Just saw this video shared on Twitter and it reminded me of the Sir Ken Robinson quote that I wrote about last week:
And for those who have never lived in a world without the internet, there’s no distinction between online and offline.
Pretty amazing to watch in my opinion.
cc licensed ( BY ) flickr photo shared by Untitled blue
My mind has been racing as it seems there are amazing things happening all over the world, and in our own community, that are pushing education forward. I see more people taking the plunge, getting elbow deep into their own learning. I am inspired every single day, and I am seeing some amazing connections between the work that educators are doing and the learning that is happening in the classroom.
Here is the question that keeps popping into my head though: Where is the data that supports this progression in our own practice resulting in success in our schools? This can be about any initiatives in schools ranging from assessment, technology integration, critical thinking, and so on. The problem is, with many things happening in education today, they are so new that the “data” is lacking. Sometimes even if data is there, it might not necessarily prove anything. For example, if we say the purpose of school is to prepare our students to be happy and contributing citizens in our society, how do high standardized tests prove this? All it really proves is that students did well on the test.
So where does the research come from? Well, before anyone deems something successful, someone has to have ventured out, taken the risks, and tried something that was “different” at that time. But what motivated them to try in the first place? Some would even be concerned that trying something different is not considerate of our students and we are placing their futures at risk. But as educators, do we ever do things that are unproven and totally make no sense? There is a difference between “risk” and “calculated risk”.
We must first consider and discuss what we are doing now and does it work? Well in any system, some things will “work” for a number of students, but we should always be striving to do what is right by as many students as possible, and ideally, for all students. The idea of personalized learning is something that should work for everyone because common sense would say that if I tailor a program to fit the needs of a child, the child will be more successful. That is obviously easier said than done, but the more personalization we can bring into education, the better off we should be.
Also, we should be continuously looking at our world, and the shifts that are happening, to make sure that we are preparing our students to be successful. It would be foolish to ignore technological advances in the world, as they have made such a large impact. With so many companies and organizations adopting technology as part of their everyday operations, how could we not implement this into our schools? It would seem foolish to ignore it.
Most importantly though, we need to listen to our kids and then act on their suggestions. Recently, Alberta started a huge initiative in our province called “Speak Out Alberta” which was meant to hear the voices of our students. It is great to listen to them, but it is more important to work at creating the environments that they say will work best for them.
Last year, I wrote a post titled “The Impact of Awards” and it discussed my belief on why award systems were not best for our students. My shift in thinking came from first seeing this Daniel Pink Ted Talk, and then followed by reading his book, “Drive“. Although he did talk about research, his common sense examples just made sense; the research to me meant little when he could explain it so simply.
One of the comments from the aforementioned post, shared by Matthew Ray, has stuck out to me ever since the day I read it. He discussed a scenario shared by Rick Lavoie when talking about how awards kill innovation in children:
In one workshop (FAT City), he creates an environment for a group of adults to help them understand the pressures of being a child. He has the group look at a picture and demands to know what’s in the picture. No one can name it. So he calls on one woman and essentially says: “Oh, come on! How can you not see it? It’s right there. You’re not looking hard enough! Look harder!” (Don’t we all think and say these things to our kids sometimes?)
Finally he says, “All right, look. If you can tell me what’s in that picture, I’ve got a blank check for $100 that I will write out to you. You tell me what’s in there and you get a hundred bucks!”
Will that possibly motivate the person to do anything further if she can’t possibly see what’s in the picture? Of course not. Yet she has the added pressure of the reward making her feel inadequate. Makes sense, doesn’t it?
That is not based on research, but just thinking about it, and using logic helped me understand why this would not be an approach I would want to take with students. Not only did this make sense to me, but the “story” that was used created an emotional connection for me that often data would not invoke. Stories are often the thing that move people forward:
“The gestures made (or not made) by leaders can turn into the stories that powerfully affect behavior…Leaders who understand this and use this knowledge to help make their organizations great are the ones we admire and wish others would emulate. Those in leadership positions who fail to grasp or use the power of stories risk failure for their companies and for themselves.” Forbes – The Power of Stories
Here are some questions that are pushing my thinking right now…
Someone has to go out there and do research and lay the ground work so why not us? Why are we so willing to wait for “someone else” to clear the path? If we are looking at the world and seeing the change, why would we not do our best to prepare our kids for that? By the time we get the “data”, will it be too late?
If things were working, we wouldn’t change, but there is evidence that we could just do better.
What do you think?
cc licensed ( BY ) flickr photo shared by [F]oxymoron
Spending the last few days at the 21st Century Learning Leadership Forum at Banff, we had a great conversation at the end of the conference discussing some of our key learnings moving forward. It was echoed throughout the conference the importance of bringing our communities, and especially our parents into the conversations. Their input is so valued and the importance of hearing that voice that is the expert on their own child, will really help move our schools towards a more personalized experience for every child.
Although there was a huge discussion about all of the different ways that we could try to communicate with parents and give them a transparent view into our schools, one comment stuck with me that I have heard many times before:
“It is tough sometimes because since everyone went to school, they believe they are also an expert.”
I will admit that I have seen resistance to some educational changes and if you read any article in the New York Times (or any mainstream paper), you will usually see a ton of comments longing for the “good ole days” of education. I believe that we are seeing so many parents keeping up with educational research as technology gives us the opportunity to have access to much of the same information. However, there are always those who believe the “traditional” way is the best way. There are so many things that the old way of school provided that we can build upon, but just like anything, the further we progress, the better it should be.
I often think, though, that we could turn this idea around and ask something different. Instead of talking about what works or worked in school, maybe we need to do something different. Why don’t we start the conversation with things like,
“Give us a situation of where you really were passionate about something you were learning and explored that topic. What did that look like? How do we bring that to school?”
The focus needs to be on learning first, then we move it to school.
My best guess would be that many would not even default to a time that they were in school. I know that I wouldn’t. I have never learned anything from writing notes off of a board (other than how to write notes off of a board) but I remember spending a HUGE amount of time in school doing just that. I do however know that when I have been interested in something, my own exploration of the topic in a way that was meaningful to me, has been where I have had the most success. Many of the skills that I use to do that exploration now were not necessarily emphasized in school.
I think of my own nephews and nieces who were both fluent in Greek and English before they even walked into school, yet I can only speak one language. I took French until grade 12 but can really only say “hello” and “may I go to the washroom” in the language (est-que je peux aller a la toilette?; life saver!). Many of my friends who are fluent actually traveled to a city or country and were immersed in a language. They struggled through the process, failed many times, but the real life experience of learning was what made them eventually successful. How do we bring that to school in all areas?
If we can look at what works best for learning, focus on it, and bring that to our students, I am hoping that will move many people forward, most especially our kids. If the process of learning is continuously reinforced and emphasized at school in the work we do, we will have made a huge leap ahead.
cc licensed ( BY ) flickr photo shared by Fibonacci Blue
I read this extremely interesting paper on New Millenium Learners and was fascinated by the following quote regarding the “Matthew Effect“:
It can be reasonably expected that those who are already in possession of good cultural capital will find in their technology-related practices a way to reinforce it, while those who either do not have access to technology or lack sound cultural capital will lag behind. In the long run, the existing differences between those who have and those who don’t have the right cultural capital to take advantage of the potential of technologies will increase. Hence the Mathew effect: those who benefit from a better socio-economic environment find it easier to benefit from technologies, thanks to the cultural capital transferred to them, and they thus increase their advantage and privileged situation in comparison to those who lack such an accompanying capital. In other words, if no compensatory policies and practices are in place, granting access to technology to children from socioeconomic deprived contexts may look like a good step in breaking the technology gap, as it was originally defined, in terms of access. However, a second digital gap is now emerging. To bridge it requires a new set of educational policies and practices, as they are related to technology practices associated with cultural capital.
“…students who do not have access to a computer at home tend to be lower achievers than the others and, secondly, it would also seem to be the case that students using computers at home less often had below-average results.”
The tributes and articles about Steve Jobs keep coming in on the Twitter stream. Tweets from Barack Obama, endless articles talking about his battles with being famous, or even products of his that failed.
But of all the professional articles that have been created, it was the amateur created picture that really stuck out (even though it had been created before this day).
Absolutely beautiful.
This video below also really stuck out for me:
The quote comes originally from the “Think Different” ad campaign and is amazingly powerful.
Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They invent. They imagine. They heal. They explore. They create. They inspire. They push the human race forward.
Maybe they have to be crazy.
How else can you stare at an empty canvas and see a work of art? Or sit in silence and hear a song that’s never been written? Or gaze at a red planet and see a laboratory on wheels?
We make tools for these kinds of people.
While some see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.
Powerful stuff.
Imagine if we always looked for the genius in our kids? It might not be what the “test” is looking for, but it is in there. We just have to find it.
About seven years ago, I successfully ran a full marathon in under 3 hours and 19 minutes. For someone who was not athletic and had lost a lot of weight, this was quite an accomplishment. One of the things that I distinctly remember about that event was when people were amazed at the accomplishment and would often say things such as, “Wow…that must have been such a hard race.” I remember telling them that it was not actually the race that was hard, but it was the training. The race only happened on one day but I had trained for over four months, running (literally) thousands of kilometers in the process. I would wake up often at 5 am and go for some short (20 k) runs and I would often spend Saturdays running training distances over 30 kilometers. I am literally exhausted thinking about it right now and do not know how I ever did that.
From the training, I remember one day when I decided to try my hand and running 36 kilometers with no water. This was an extremely stupid idea. I ran 18 kilometers one way, and then about 10 the other. Leaving me about 8 kilometers in the middle of nowhere on the side of the road. My legs could just not run anymore. I had to go to a farm house and ask to use their phone when they asked me, “Did you car break down?”, and I had to sheepishly tell them that, no, I just could not run anymore. I called a friend who came and picked me up from the side of the road and took me to the hospital to treat me from heat exhaustion. I learned to run with water after that day. 
It is nice to look back and laugh at that moment now because I came out okay, and eventually ran a great race. But how many people knew about the major failure that I had that day? How many had just assumed that I was extremely athletic and running had come second nature to me? My physical education teacher knew that I could barely do the “12 minute run” in our Canadian Fitness Testing program (the worst week in gym class ever).
Tie that to our classrooms. How many of our students think that we just “know” things because we are adults and it just comes to us? I have repeatedly stated that we need to make our learning transparent to our students, but I think it is essential that we know it is the process of learning that we need to share, not only the product that comes out of it. Blogging has taught me a huge amount of humility as I often receive messages about grammatical errors or spelling mistakes, but it has also taught me that an idea sitting in my head will only lie there dormant. For it to grow, and to take advantage of the vast knowledge of people that I am connected to (online and offline), I need to share the process of what I am learning. In this “publish then filter world” that Clay Shirky talks about, I have realized that the world is very forgiving of the mistakes when they see the effort.
As educators, we have to really try and push through the idea that things have to be perfect before we can “release” them to the world. When we truly trust others, we know that they will help us along the process and be comfortable with us falling/failing on the way to whatever we are pursuing. We need to realize that when we are waiting to release the “perfect” product, others will still think it is not perfect, and they could have probably been just helping you a long time ago.
We need to remember that the process of learning is much more important for our kids to see than the product of our learning.
cc licensed ( BY ) flickr photo shared by Horia Varlan
Pernille Ripp, an avid blogger, asked a question that many educators have been thinking about in relation to SmartBoards. She was asking for feedback on the technology and was asking for evidence that they were a valuable way to spend money with increasingly tight budgets in schools. The comments were intriguing and shared comments both for and against their implementation.
Obviously from her writing, you could see that this was a division initiative and that perhaps the conversation was not had in the first place with some teachers. This is not to say that the ideas from the leaders were not well intentioned as I am 100% sure they were. If anything is ever implemented on a division basis, there is obviously a belief that whatever it may be will be beneficial to students and no child should be missing out. The intention is not what I am questioning, but the process is (although again I am not certain of how it was rolled out.)
We are seeing more schools going to 1-1 environments, massive implementation of SmartBoards, iPads, etc., yet what is the vision behind this? Derek Hatch on Connected Principals wrote about this same idea and stated, “We need to spend some time examining what is important and what role technology will play.”
Shouldn’t the first question we ask be something similar to, “what opportunities and environment are we trying to create for our students?”, and then move from that point? We need to ask more what the purpose of school is and move from there.
I am reminded of this Prensky quote about the failure of some “tech” initiatives in schools:
“Just adding technology, however, will not make this (success) happen. In fact, in some cases, laptops have already been added and removed for having “failed.” But the failure in those cases was neither of the students nor of the technology, but rather of the pedagogy.” Prensky, Teaching Digital Natives
For example, if we are wanting students to be able to collaborate more with one another, is the SmartBoard the best way to facilitate that objective? If we are trying to have the students create more, is this the tool that will open that door? As my own school division moves forward, these are some of the questions we will need to answer.
And let’s make sure that the questions we ask impact our students first as that is who we serve.
I wish that every decision I have made as a leader has focused on these ideas first, but I would be lying if I said that was true. I remember pushing my own principal to purchase a few class sets of Senteo Clickers for our school and I still could not justify that purchase five years later.
As I have gained experience though, I am realizing that we have to start with questions first, instead of answers. Find the “why” of what you are doing, make sure that you can clearly articulate this to whoever is asking, and then start putting the pieces in place. Doing the reverse of that process is not best for our kids, could waste a lot of money, while also losing the confidence of those you serve.
Doesn’t sound like a good way of doing the business of school.
cc licensed ( BY ) flickr photo shared by umjanedoan
Reading a USA Today article on social media in schools followed by Eric Sheninger’s post, I was not surprised by reading some of the comments Eric listed on his post such as this:
More evidence of the “dumbing-down” of society. Stupid media like USA To-shmay buying into it, of course. Put the cell phones and calculators aways, stay off the waste-o-time websites and GET TO LEARNIN’!
The idea of appealing to the general public on school reform through the media is extremely tough, especially when reporters have narrow views of education, character limits, and are probably wanting a little controversy to push the envelope and draw an audience. Something similar happened when Chris Wejr and I were discussed in an article regarding award ceremonies. I thought that this was an interesting response on that article:
We already pamper our kids too much. Few of them even do chores around the house or learn to cook and do their laundry. They are chauffeured everywhere and constantly praised for their burps and farts.
Although our stance was not in any way about pampering kids (both Chris and I have extremely high standards for what we expect from students), based on the article and limited amount of information, it could have been easily misconstrued.
We all have heard arguments from those that are not educators such as, “It was like that when I was in school and I turned out just fine.” It is really easy to assume that when we as educators blog, that the majority of our readers agree with us, yet we often forget that the majority of our readers are educators. This would not be the case for a publication like USA Today though.
For example, the quote by Chris Lehmann in the USA Today article, “Being literate in 2011 means being digitally literate”, probably means little to the many. The thought of literacy to most is being able to read and write. Although reading and writing are the cornerstone of literacy, to many educators there is more to it.
Now I am not saying that we should not put ourselves out there and push for improvements to the education system (although in Canada I would say that there are a lot of things that are right as well). It is imperative that we continue to be serious about getting education into the conversation and we can see that many educators out there are getting frustrated with the feeling that we are always taking steps backwards in the area of public relations. The conversation and theory though is not enough. There are many schools out there that are doing amazing things with their learning and are sharing it with the world. Using terms like “collaboration” may be cool, but what does it mean in a school setting? More importantly, what does it look like in action?
Last night working with my brother on a Google Doc (his favourite thing ever), he marvelled at how amazing and easy it was to just work together either in synchronous or asynchronous time. Now does that story move education forward? Probably not, but showing a simple video that applies to both business and education about Google Docs might help others see how what we are doing in school is really connecting to what a lot of the business world is doing, or sometimes even, we are a step ahead. How do we do this though?
Watching stories like Chris Kennedy’s Ted Talk on how students used technology to become journalists (not like journalists but actual journalists) for the Vancouver Olympics was an absolutely amazing way to show how students were not only engaged, but doing very meaningful work. Watch any of the PS22 Chorus videos (awesome version of “Rolling in the Deep” here) with anyone and see the emotion these young students invoke in anyone, whether they are educators or not. No one would have heard of them if their teacher did not share the work of these amazing kids.
This does not only show what we are doing in technology, but how we are changing the way we think of leadership. Yesterday on Connected Principals, Bo Adams shared an email that he sent to staff to truly collaborate and get their feedback. He could have simply talked about it, but he actually posted the email. It is examples like this, that others take and build upon, that will first and foremost help schools move forward, and then the “public” will see how many educators are really getting it right for the sake of our students, not just looking for an easy way to do things.
I hate to say it, but data and statistics are boring. It definitely has a purpose in moving our schools forward but connecting it with the stories and examples that are shared is what will push things forward. Chip Heath discusses this in “Made to Stick“:
This is the most important thing to remember about using statistics effectively. Statistics are rarely meaningful in and of themselves. Statistics will, and should, almost always be used to illustrate a relationship. It’s more important for people to remember the relationship than the number. (Heath, 2007)
This post is not a slight in any way to Eric, but more to discuss the frustration that many educators are feeling right now with bad press and public backlash. Eric has shared some amazing examples of learning, such as this project his students did regarding the Holocaust:
Technology now allows the students and staff at NMHS to share in the authentic learning experiences taking place in Europe (Germany, Poland, Czech Republic). Last year, we launched a blog where the students in Europe chronicled and reflected on essential questions, focusing on a dark time in human history. Meanwhile, students and staff back on the campus of NMHS are using the blog as a catalyst for a variety of other learning experiences. Some teachers even have their students respond to the posts each day…Skype has also brought a whole new element to the program. Prior to the trip, students Skyped numerous times with their guide who resides in Israel. This year we even Skyped in a Holocaust survivor to our elective course on the topic.
That is not only engaged learning, but it is learning that is better and different from the way I could have done it when I was in school. We want the statement to move from, ‘That’s how it was when I was a student’ to, ‘I wish I would have done that when I was in school!’
As long as educators keep doing amazing things and sharing those stories of authentic and deep learning, schools, and ultimately public perception, will continue to get better.
I am loving the Google Chrome videos. This Justin Bieber one is absolutely fantastic to watch as he starts a career in something he obviously loves at a very young age.
The thought that a young kid growing up in a small town, could become an international superstar by sharing YouTube videos is something that blows my mind away. Watching the PS22 chorus, seeing their growth, and their absolute enthusiasm for what they do, shows how audience really does matter, not only to the concept of engagement, but also opportunity.
Growing up in a small town in Humboldt, Saskatchewan, with a population barely above 5000, many of us felt passed over by “city kids” for opportunities. It always seemed that it was never a matter of your talent, but it was a matter of who you knew. Knowing someone has always been important but now many of the opportunities aren’t about who you know, but about how you connect. Kids and adults alike are creating great opportunities through the openness of the web and with some creativity, are doing some amazing things. Social media has the opportunity to wipe away the isolation of the “small town” and allows the best ideas and talents to be connected throughout the world.
Connection is becoming more important (and easier than) ever. Nice to think that our students will have way more opportunities than we ever did; we just have to help them find a safe and secure way to do this.
After spending the last two years at Forest Green School and Connections for Learning as principal, I learned an amazing amount both through my success and failures. The idea of Connected Principals is to share our learning openly with other administrators and educators so we can not only better ourselves, but these lessons will help others move forward in their roles. I would be remiss to not share some of the things that I learned from my time at an amazing school with an highly dedicated group of professionals.
Here goes…
My learning curve was huge in the last two years and I did my best to not only serve our school community, but to continuously push it forward. With that being said, I truly immersed myself in the learning and I would not trade the last two years of my life for anything.
I would love to hear your thoughts on anything I wrote or that you have learned in your roles at your school.
