You are who you choose to be...(It's about the choices we make, Part II)

I thought, "This cannot be happening."

I am a GUY.

I eat food off of the floor.

I think bacon should be a food group.

I think tofu is just wrong.

During football season, I am in front of my big screen television, butt firmly on couch, remote firmly ensconced in hand, from the Thursday night ESPN game through the Monday night ESPN game.

I am a GUY.

A GUY does not CRY.

Especially at some flippin' cartoon featuring the voices of, who, Jennifer Aniston and Harry Conncick, Jr?

**********

I use to channel surf a lot, especially on lazy Saturday afternoons. (This was loooooong before I had children; since then I have not used the word "lazy" and "Saturday" in the same paragraph, much less the same sentence). Remote in hand, day old pizza by my side, I would shift aimlessly from channel to channel. Click. TNT. Click. ESPN. Click. TBS. Click. The Oxygen Channel. Shudders and convulsions. Click. Quickly back to ESPN.

Anyway, while channel surfing some time ago I literally stumbled upon a movie, a cartoon of all things, called "The Iron Giant." I vaguely remembered that this movie was given two thumbs up by Siskel & Ebert, and I had absolutely nothing better to do, so I thought, "What the heck. Let's waste a few hours and a few hundred thousand brain cells watching a cartoon."

I didn't expect much. After all, I am a GUY. A GUY does not watch cartoons.

I won't provide a recap of the entire movie other than to say it is one of the best movies EVER made. I mean EVER, EVER, EVER. It's that's good. But what really killed was the end. (Spoiler alert).

The year is 1958. The location, a small town in Maine. An atomic missile has been fired and is descending on the town in a misguided effort to destroy the Iron Giant, a giant metal machine that becomes a gun when confronted with a gun. The Iron Giant, who is feared by the townspeople and relentlessly pursued by army, is told by nine-year old Hogarth, his only friend, that when the missile comes down "everyone will die." The Iron Giant understands. He places a large metallic finger under Hogarth's chin, raises it gently, and says, "You stay. I go. No following."

The Iron Giant takes off, flying towards the missile. The missile reaches its apex, starts down. The score by Michael Kamen begins to swell. The Iron Giant can see the missile. Hogarth's words to the Iron Giant, spoken earlier in the movie, voice over the scene:

"You are who you choose to be."

The missile, now very close, is bearing in on the Giant.

The Giant utters only one word:

"Superman."

The score reaches a crescendo. The Iron Giant and the missile collide. The Giant is destroyed. But the town is saved.

I sat there is stunned disbelief. First chills. Then, my eyes narrowed. I blinked involuntarily. I thought, no way. No FREAKING way. This is NOT happening. But I could not stop. My eyes misted over.

I cried. At a stupid, moronic cartoon of all things. I was absolutely dumbfounded. This is just not what I do. But something about this scene, something I couldn't quite fathom, really moved me.

Click. I changed the channel. I needed to get back. Back to football. Back to blood and bruises. After all, I'm GUY.

And a GUY does not cry.

But I would mentally revisit that moment many times during the ensuing years.

***********

While writing a series of new blogs yesterday, and weighed down by various pressures, I stumbled across the following post on You Tube. It is the ending to the Iron Giant. Just the ending. If you have the time, you should watch it.

I did. And it still gave me chills.

So what is it about this scene? And why do I share it with you?

Two reasons.

Sometimes I get tired. I never imagined that convincing educators about the educational value of technology would be so difficult. I knew education had its traditions, I understood some of the financial constraints, but I never imagined it would be so hard. Thank God I work for a great company and great people. For visionaries. Smaller minds probably would have fired me a long time ago.

Sometimes I think, screw it. Sometimes I think we should just incorporate a charter school or establish a school within a school, write some grants, raise some money and do it ourselves. It couldn't be any harder than having to convince truculent board members or "on-the-8th-day-God-made-me" administrators about anything that smacks of pedagogical change. Sometimes I want to say: You keep on trumping up those 50% graduation rates. In the meantime, we'll keep fighting the good fight to prepare our kids for something more than a career flipping Whoppers.

But then I'm reminded why we're here. The kids. That's why we fight. Because we should be able to say to every child in every school, and really mean it, "You are who you choose to be."

What a beautiful thing to say. What a powerful thing to say. And we have the power, we have the means, to make this true, or certainly more true than it is now, for millions of children who depend on our schools and the decisions we make today.

Change begins with choice.

And with who you choose to be.

So with the Michael Kamen score swelling through the recesses of my mind, my resolve, though tested, remains firm. Launch the missiles. Slam your doors. Hold on to your industrial-age traditions. I understand.

I'm ready.

Progress can be slow. Change can be painful. But I'm going to keep moving forward.

Because that's who I choose to be.

It's about the choices we make

Let me start by saying that I'm no longer really angry.

When I picked up a newspaper and read about the AIG bonuses, I was stunned and fired off a rapid fire, stream-of-consciousness blog about the hypocrisy of unconditionally bailing out an AIG while our schools and the students who depend on our schools continue to suffer. Apparently, I was not alone in my outrage. But today my mood has changed. Anger has given way to introspection. This morning, I find that I am far more more reflective.

I find myself thinking a lot about choices.

Life is not a zero sum game. Too often, we create these arbitrary ideological splits, these unnecessary "either/or" dichotomies that fail to account for nuance or shades of gray. I try not to do that. I try to look at the big picture, at the totality of opinions and varying points of view, but I also think it is fair to say sometimes life requires that we take a side and make a choice. In fact, I will go one step further. I think, in the end, our lives and our legacy are defined by the choices we make.

AIG was not the only news of the day. I also learned that over 1000 people have died as a result of the Mexican drug wars. (You might be thinking, what does this have to do with education technology? Please bear with me for just a moment, I'll get there). Over 1000 people dead is a staggering number. A tragic, stunning loss of life. It was this fact--over 1000 people have died--coupled with the news about AIG that made me focus so much about choices.

In a world too often defined by political correctness and efforts to offend no one while concurrently trying to appeal to everyone, we often find ourselves afraid to voice a simple opinion. We're afraid to make a choice. I absolutely abhor most of Rush Limbaugh's politics, and I find his self-aggrandizing style alternatively amusing and offensive, but, like it or not, the man has an opinion and he's not afraid to let it rip. I respect that. I sometimes wonder if Hillary Clinton's political fortunes would have been different had she simply told the American people what she thought. I thought her speech at the Democratic National Convention was amazing. I thought, where was that Hillary for the past 18 months? She finally let it rip. Sometimes it's okay to stand before the world and say, "Here I am. This is what I believe. Tear it down if you want, but this is where I stand."

Choices, everyone. We must all make choices.

I've made mine.

How many more innocent people have to die before we realize we can't win a war against drugs? Our jails are filled beyond capacity with poor black boys and poor Hispanic boys many of whom will be denied the opportunity to participate meaningfully in the American Dream because they have criminal records. How many more young children simply walking down the wrong street at the wrong time will die in a crossfire of bullets as rival gangs fight over "territory" and the right to control a street corner? We spend billions of dollars on this war, but what ground have we seized? Where is our Normandy? What have we gained? More importantly, how many innocent souls have we lost?

The point I'm making here isn't about drugs. It's about choices. We can only do so much. Our tax dollars will only go so far. Average people have to make difficult choices everyday about where and how they will spend their money. You may need a new car. But your child needs braces. What do you do? You may need a new suit, but your child needs clothes for school. What do you do? The house needs a new roof, but your son or daughter also needs tuition for college. What choice do you make?

I'm not a politician. I'm one man writing a blog that only a relatively few number of people will read or see. But if asked to make a choice, I will say it again and again and again...we have got to invest first in our children. We have got to invest more in our schools. Our schools should be models of innovation that educators from every nation follow and admire. Students in every district, rich or poor, should be able to walk into any classroom in any school and put their hands on the very best, most sophisticated, most powerful learning tools available to 21st century learners.

But that is not now the case.

So if asked to choose, I'd rather we took the monies fighting a war that it seems we cannot win and invest this money in the war we must win--a war for the hearts, minds and future of our children. Let's invest this money, dollar for dollar, in education. Let's refurbish our schools. Let's create 21st century classrooms. Let's get technology out of the labs and into our student's hands. Let's make wireless access a public utility; available to every household. Let's create new scholarships, fund new grants and provide universal access to low, fixed rate student loans. Let's blow open the doors of opportunity for every child by creating a system of public education that embraces every child, empowers every child and equips every child to compete and succeed in the global economy of 21st century.

Ask yourself this--If you could spend 100 billion on developing a cure for colon cancer or 100 billion on developing toxin free, hormone free, pesticide free, easily mass-produced food that is both healthy and inexpensive, food that could be made readily available to everyone irrespective of income, which would you choose? It is a difficult decision. But I would choose the latter. I would choose to invest in something that creates life. I'd rather invest in avoiding a problem than fixing a problem.

So in a strange way, the AIG story and the causalities as a result of the Mexican drug wars formed mental bookends in my mind. Both stories, in the end, are about the battles we choose to fight and the choices we choose to make.

I've made my choice.

Want to bolster our economic future?

Create better schools.

Want to wage a meaningful war against drugs?

Create better schools.

That's where I stand. In plain and simple language.

And I'm not afraid to go before anyone, anywhere, anytime, make my case for schools and for children, and say tear it down if you want to but this is what I believe.

But what about you?

What's your choice?

I'm angry folks; really angry

I'm upset.

Along with most tax-paying citizens, I find the thought of paying a bonus to anyone in any department at AIG to be simply unfathomable. And don't give me the bit about contract law. I spent 15 years as a corporate attorney, I know the drill. Most of the employees in question are employees at will. Yes, they might be contractually obligated to a bonus, but they are not contractually obligated to a job. For me, the choice would be very, very simple. Take your bonus and walk or forego the bonus and work with us, and the taxpayers who saved your job, and let's turn this thing around.

But more than that, I'm upset that while AIG has received, to date, about 180 Billion in bail out funds (and that's your money folks), apparently without conditions precluding the payment of bonuses, the Senate concurrently saw fit to scale back and whittle down the funding appropriated for schools. So let me get this straight. AIG.....here's a check. A really BIG check. Schools....here's some money, but let's hold off before we do too much more because we're not sure an investment in education is "stimulating" enough.

Fine.

That would be my Exhibit A under the definition of "short sighted thinking."

If AIG fails, we will survive. The country will go on. If our schools continue to fail the millions of children each year who are dropping out, checking out, or doing just enough to get by but are otherwise functionally illiterate and virtually unemployable, then the looming human crisis will make the current capital crisis look tame by comparison. I am not an economist. I have not spent one day on Wall Street. But I think our first priority should be to invest in people. In children. And in the institutions that will dictate our future.

Of course, that's just me.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Maybe I'm just baying into the wind.

But I'm angry, folks.

Really angry.

At Smart, we take the frustration out of technology...

Ok.....this is just funny.

Thought I'd lighten it up a bit.

Back to saving the world next week.

Have a great weekend everyone.

Education Department to Distribute $44 Billion in Stimulus Funds in 30 to 45 Days

According to a press release issued by the White House on Sunday, March 7, 2009:

$44 billion in stimulus funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) will be available to states in the next 30 to 45 days. The first round of funding will help avert hundreds of thousands of estimated teacher layoffs in schools and school districts while driving crucial education improvements, reforms, and results for students.

According to the release, another $49 Billion will be made available in the next 6 months.

The read the entire press release, go here.

Obama takes on education

At a speech given before the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce yesterday, President Obama proposed what he termed his "five pillars of reform."

They are:

Investing in early childhood initiatives like Head Start;

Encouraging better standards and assessments by focusing on testing itineraries that better fit our kids and the world they live in;

Recruiting, preparing, and rewarding outstanding teachers by giving incentives for a new generation of teachers and for new levels of excellence from all of our teachers;

Promoting innovation and excellence in America’s schools by supporting charter schools, reforming the school calendar and the structure of the school day;

Providing every American with a quality higher education--whether it's college or technical training.

During his speech, President Obama pointed out that: "By 2016, four out of every ten new jobs will require at least some advanced education or training."

Whether you agree with his proposed reforms or not, I think President Obama should be commended for his commitment to improving the quality of education available to our children. And if you don't agree with his proposed reforms, or think government should be doing more (or less), I would encourage you to speak up and speak out. Democracy is not a spectator sport. Our collective future depends on individual involvement.

To read the full transcript of the speech, go here.

To view a video of the speech, go here.

Web 2.0--What exactly is it?

(Sung to the music of Simon and Garfunkel's "Mrs. Robinson")

Where did you go
Web 1.0?
A nation turns its longing eyes to you,
What will we do?

What's that you say
Mr. IT guy
Web 1.0 has left and gone away
Well, boo, hoo, hoo...

What will I do?
With Web Version 2?
Oh, what will I do?


One of the primary uses for this blog is to inform. But not just inform, but to make information accessible and easy to understand. Technospeak for many of us is like Latin; it's absolutely unfathomable. And even though I am fairly technically literate (but I am by no means a "tech guy"), I find that the sheer volume of material available on the web to be overwhelming. Millions of blogs, hundreds of educational websites and web-based applications, twitter, plurk, facebook, myspace, and now the ever-growing phenomenon of the "professional learning network." It can be too much. I can remember when I started bookmarking helpful websites and informative web pages. After about two weeks, my bookmarks drop down menu started to look like the Dead Sea Scrolls. Even worse, by the end of Week 2, I couldn't remember why I had bookmarked half of the items I'd bookmarked during Week 1.

Folks, there's a lot of stuff out there.

But if this vast wealth of information and knowledge isn't trickling out of cyberspace and into our classrooms more effectively, what's the point? Despite rapid advances in hardware and software, for many teachers email is still exotic. And blogging, wikis, podcasting, social networks, things like that? Well, you may as well be speaking in Latin because that conversation is going nowhere.

So I will try and do some of the heavy lifting for you. In future posts I will try and explain, in clear, concise and simple terms, what a lot of this "stuff" is, how it works and its value in the classroom. Yes, I will still wax philosophical on policy issues (because policy and yes, politics, ultimately dictate and define the future of our schools) but when talking about technology, I will steadfastly avoid techospeak.

I will break it down.

I will, with a nod to Don Henley, get down to the heart of the matter.

So let's start.

Let's start with the phrase "Web 2.0." You hear it all the time. I hear it all the time. We tell teachers how to teach using "Web 2.0" tools. We talk about learning in the age of "Web 2.0." But what exactly is Web 2.0? Did the internet change? Do you need to run out to Best Buy and buy some new widget or gadget? Did you somehow miss something?

Nope, not really and no.

Web 2.0 does not refer to a new internet. The technology (at least relative to those of us who simply use the internet) hasn't really changed. You still type www. (fill in the blank) and viola, you go somewhere. But the big difference, in plain and simple terms, between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 is this.....

Web 1.0.....you went there to read stuff.

Web 2.0...you go there to do stuff.

A classic "Web 1.0" activity would be going to the online version of your local newspaper to read a news story because you forgot to pick up a newspaper that morning or because you wanted to reread story that was published a few days or a few weeks ago. Going to the internet to read news, sports, weather and entertainment updates posted onto your web browser's home page are other examples. These are all fairly static activities. You read, you get what you want and you click the little red "x" to sign off.

Wikipedia is a classic example of "Web 2.0." You don't just go there to read; you can add, edit or correct information. In fact, the information you read was created and is continually updated by people just like you. Web 2.0 is an interactive web. You use it to buy stuff (eBay), advertise stuff (craigslist), hear stuff (iTunes), share stuff (blogs, podcasts, twitter, plurk ) and learn stuff (online professional networks). In the wonderful world of Web 2.0, we don't just use the web to get content, but we also create content we use. We are producers and consumers at the same time. We are prosumers in a cycle of ever-changing, ever-evolving data and information.

So teachers, when you hear the phrase "Web 2.0," don't fret. Don't feel as though you've missed the boat. You haven't. If you've ever downloaded an mp3, posted a comment on a blog, written a blog, used eBay, posted a picture on Flickr, or God-forbid, done something really high-tech like created a myspace or facebook page, you are already a part of the Web 2.0 revolution. Or as we like to say, "webolution." The only difference is that this webolution will be televised and available to every living soul on the planet with access to a computer and the internet.

That's power. And that power is yours. If you choose to seize it.

Web 2.0.

Simply stated, it's all about using the web to do stuff.

So you see, it's not so complicated. My challenge, our challenge, is to harness the extraordinary power of Web 2.0 to help our teachers better teach, reach and engage our students.

If you have ideas or examples of how you've used Web 2.0 tools to reach your students, please share them. You never know who might be reading, watching and learning.

Arnie Duncan labels NCLB "toxic"

I read the following article this morning. Arnie Duncan was interviewed about the impact and future of NCLB. I've attached the link for your review and consideration:

http://www.onpointradio.org/notes-and-updates/2009/03/arne-duncan-no-child-is-toxic/

I think Mr. Duncan makes some good points during his interview, but NCLB's problems go far deeper than simply "rebranding." There is nothing inherently offensive about the name or the mission of NCLB (in fact, I rather like the name), but I think we can all agree that the means are fundamentally flawed. Arbitrary performance based standards at the expense of content or comprehension are not the answer. This was especially evident during the last two weeks when hundreds of schools across the country simply stopped teaching in order to focus on their statewide standardized assessments.

In any event, read the article and let me know what you think.

Is Mr. Duncan on the right track?

Why can't we seem to move forward?

I just wrote the following comment to a surprising and unexpected blog post about my blog written by Kelly Tenkely. Kelly has a wonderful blog called iLearn Technology that offers some truly helpful hints and practical tips for integrating technology into your classrooms. If you haven't read it, you should. Better yet, add it to your blogroll.

In any event, I decided to share my comment because it reflects, in no uncertain terms, my current mood. It reads:

Thank you for the kind words about my blog. I hope, in my own small way, to add something of merit to the conversations that may, over time, lead to meaningful education reform. But I never forget that it's not me, but people like you, the teachers, who are the real difference makers. You're in the trenches everyday fighting the good fight for the hearts and minds of our children.

Yesterday on twitter you posed an interesting question. You wrote: "Reading outstanding edu blogs, how is it that so many can see the change that needs to happen and yet we can't seem to make it happen?"

I initially responded with a "rah-rah" answer about "keep moving forward" and about the power of "faith and conviction." I still believe those things. Very much so. However, after receiving your "tweet," I spent the evening reading edublog after edublog. The more I read, the more frustrated I became. You are so correct; the problems are well documented and the proposed solutions are not novel. And yet still we debate; we talk, and opine and propose but very little actually changes. Why? Because those of us in the edublog universe are so smart and everyone else is so dumb? I hardly think so. So what is the problem? If we know the questions, if we can identify the problems, if we know what we're doing isn't working, why don't we change?

I'm troubled. These are disturbing questions that could easily take you to an angry and cynical place.

Or......

It can steel your resolve. It can make you more determined than ever to be the change you seek. But I'll write more on that later.

In the meantime, I will continue to ponder your outstanding question.

Thanks again for the compliment. I am and remain honored to collaborate, question and learn with you.

Kelly's question was dead on and the more I thought about it, my response seemed silly and superficial. I'm not Tony Robbins; we need more than presentation level slogans to architecture level problems. We need to move forward, but we seem stuck.

Why?

Help me blogosphere. I have my opinions, opinions I will reserve for now, but how would you have answered Kelly's question?

How is it that so many can see the change that needs to happen and yet we can't seem to make it happen?

Education funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

Highlighted below is a link to documents prepared by the Congressional Research Service which estimate the amount of education funding that each state will receive from certain aspects of the final American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Specifically, these documents estimate what each state would receive under the bill’s following program allocations: State Stabilization Funds, Title I, Title I School Improvement, IDEA, McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance, Education Technology, and Child Care and Development Block Grant Discretionary Funding.

http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/01/school-districts-will-benefit.shtml

Two Steps to Meaningful Technology Integration--Where Do We Start?

Yesterday morning, Kevin Honeycutt posted the following question on Plurk.

"Greatest tech integration challenges. What do you think?"

That, as they say, is the $20 Million Dollar question.

I don't necessarily think there is a single answer to the question. The issues are far too varied and complex. But I'd like to share a few thoughts.

Let's start with what we know. I think there's more than enough educational software out there to get the job done. Open source software and web based applications have also greatly reduced the cost and complexity of integrating technology into most classrooms. The hardware is certainly there. The present day cell phone is more technologically advanced than the supercomputers we used to send a man to the moon. What we don't have is a systemic, easily replicable design for how to bring all of these resources together in an easily digestible, pedagogically sound manner for teachers who may or may not be tech savvy. In other words, the key, I think, isn't better hardware or software, but better curriculum design. Because better design leads to better pedagogy and better pedagogy leads to better educational outcomes.

So I think we should start with design.

And how should we do that? Where does design start? Well...if you've hired an interior designer, contractor or an architect, where do you start? Do you go out and buy a bunch of bricks, wood, glass and mortar, dump it in a pile and say, "Here you go."

Of course not.

You start by watching HGTV.

Just kidding.

As simple as it sounds, you begin with a conversation.

I am of the opinion that it doesn't matter what we put into our classrooms, meaningful technology integration cannot work and will not work unless and until teachers are a part of the design process at the outset because teachers, not technology, will dictate the success of our efforts. Although one of the goals of 21st century pedagogy is "learner-centered" instruction, this does not mean that the use of technology in our classrooms should be the instructional equivalent of The Lord of the Flies. Yes, the role of the teacher should change from the industrial age model of the "sage on a stage" to a 21st century "guide on the side," but the kids can't teach themselves. Meaningful technology integration is a process. It doesn't begin because you've invested in a room full of really great looking computers, whiteboards and other pretty, shinny stuff. It begins with a great teacher who facilitates and guides the learning process.

So if we are to design a meaningful architecture for technology integration and 21st century learning, what should Step #1 be? Forget about the technology. Make it invisible. Start by focusing first on teachers and understanding what they need to encourage better learning.

Now I know some of you might think, "Whoa...wait a minute. Focus first on understanding and meeting the needs of the teacher? Shouldn't we focus first on meeting the needs of the student or the desired learning outcomes?"

That's the conventional wisdom. But I don't think so.

When attempting to improve outcomes, the really successful private sector business owners that I know, and I've known a few, don't necessarily start the conversation by asking what the customer needs or wants. Based on the occupation or context, that's almost implicit. They start by going to their employees and asking them what they need in order to give the customers what they want. Because the product doesn't sell itself. The product is channeled through and fueled by informed and motivated people who then produce the desired result.

I think the great failure of most efforts at educational reform lie in the fact that they were top down efforts; fueled and formulated by politicians and policy wonks, not educators, who then essentially dumped their "reforms" into the laps of teachers with demands to just do it. And too often these "reforms" were sharply out-of-sync or out of touch with the day-to-day reality faced by most teachers. (Think NCLB). So if we want different results, we have to approach efforts at education reform differently. We have to invite the teachers to the party at the outset.

So be wary of pre-packaged "solutions" wrapped in grandiose promises of renewed and revitalized classrooms. Before buying more stuff, think about how you can teach your teachers how to better use their existing stuff. Start small. Keep it simple. Think about starting by engaging a small group of teachers who are open and receptive to the idea of technology integration. If they're tech savvy; great. If not, that's okay. Because being tech savvy isn't a prerequisite. What is? Teachers who understand that in the information age, the best teachers are also the best learners. Teachers who are willing to go out on a pedagogical limb and try something unfamiliar and new are the teachers who will innovate and lead in the 21st century.

That's why District-wide implementations at the outset tend to be tough. It's generally too much too fast. But you don't need an entire district to make your case. You don't need an entire school. Start with a handful of kids and a few teachers within each school and work your way up and out. Build on success. Use the technology that you have access to share your stories with your stakeholders, particularly your parents. Create a classroom website (it's easy). Make the students and the work they produce using technology your ambassadors for change.

But start by engaging your teachers.

Meaningful Technology Integration--The Heart of the Matter

"I've been trying to get down to the heart of the matter."
Don Henley, "The Heart of the Matter"


Why haven't we been more successful at integrating technology into our curriculum and classrooms? Why is technology, and all its power and promise, still relegated to the back of the educational bus by many school boards and district administrators? Why hasn't there been a howl of protest from outraged parents demanding that schools integrate 21st century learning tools into our schools right now?

Yesterday, I read a plurk from "Beth," a teacher with 27 years experience who might be losing her job along with 14 other technology integration specialists because their jobs were considered "non-instructional." This would leave, I believe, approximately 1 technology integration specialist for every 1500 students in this particular district.

The reaction was one of shock and outrage while "Beth" lamented over what she could do. As I tried to sleep last night, I was haunted by something Beth wrote: "It will be the students who suffer the most."

So what do we do?

Beth's plight, and the plight shared by so many teachers, principals and administrators across the country trying, with varying degrees of success, to meaningfully integrate technology into our schools and classrooms is rooted, I think, in one core cause.

It's time to get down to the heart of the matter.

It's time to appeal to the heart.

When we are moved, we act. When we feel, we respond. Right now, those of us "in" education technology do a great job....of talking to ourselves. I'm continually inspired and informed by the leaders and visionaries of the ed tech movement. I marvel at their use of technology and ability to identify new and clever widgets, gadgets and applications. NECC is a blast (loved Nashville, wasn't so hot on San Antonio), but after two years of attending, is it just me or does it seem like we're primarily still just talking to each other?

I think what we need to do is tell a better story. We need to get people to care. We need to find a way to engage that fifth grade teacher in Indianapolis who doesn't give a damn about computers but who is sick and tired of looking at bored and blank faces every day. We need to better engage school boards who see us coming, clutch their wallets, and think: "Oh no. YOU just want us to buy a bunch of computers and we have MUCH bigger fish to fry. We don't have money for teachers or textbooks and you want us to invest in laptops?"

The foundational issue isn't the merit of our cause, but how we share and frame our message. How do we reach our audience? How do we effectively share our vision with our school boards, administrators and the thousands of teachers who have never heard of NECC and will never attend? Too often our message gets lost, diluted or muddled. Or it becomes confusing and technocentric.

So do we do that?

How do you do that?

What I have found, for what its worth, that the least compelling way to talk about technology is to talk about technology. It's boring. Cold and boring. And in my humble opinion, presentations that involve pointing and clicking through an application in front of a large roomful of people are painful to watch. (Organizers at NECC, please take note). If the people pointing and clicking would simply turn around and look at the people in the room, they would often see a room full of confused and disengaged faces (and these are teachers we're talking about). Process and applications should be addressed in smaller, more hands-on sessions. Inspire people about why. Make the case why technology is important; why technology is meaningful, why technology engages our students and why technology improves student outcomes. Because if we don't get beyond why, we'll never get to how.

One of the best presentations that I've ever attended was by Dr. Tim Tyson and it was one of the least technical presentations I've ever attended. But it was beautiful; moving. It made we want to act.

My challenge to you is make us feel it. Make people care. Appeal to the heart, not just to the mind.

How you do it is up to you.

But if you have ideas, share them. Because if we're going to win this fight; we're going to win it together.

"Beth" this post is dedicated to you.

*************

The following video is one of several that I have created when presenting to educators. It's a rather serious, somber piece; but it is designed to be. You will also note that it doesn't talk about technology at all. (The word "technology" only appears one time at the very end). The idea isn't to sell the viewer on technology, but to elicit a mood where people will be more receptive to the idea of having a discussion about technology. Again, if people are moved, if you touch the heart, then they are more likely to listen. And if someone is listening, really listening, that's when a meaningful conversation can begin.

Primary sources: 2004 National Technology Report, "Shift Happens," USA Today

I visited an elementary school today...

I visited an elementary school today.

An elementary school that will go unnamed in a community that I will not identify other than to say it is in one of the most economically challenged communities in the country.

I was at the school to meet with a kindergarten teacher. A beautiful human being this teacher; a living, walking testament to all that is good and noble about public education. Her classroom is overcrowded and yet she starts every day by addressing each student by name, looking them in the eyes and cheerfully saying "good morning." She ties shoes, wipes noses and tucks in shirts. Although many of her students come from families that are poor, some almost destitute, she refuses to compromise her standards; she expects her students to pay attention, to be polite, to remain on task and to complete their homework (yes, homework!) each and every day. She expects her classroom to be a place of learning. She pushes, but with kindness. She encourages, without ever, to my knowledge, being condescending.

But more than that, she treats her children as though they are someone. In a place of so much despair and so few role models, in a place where so much says to these children, both explicitly and implicitly, you're nothing...you'll never amount to anything, she regards each and every child as precious.

And that means something.

Her name is Ms. "G."

Ms. G has, on more than one occasion, gone into her own pocket to buy resources for her classroom. Books on tape, tape recorders, used books, pencils and pens, posters for the wall, decorations for her classroom....basic things, simple things. Things she should not have to buy. But she does. She wants to make her classroom as personal and as appealing as possible. She wants to make school fun and engaging for these children. For her, this isn't just a job; its almost a moral imperative. "If we don't get to these kids now, we'll lose them," she once told me. "Mike, when a lot of these kids start school, they can't write their own names. They don't recognize letters or colors. They're loved but they're just not prepared. They need so much but often get so little."

But when we talk, she's never downbeat. I can sometimes tell she's a bit tired, and I can certainly see the impact of time; of a lifetime spent in the service of children other than her own. Her face is deeply lined and wrinkled, she looks older than her years and her hair almost completely gray. But her eyes shine. Her spirit seems undiminished. She remains hopeful.

She still believes, as much now than ever before, in the value of education.

But she also knows that something must change. She knows that we can't teach children today the same way she was taught. She doesn't claim to understand exactly what I'm doing, or how technology should be used in the classroom, but she supports my efforts.

"It's a new day," she said. "A new time."

Yes it is.

A new time that requires new tools.

But as I feel my way through this new life--my life as an education technology advocate--I find that this journey is taking unexpected twists and turns. It has certainly, if nothing else, been an organic process. When I started down this road just over two years ago, I was so impassioned about the transformative power of technology that I titled my first white paper "1-to-1." I didn't think that technology should simply be present in our classrooms, I thought that every student in every school should have 1-to-1 access to technology.

I so clearly remember attending NECC for the first time. It was stunning. I remember being astounded by the dizzying array of educational applications for laptops and whiteboards, document cameras and interactive educational software. I was inspired by a speech by Bruce Dixon. I was touched by Tim Tyson's stories about the incredible movies produced by his 6th grade students. I got to shake Gary Stager's hand! It was as though I'd stumbled upon a whole new universe, a universe existing within the shadows of my existing reality; a universe of infinite possibility powered by these extraordinary tools.

It was as though a veil had been lifted and I saw Oz in technicolor for the first time.

Two years later, I still believe in that universe of infinite possibility. I still believe in the transformative power of technology. I still believe that every child in every school in every school district, whether large or small, rich or poor, should have ubiquitous access to these extraordinary learning tools. Technology is to the 21st century what books were to the 20th century and the printing press was to the 19th century. But I find, as I move forward, my focus has shifted, perhaps softened, a bit. It is now a journey tempered between embracing the transformative power of technology and recognizing the transformative power of people.

Because that's where it all begins.

With people.

With teachers.

And with the simple act of caring.

School should be the great equalizer. Irrespective of where you live, who you are, your background, religion, race or culture, you should, in America, be able to attend the school of your choice and know that you will receive an education that will equip you to compete and succeed in the world as it exists now.

That, as so eloquently written by Thomas Wolfe, "is the promise of America."

And that, I think, is the ultimate power of technology.

The technology that we have at our disposal right now, technology that anyone can purchase or lease at virtually any electronics store, has the power to render time and space irrelevant. It allows children from every part of the globe to rise above everything they know and to access the sum of all human knowledge anywhere, anyplace, anytime. It makes direct and unobstructed access to facts and information, once the province of the few, the right of the many. That has power. So forget about whether you're tech savvy or not. Forget about whether you like technology or not. Forget about whether you're old school or new school, democrat or republican, mac or pc. No other learning tool in the course of human history, not books, not the printing press, not radio, not television, can make the same claim.

So what should we be debating?

We can certainly debate how technology should be used in our schools. We can certainly debate when technology should be used in our schools. What we should not be debating at this point in our nation's history is if technology should used in our schools. The world has changed, we're not going back, and as fondly as I remember pounding out term papers on my old IBM select typewriter and fax machines that used thermal paper, I wouldn't try and open a business with one.

So to everyone, and I do mean everyone, debating the need for 21st century tools in 21st century schools, I once again extend a challenge. Quit your job. Open a business. And try to pay your mortgage for one full year using only the tools found in most inner city public school classrooms. I'm not trying to sound harsh or unfair, but I think if you're being intellectually honest, many of us, including me, would have to say, "I can't do it. I don't have the tools."

Exactly.

Neither do they.

The difference is that our students can't do anything it.

But we can.

In School That Learn, MIT educator and best-selling author Peter Senge writes:

Schools may be the starkest example in modern society of an entire institution modeled after n assembly line. Like any assembly line, the system was organized into discrete stages. Called grades, they segregated children by age. Everyone was supposed to move from stage to stage together. Each stage had local supervisors–the teachers responsible for it. Classes of twenty to forty students met for specified periods in a scheduled day to drill for tests. The whole school was designed to run at a uniform speed, complete with bells and rigid daily time schedules.

Those who did not learn at the speed of the assembly line either fell off or were forced to struggle continually to keep pace. It established uniformity of product and process as norms, thereby naively assuming that all children learn in the same way. It made educators into controllers and inspectors, thereby transforming the traditional mentor-mentee relationship and establishing teacher-centered rather than learner-centered learning. Motivation became the teacher’s responsibility rather than the learner’s. Discipline became adherence to rules set by the teacher rather than self-discipline. Assessment centered on gaining the teacher’s approval rather than objectively gauging one’s own capabilities.

This industrial age model sounds pretty grim, but it is, with minor modification, the blueprint for most schools today. And it is, without question, a model that is hopelessly out of sync with our present day needs and reality. Nothing else in our society, not our businesses, hospitals, factories or farms operate essentially the same they did almost 150 years ago. Nothing, except for our schools.

So why are we here? Why do we fight this fight? Why do we make the case for technology? For change? For School 2.0?

The point of technology integration isn't about technology any more than investing in textbooks is about books. It's not about the product, it's about the purpose. It's about pushing away from a pedagogy that focuses on "knowing" and the rote repetition and regurgitation of facts to a thinking pedagogy that focuses on understanding, comprehension, communication and the ability to apply information and data in real world contexts. Knowing "what" electricity is, for example, or being able to identify its elements for a standardized test, is one thing. Understanding how it works has led to advances and innovations in science, medicine and technology that have forever reshaped and redefined every facet of our world.

In A Whole New Mind, author Dank Pink writes: “The last few decades have belonged to a certain kind of person with a certain kind of mind–computer programmers who could crank code, lawyers who could craft contracts, MBA's who could crunch numbers. But the keys to the kingdom are changing hands. The future belongs to a very different kind of person with a very different kind of mind–creators and empathizers, pattern recognizers and meaning makers. These people—artists, inventors, designers, storytellers, caregivers, consolers, big picture thinkers—will now reap society’s richest rewards and share its greatest joys.”

Now I know there are some who debunk the importance of Dan Pink's "soft" right brain skills. I am also away of pedagogues who dismiss the idea that critical thinking and analytical skills can be developed independent of specific course content. I say let the pedagogues debate. But it's 2009 and long past time that we got beyond the second level of Bloom Taxomony. Because in the age of information technology, the "Digital Age," it doesn't really matter what you know. Memorizing facts is not a terribly marketable skill. What's needed is the ability to find, make sense of, and use relevant information for specific purposes. What's needed is the capacity for lifelong learning. What's needed is a 21st century pedagogy for 21st century schools and, like it or not, technology is a critical component of that pedagogy.

So, to quote the Morgan Freeman character from the Shawshank Redemption, "We can get busy living or get busy dying." I choose life. I choose hope.

I choose change.

But I promise, I won't forget you Ms. G. Because the educational foundation upon which we all stand was built by people like you.

No computer, no matter how fast, will ever replace you.

But maybe, just maybe, 21st century tools in the hands of 21st century teachers will help the next generation of Ms. G's do their jobs, and reach their students, just a little bit better.

So I dedicate my efforts to you.

To Ms. G and to Ms. G's everywhere who are fighting the good fight for the hearts and minds of our children.

And we continue to wonder what the problem is with our "21st century schools"

This morning, I sent an educator that I know an email about using Skype. Skype is a wonderful web-based application that allows you to place a call from your computer to another Skype user on their computer for free. All you need is an Internet connection. It’s safe, fun and secure and teachers from Maine to California are using Skype to communicate and collaborate with schools and classrooms from across the country and across the globe.

In any event, this particular educator hadn’t heard of Skype so I recommended that she give it a try.

About an hour later, I received an email in response:

“I will try and download skype. The computer I have at the high school is terrible. You would think a system like [ours], which is very up-to-date with many things, would give me a decent computer! I am on the 'waiting list'.. Lol. I even tried to buy my own computer to use but they wouldn't let me use it, go figure.”

When I recommended that she download Skype on a personal computer if downloading it onto the school-issued computer proved too difficult, she replied:

“It's funny because the students are given the new computers but some of them are not even hooked up yet. In the special education rooms there might be one that is ready to work. I work with some teachers who were given new laptops but refuse to use them, so they are sitting in the closet. But because they were "given" to that teacher, I can't use it. It makes no sense at all!!!

Alrighty now.

And we continue to wonder what the problem is with our "21st century schools."

How do you do it?

I feel like the kid in the back of the classroom who's spent the entire semester watching, listening, not saying anything and then on the last day of class finally, slowly, raises his hand.

Everyone looks back.

I have a question, directed to our teachers.

How do you do it?

How do you reconcile the back-to-basics mandates of NCLB with the goals of technology integration? How do you juggle a curriculum that, by design, must focus on basic skills while at the same time using technology to promote improved problem-solving and critical thinking skills, higher-order thinking, differentiated instruction, greater communication, collaboration and creativity and other so-called "21st century skills?"

Will you share?

Because it seems to me that this goes to the heart of the ongoing debate about the meaning and merit to continued investments in technology and technology integration.

Looking at technology through a different lens...

When you know something, or think you know something, it's just implicit to you, it's sometimes difficult to explain it when challenged. Young children are particularly good at producing vexing moments like this. A few days ago, my son asked, "Dad why does the water look blue when you're far away, but it's clear when you're close up?"

Uh..........

"Dad, if the earth is round, how come the people on the bottom don't fall off?"

Well......

"Dad, if God is in bigger than the WHOLE WORLD (arms spread wide), how can He fit into my heart?"

Um..........

The point here is that we sometimes take for granted what we know and don't stop to understand and think that someone else may be looking at the same facts, but through an entirely different lens. This is critically important for those of us "in" education technology. We feel so passionately about the transformative power of technology that we are sometimes vexed by what we perceive to be ongoing, illogical and inexplicable resistance to meaningful technology integration. But it sometimes helps to step back and look at this through a different lens.

My six year old son spent the weekend with cousins. They own x-box, I don't. I received a text message late last night about how much "family fun" he was having. I responded "That's great!" replete with smiley face, but I was inwardly thinking "Oh no." My mind flashed to my son sitting in front of a flickering television, eyes glazed, expression blank, a half consumed pop can sitting ignored by his side, his thumbs flailing away in a rapid staccato succession of click, click, click, click, hour after hour, day after wasted day, playing video games in a nonsensical, make believe virtual world. I thought, I don't want him playing with this awful machine. Will he still want to go outside? Read books? Play with other kids? Play with me? Or will he be consumed?

Will he lose the simple joys and pleasures of being a boy?

I had a strong, vivid and visceral reaction to what I'm sure was an innocuous event. I reacted that way and I'm an advocate for education technology integration.

Wow.

I had a bit of an epiphany. I realized that my reaction to my son playing with an x-box (and the inevitable looming request to buy one) was eerily similar to the concerns voiced by many stakeholders, both internal and external to education, about computers in our classrooms. They fear, I think, at some visceral level, the loss of human connections. They fear a classroom of multimedia zombies living in a virtual world, disconnected from people, each other and authentic experiences.

And you know what? That's totally fair. We need to understand that. Understand it, respect it, acknowledge it and talk openly about it.

We need to look at technology integration through a different lens.

In a comment to my post "My Fear? A feeding frenzy..." Rob writes:

I'm not an educator, but have been a technology worker for more than two decades. And I'm a new parent to a toddler.

I'm really uncomfortable with the way we're shoehorning computers into education and barraging children with technology. We seem to have been lulled into thinking that any exposure to technology is a good, educational thing so we're recklessly immersing kids into a high-tech, media-saturated environment that, I believe, could be undermining every other effort we make to raise & nurture healthy children.

He continued:

I don't pretend for a moment to know how to do it, but I'd much rather we focus on teaching children how to solve problems, think rationally, and express their creativity. The people I've come to respect & admire the most in the I.T. field are those who can reason - people who plan ahead and act with intent and focus. In almost every instance, these people are not the most technologically proficient nor have they had extensive computer education. Some of them were lucky to have had calculators in college. But they are problem-solvers - thinkers - able to consider outcomes and adjust plans accordingly. That's what I want to foster in my child. The technology stuff will fall easily into place after that.

Right on Rob. I couldn't agree with you more.

Kids need rich and varied learning experiences. They need to run. They need to paint. They need music and art and books. They need to crash into each other and the freedom to roll around in the mud. All of these have value; all of these are learning experiences and all of these should be an integral part of how we should educate our children now and in the future. Technology can't be there to replace those things, but to augment those things, and to allow for deeper, richer, more personal and interactive learning experience than would be possible in its absence.

Because in the end, what is a pc? What does it do? For most of us, the primary purpose of a computer is not data processing. For most of us—and for most of our students—the computer is used primarily for email, social networking and to transmit or receive information. In other words, for most of us, the personal computer is a personal communicator. Personal communicators allow us to connect with more people, in different ways, at more times and in more places than all the other forms of communication invented in the course of human history.

That is the ultimate power of technology.

It takes a world of billions of people, separated by language, culture and distance, and brings us closer together. It allows us—and our students—to transcend beyond our immediate physical space and connect to the thoughts, ideas, views and passions of people from across the globe. When we understand how others feel, what they think, and why, issues of “us” and “them” become blurred. We may agree. We may agree to disagree. But suddenly the phrase “the human race” takes on a whole new meaning.

Could the horrors of the holocaust have occurred in the age of information technology? What about the idea that one race is superior to another race? That “manifest destiny” was God’s will? That Native Americans are “savage”? That women are not the equal of men?

Ignorance thrives in a vacuum. Technology connects us to the world.

So we need to be careful when making our case. I think we need to focus less on applications and more on connections. Because that's what counts. Don't just explain how the presence of computers in our classrooms will make our young people better students. Explain how it will make them better, more compassionate, more concerned and more connected people. Show them how technology, when used properly, allows our students a more meaningful chance to interact with content, data and each other.

Help them to understand that we won't lose each other by integrating technology into our classrooms any more than the presence of textbooks in the classroom meant we stopped talking to each other.

And when defining what a pc is, think about using these words.....

Personal communicator.

Personal connector.

Personal creativity.

Whatever the words you use, help our parents and board members, our teachers and administrators, and everyone who cares deeply about the well-being of our children but may or may not support our cause, to look at technology through a different lens.