t finger pointing, it is observation).
I let technology supersede pedagogy.
On the bright side, I am a teacher in my 9th year and I’m loving the vitality and enthusiasm my attempts at a 2.0 Classroom have given me. So what if I am out of my comfort zone, as are some of my students. So what if learning is messy. Of course my approach will be more pedagogically sound next time... but as I start putting all the pieces together, I have come to the realization that some things are worth doing… even if some assembly is required!
Feedback and suggestions for the wiki are invited…
This is the power of a blog… I won’t reflect here, instead I will let the two comments on my original post do that for me. Thanks to Gabriela and Claudia for being so insightful and contributing to my learning!
- – -
Comments
David, I’ve been reading your posts since I started blogging for my students. I am amazed to see that I share some of your concerns as regards education. Amazed because of the different educational realities we live in and because we teach different subjects.How to deal with “structure dependent” students (most of them) is one of my concerns. They get puzzled when you don’t provide the expected, clear and well organized instructions. I love playing that game, though.I have to admit that I have failed many times. The worst was to feel frustrated and give up. Then I learnt to insist and be patient (both things at the same time). Success is not guaranteed, but when it finally happens the feeling of achievement the students get is so rewarding that it’s worth the “discomfort”. If students have the chance of making decisions, they have an experience and you also have an experience.I had a look at your wiki and I thought: “If I had had a science teacher like him, I would have learnt something at school.”Insist and be patient, and, please, never stay too long in your comfort zone.
David,I believe there is nothing wrong with needing some structure. It may be a sign of a totally different learning style compared to our own. Let’s say we should learn from it as well. What scientific basis is there to conclude that one style is better than the other?
I would refrain from thinking either that the student in need of “structure” should embrace any other way just because it is better to so many other people. I am sure that by taking part in your wiki, they are already experiencing 2.0 style and, to a certain extent, they must have challenged their previous structures for learning. No need to go over the board with efforts to help. The student can be an expert in his own needs.
Second, I would not try to device any steps to “instruct” these students. Perhaps I am not the best node in these student’s network to go beyond or learn more. Let’s admit it: we are in love not only with what technology enables us to do but also with ‘learning my way’! So I wonder whether I would not create a sense of lack of confidence in those students if I continue to encourage another learning style.
I would definitely help the “structure-needed” student to find a learning node within the wiki members. Peer help will do it. And I would expect that their interaction -unpolluted by my words- teaches me a lesson in learning. As a teacher, I think I would be quite effective if I simply manage to help the student find who can teach/provide the structured view he needs so much.
Look forward to your posts about how your students get on with all this.
Allow students to determine what they need to learn, and then enable students to manage their own learning activities?
I recently started a wiki space for my Grade 8 Science classes called Science Alive!
The concept is to let students choose their own topic to explore, and then demonstrate learning on all the levels of Blooms Revised Taxonomy.
It has been exciting starting this project… and scary too!
I have been developing a rather critical blog post, looking at my own attempt at creating and using this wiki in my class. I have told myself time and again that I have bitten off more than I can chew, and that I am expecting too much from my Grade 8′s.
I asked my students to ‘start’ looking into their chosen subjects this weekend. Before dinner tonight (Sunday Night) I checked the ‘Recent History’ of Science Alive and saw no changes for the weekend other than one on Friday afternoon. I have to admit to being disappointed.
Well I just came back (at 9pm) and I got to meet Joyce.
So, what happens when you:
Allow students to determine what they need to learn, and then enable students to manage their own learning activities?**
Have a look at what Katie and Sara did this weekend: Meet Joyce.
(**See the Instructional Stategy Development section in this Bonnie Skaalid paper.)
Originally posted: April 2nd, 2007
Reflection upon re-reading and re-posting:
From my post:
“I have told myself time and again that I have bitten off more than I can chew, and that I am expecting too much from my Grade 8′s.”
Yesterday I got to hear Alan November speak again. I couldn’t make his early session, but arrived just at the end of it, then sat with him for a few minutes before his afternoon session. He seemed inspired by some of the really great projects that teachers were doing. One interesting comment that he made was that, during their sharing session, time-and-again yet another teacher would come up to share what they were doing with their classes and two key ideas would emerge:
1. Teachers felt like their projects were not good enough, or that they could have/should have done more with it. (The subject of a future post.)
2. Teachers were surprised by what students were capable of, or what they accomplished.
The afternoon session catered mostly to teachers that had not seen him before, and although I really enjoyed it, what struck a chord with me were these two points Alan and I talked about for all of 2-3 minutes.
Do we set the bar too low for our students?
If we are continually surprised by what our students are capable of when we empower them with dynamic ways to demonstrate their learning, then isn’t that an indication that we should be expecting more?
I can’t help but think that we should expect more… and that perhaps this is a motivation issue. I don’t mean that “kids today aren’t motivated”! I think that we just don’t motivate them enough, we don’t offer them opportunities to feel empowered about learning, we don’t let them learn for the love of learning. Instead we teach them things that will fit on a test, things that will ‘prepare them for the next grade’.
- – -
For a real-life example, I need not look any further than my own motivation in school.
My university marks looked like this:
I loved the course: A
I liked the course and the prof was engaging: A
I liked the course: B
The prof was engaging: B
I disliked any of the above, and the course was easy: C
Any other conditions: C- to B, but mostly in the C’s!
Translation… If I was engaged/motivated, I met and even exceeded expectations; If I wasn’t engaged, I did what I needed to do in order to pass.
In my classes with lower marks, I’m fairly certain that I would have looked like someone not really capable of doing more. Or else I may have been a classic examples of a student who gets those wonderful report card comments, ‘Not meeting his potential’, or ‘Capable of better marks if effort improves’.
I may not be brilliant, but I can’t think of a single course I took in university that I wasn’t capable of getting an ‘A’ in. So why didn’t my report cards show a plethora of A’s? Here is the crux: The content or the learning experiences weren’t interesting enough for me!
In fact, I often broke the criteria for projects and assignments. I would do what I wanted and ‘take the hit’ on my marks. (I have a perfect example of this that I’ll share at another time.) Or, I simply felt bored and didn’t bother putting an effort in. I’m not proud of this, but it is not an exaggeration to say that I probably handed in more than a third of my assignments late, simply because I didn’t want to do them in the first place.
- – -
If we engage our students in interactive, social, dynamic learning opportunities that are meaningful to them, then what are they capable of?
Two Wolves Which wolf will you feed? A Remembrance Day Post
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Warning! We filter websites at school. Filters filter learning!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My blog is my PhD I have given myself a Blogtorate of Philosophy.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bubble Wrap What we are doing is creating a facade of security, nothing more than an illusion of bubble wrap.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Who are the People in Your Neighbourhood? My (digital) neighbourhood spans the globe.
Personal Reflections:
The concept is to let students choose their own topic to explore, and then demonstrate learning on all the levels of 
Background
Dave MacLean on Wednesday, 17 October 2007, 06:15 CEST