"It is perfectly normal, in this day and age, for a person to use social media to spread doctrine with no factual basis, without checking for any form of historical record, and with the attachment of the name of a notable figure to give the statement credence; this form of ignorance is both an inalienable right of humanity and the foundation on which our great country formed."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The trouble with quotes on the Internet is that you never know if they are genuine."
- Abraham Lincoln
"The greatest thing about Facebook, is that you can quote something and totally make up the source." - George Washington
"When in doubt, attribute quotes to Mark Twain."
- Samuel Clemens
"The fabrication of Oscar Wilde quotes is among the noblest of endeavors."
- Oscar Wilde
I have to admit I stole this idea from someone's Facebook post. But I liked it too much to walk away from.
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
The future of Tablets: iPad vs Surface
 |
| iPad 3 |
 |
| iPad 2 |
I'll admit that I was a little disappointed that this meant that I'd be diving into a Microsoft product instead of an Apple product. Generally speaking the price point of Apple products have been the major deterrent for me engaging with them on a personal level. MacBooks tend to run around $1000 while fully functional PCs laptops are half that. However, when it comes to tablets, a refurbished iPad 2 runs $319, new at $399. The iPad 3 and the Surface run approximately the same price somewhere around the $700 range. When it comes to having a simple device that works well, that has always been Apple's strong point. It is when trying to get powerful performance and flexibility that Apples have lacked.
Surface RT
So I started to look into the Surface. The current Surface RT proved quite an interesting device. It contains a pared down version of Windows 8 and comes default with a the basic version of Office which includes Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. This deals with one of the biggest struggles of mobile devices, having the common programs that people are used to using. The iPad charges $10 each for their equivalent versions iWorks programs Pages, Numbers, and Keynote. Not that the $30 couldn't just be rolled into the machine, but the idea that to get true functionality out of the device I need to buy a couple of basic programs that Microsoft is giving me for free is just somewhat annoying.
 |
| Surface RT |
Surface Pro
In January Microsoft is releasing the Surface Pro which, unlike the name suggests, isn't really just an upgraded version of the Surface RT. The Pro will come with a full version of Windows 8. That doesn't sound very impressive until you start to delve into it a bit. A full version of Windows 8 makes this less of a tablet and more of a full laptop as far as functionality goes. It doesn't have a mobile processor, it's got a full Intel chip. Perhaps the most important feature of the whole show is also the simplest. It's got a USB port.
The combination of a 3.0 USB port and a full version of Windows 8 is what really makes this device shine for me. A single USB port is enough to plug into a Targus Docking Station. This means a Surface Pro is the tablet when I'm traveling, and a computer when I'm at my desk. The idea of this is very intreaguing. It reminds me of a home inspector that I hired at one point that had a laptop with a screen he could flip around into a touch style device. His was a 5 lb laptop; this is a 2 lb tablet. The touch laptops of old never really did it for anyone because they weren't ergonomically designed tablets. The ability to easily plug into a station through a USB plug means for teachers they could move from their desk with the device quickly and easily. They've still got a functioning tablet for meetings and roaming, and it's a single plug to reconnect to the projector and keyboard. This might work.There is a few odd things with the Surface Pro. First off, while the RT comes with the limited version of office similar to Office Home or Student versions, the Pro doesn't ship with office installed. This isn't a big deal for me personally because my district has licensees, but it is odd. Second you're looking at a 64gb internal solid state drive. I like solid state, but 64gb concerns me for a laptop. By the time windows, office, and a few other basic software things are installed it doesn't have much room for media. Also the $899 doesn't come with the keyboard which I think will be a vital piece of the puzzle as it works as both a screen cover and keyboard. That means you're really looking at $1K to get started. Plus you'd need a dock, and another keyboard and monitor and -- crap. That's a lot of money.
Teaching Stations
When I start looking at the whole package of what it'd take to set up a teaching station for each teacher with a Surface Pro the price gets out of hand really quick. I just ordered 2 Lenovo laptops (L430s) with docking station and carrying case for $710 each. That gives me enough extra coin compared to the $1200 (with dock) of the pro to pickup an iPad 2 (Refurbished for $319 from Apple.com) and a couple of accessories. Because the L430 is a real laptop I don't need a separate keyboard. and monitor and such, though I'd probably use them anyway. It's got a full 320gb storage, dvd drive, and all the necessary hookups already on it. It's a tough sell to get it all in one for more than I'm paying for it separate.
While the idea of an all in one I'm not sure if the price tag is worth it, yet. I feel that eventually we'll be looking at tablets replacing laptops and using a good dock as a working station. Laptops have already basically replaced desktops in most light business applications, and if they haven't it is simply because people haven't bought one in the past three or four years. I'm curious to see how Apple responds to this. For the first time we see Microsoft taking a step ahead and making the OS on a new device better than the competitions. Apple needs to respond with a full iOS version of an iPad.The Future
What I'm hoping to see in the future is the combination of all of these things into a cell phone that you can plug into your tablet, or into your computing docking station. Solid state drives are becoming more powerful and will eventually replace moving parts drives altogether. Eventually we'll just be carrying around the very core of what we need with us and just need to plug it into the format we want to work.
As it is I'm very curious to get my hands on a Surface Pro to see if it really lives up to expectations. While it might not be the answer today, it is a first generation machine. In two years, we should expect to see major changes in the tablet arena. The iPad 2 is still a fully viable tablet at under $400 and it is only a year and a half old. The Surface Pro might find some similar drift towards affordability on a mass deployment level. I could see paying an additional $100 or $200 to get a tablet over a laptop, but for now the additional cost of a new iPad 3 over the laptop equivalent is a bit high out of pocket for a really good idea.Thursday, November 8, 2012
SmartBoards as essential teaching tools?
This topic came out of a discussion with the elementary teachers in my school about wanting SmartBoards in their classrooms. I want to point out that I'm not intending to specifically respond to them. I've realized I feel a specific resistance towards SmartBoards in myself that I want to explore in this post. I hope no one feels attacked. Also, I use the term SmartBoards even though there are a number of other companies that make devices that compete with Smart Technologies. Much like Kleenex, and even more so in technology, we tend to attach ourselves to whatever came along first. If you don't believe me open a word processing document and look at what the save icon is. That's a floppy disk. Now try to think of the last time you used a floppy disk -- no, that was a zip drive -- there you go.
Secondly, I want to be sure that everyone who reads this knows that I'm not arguing against using the SmartBoard in your classroom. If you have one, use it. I'd rather have one than not, and there are thousands of uses for them. This article is to discuss if having a SmartBoard in every classroom should be considered necessary technology in the same way that a whiteboard or chalkboard is commonly found in every room.
I, along with most teachers I know, use the computer and projector every day. Speakers are frequently used and are easily worth adding considering their low cost. The whiteboard has definitely become industry standard; there are still some teachers that use blackboards and to some degree the white board becomes more of a static fixture in a room with a SmartBoard. The extra monitor I find incredibly useful with the projector as I use the spare to show what is on the screen behind me running an extended desktop rather than just showing what is on my screen to the world. It allows me to have my grade book, email and other more sensitive files open on my computer without having to worry about accidentally showing it off to my students. Plus the additional screen space when trying to create presentations and pull information from the web prevents me from having to flip back and forth between multiple windows as often. I could live without the extra monitor, but with cheap monitors running around $100 it seems to good a deal not to buy.
When I had a SmartBoard in my room during my student teaching and last year, I used it every day. I only used the whiteboard for random breakouts during math and to post the weekly homework for everyone to see. Almost all classwork, entry task assignments, and corrections were done with use of the SmartBoard and projector. There were other teachers that used the SmartBoard for a number of purposes that I'll discuss later on here. Needless to say, they were used, heavily. The question I'm curious about is if they're worth the cost. Not if they serve a purpose.
Looking at the cost we see that the current range for interactive white boards is between $1000 and $4000. I've seen a few conference sessions about making your own using a Wii which could significantly decrease the cost. While practical on an individual level this isn't the sort of decision that is going to be employed across a district. Additionally to the fees for buying the board is the cost of mounting both it and the projector. While the projector is necessary technology mounting it isn't necessary, even if it is best practice. So we should probably assume in the $2500 range for this piece of technology in order to get it a significant size, assuming that the teacher has all the other equipment to make use of it. Sizes of up to 94 inches are available but the cost also increases significantly.
Newer boards are getting to the point where multiple touches are standard allowing for multiple students to use the device at once. One problem I encountered was having multiple students work on the space at the same time.
Size is becoming less of an issue. 77in seems to be the new standard which does meet the needs of most classrooms. My own projector is currently running at 68in diagonal and is meeting my needs just fine. Some of the earlier versions sat at 48in (they're still available) which ends up being horribly small for most classroom uses. Boards this size are still useful for conference room type settings but they don't really function in a classroom.
One other advantage is that you can use the screen as a giant iPad. I've seen teachers use this for organizing games, students taking their own attendance, or several other uses. It allows anyone access to come up and manipulate what's on the screen without having to get access to the teacher's computer. I've utilized this both as a large interactive whiteboard as well as putting online worksheets on the board and I can write on the directly.
One of the biggest features of an interactive whiteboard really isn't that valuable in most classrooms. The ability to save work on the board. This was described to me as highly valuable in engineering scenarios where people are doing a long series of design type work and want to share and keep the results. In my math classroom it hasn't been necessary. I've used it for lists in language arts but this was more for dramatic effect than to actually save the specific work done. It does allow you to quickly copy down what is on the board and move on to a fresh screen. You can move on without actually erasing anything. This means earlier problems can be brought back up in the same session. This is valuable, though not vital.
I feel that the full picture of uses hasn't been fully developed for interactive whiteboards but the technology is quickly being eclipsed by tablets. If information can be pushed to student tablets they gain all the touch functionality that you would have with the screen at their desk. I'm sure there are all kinds of creative things that can be done with touch screens but I don't feel that realistically most teachers will optimize their usage.
Bearing the $2500 price tag is really a big deterrent to bringing Smartboards into every classroom in my opinion. With the current price of tablets reaching down into the $200 range, paying the price of 10 tablets to outfit a classroom with a piece of technology with no mandatory uses feels like a significant waste of money to me. The Smartboard from 3 classrooms could give an entire set of tablets to one classroom.
While it definitely does cool stuff I don't see enough practical uses in most classrooms. Perhaps in a college science setting or maybe even advanced high school math there are some reasons why people should have one. But overall I feel that this is more of a want from people than a need. In a classroom a Smartboard is a big shiny. It's something that stands out as cool and fun. But it just doesn't bring with it the educational bang for its buck that makes it a necessary investment for schools.
Secondly, I want to be sure that everyone who reads this knows that I'm not arguing against using the SmartBoard in your classroom. If you have one, use it. I'd rather have one than not, and there are thousands of uses for them. This article is to discuss if having a SmartBoard in every classroom should be considered necessary technology in the same way that a whiteboard or chalkboard is commonly found in every room.
What you find in a teaching station
When you walk into a classroom what do you expect to find? There will be desks or tables, chairs for the students. Usually you'll find a teacher's desk of some sort, storage for supplies. The teaching station is specifically the area around some sort of desk or podium on which technology resides. My current teaching station is comprised of a laptop, extra monitor, projector, speakers, and a whiteboard. I have a pull down screen but I'd rather just project directly on the whiteboard. Last year this also included a microphone, built in speakers, scanner, keyboard and mouse, computer dock, student clickers, and a SmartBoard. |
| Teaching station at University of San Francisco |
The SmartBoard Question
When I had a SmartBoard in my room during my student teaching and last year, I used it every day. I only used the whiteboard for random breakouts during math and to post the weekly homework for everyone to see. Almost all classwork, entry task assignments, and corrections were done with use of the SmartBoard and projector. There were other teachers that used the SmartBoard for a number of purposes that I'll discuss later on here. Needless to say, they were used, heavily. The question I'm curious about is if they're worth the cost. Not if they serve a purpose.Looking at the cost we see that the current range for interactive white boards is between $1000 and $4000. I've seen a few conference sessions about making your own using a Wii which could significantly decrease the cost. While practical on an individual level this isn't the sort of decision that is going to be employed across a district. Additionally to the fees for buying the board is the cost of mounting both it and the projector. While the projector is necessary technology mounting it isn't necessary, even if it is best practice. So we should probably assume in the $2500 range for this piece of technology in order to get it a significant size, assuming that the teacher has all the other equipment to make use of it. Sizes of up to 94 inches are available but the cost also increases significantly.
The Issues
Unlike a projector screen (or as I'm currently doing just projecting on a white board) there isn't much flexibility once the smart board is in place. While a mounted projector can be turned off and the board used for other purposes, the interactive white board takes up prime classroom real estate all the time. It goes front and center. While I've used a smart board on wheels that could be rolled around the continual need for adjustment really makes this not worth it. The dead center of your teaching pallet is basically reserved for the machine. While this isn't a massive issue all the time it can be frustrating when you want to draw a timeline across your entire white board.Newer boards are getting to the point where multiple touches are standard allowing for multiple students to use the device at once. One problem I encountered was having multiple students work on the space at the same time.
Size is becoming less of an issue. 77in seems to be the new standard which does meet the needs of most classrooms. My own projector is currently running at 68in diagonal and is meeting my needs just fine. Some of the earlier versions sat at 48in (they're still available) which ends up being horribly small for most classroom uses. Boards this size are still useful for conference room type settings but they don't really function in a classroom.
The Uses
There is a handful of specific uses that you can do with a smartboard that you can't pull off with just a projector. The first one is easy display of functioning websites. A presenter doesn't need to go back to a computer to forward slides or click on webpages. While a clicker does perform several of these functions, the ability to easily click on hyperlinks has significant value. |
| Smart Technologies |
One of the biggest features of an interactive whiteboard really isn't that valuable in most classrooms. The ability to save work on the board. This was described to me as highly valuable in engineering scenarios where people are doing a long series of design type work and want to share and keep the results. In my math classroom it hasn't been necessary. I've used it for lists in language arts but this was more for dramatic effect than to actually save the specific work done. It does allow you to quickly copy down what is on the board and move on to a fresh screen. You can move on without actually erasing anything. This means earlier problems can be brought back up in the same session. This is valuable, though not vital.
I feel that the full picture of uses hasn't been fully developed for interactive whiteboards but the technology is quickly being eclipsed by tablets. If information can be pushed to student tablets they gain all the touch functionality that you would have with the screen at their desk. I'm sure there are all kinds of creative things that can be done with touch screens but I don't feel that realistically most teachers will optimize their usage.
Cost Benefit Analysis
 |
| Apple iPad |
While it definitely does cool stuff I don't see enough practical uses in most classrooms. Perhaps in a college science setting or maybe even advanced high school math there are some reasons why people should have one. But overall I feel that this is more of a want from people than a need. In a classroom a Smartboard is a big shiny. It's something that stands out as cool and fun. But it just doesn't bring with it the educational bang for its buck that makes it a necessary investment for schools.
3D Game Lab, First Update
As part of the teacher camp for 3D Game Lab they want us to note down things in a journal or blog of some sort. Rather than use their internal tool I'll share things here.
First off upon getting in you have the ability to easily pick the starter quest. Completing it leads you to 4 new options. I'm not entirely sure that the titles picked by the creators were as good as possible for these quests as I didn't want to click on one because it seemed to exist only for the purpose of making a report of an issue. Actually it was a required quest that showed me how to make a report. Important lesson, name your quests well.
I also very quickly found that I wanted to earn more XP. I simply couldn't help it. One more quest, this one is worth 25 xp. That bar could get more filled -- I got a rank up -- I have more quests available, I should look at them before I log off -- maybe I'll just do this one -- or two. Now I'm a big fan of learning so maybe this is personal and won't be as present in my students. But the simple fact that I can see my work increasing a score makes me want to get a few more points.
From a teaching and learning perspective this is fairly revolutionary. Students are generally given a task that may or may not be graded. If they do well, they are rewarded with a good grade. If they do poorly, they are punished with a bad grade. That's the end of the story. Perhaps a teacher will give students the chance to return to their work to try to improve their grade. But these are generally only awarded to students with significantly inferior scores. The student with a B that will keep working until they get an A is generally left in the dust.
Here suddenly we can go beyond this model and actually hold all students to a higher standard. It's not done until it's A work. But you can keep on working on it until it gets there. It becomes a great way to always be moving forward without the millstone of previous failures. If learning is about making mistakes, why doesn't everyone get the chance to try again.
Monday, October 22, 2012
What's a Tech Teacher to do: Pirated Software
I ran into a very interesting struggle as I was working with my Juniors. I wanted to see if anyone could successfully log into the Minecraft server I had set up so I asked them who had a copy of Minecraft. About half a dozen hands shot up. So I asked if one of them could log into my server. One student stopped to ask if he needed a legal copy of Minecraft to log in. When I told the class that the server was an account verified server suddenly there wasn't anyone able with an account that could log in.
Interesting factoid #1: 1/3 of my students have a copy of Minecraft. None of them have paid for it. I then found myself having to ask my other classes if anyone had a "legal" copy of Minecraft. Surprisingly enough, it was the 6th graders who had a number of students (3) with actual legal accounts.
Interesting factoid #2: The most common response I got to my question about a legal copy was "oh, no, mine's not legal". Students were open and ready to admit that their software was acquired through less than savory channels. The simple fact that I had to ask about a legal copy indicates an interesting posture on the use of pirated software.
Teaching with Regards to Pirating
So where does this leave us as teachers of technology. I can't be the teacher who ignorantly preaches total opposition alcohol while going home to drink a glass of wine. I can't just say it's bad don't do it. I also can't really discuss the legal implications of taking this action. Students already know their actions are illegal, it is evident in their language. Realistically teaching the about the punishment if they're caught won't really work either as the chances of an individual getting busted for pirating software is incredibly low.
So what can I teach? In the end I'm forced to view pirating software much like speeding. It's possible to get busted for it, but that's not where the real danger lies. The issue with speeding is that it is dangerous. This doesn't mean that people don't speed. It means that they need to understand what it means to speed, how much danger it puts them in, and how to react when something does wrong. Most of us would barely call speeding illegal. It is more of something we could get in trouble for but is totally okay to do.
There are a few very valuable lessons that can be taught surrounding pirated software that go beyond "it's bad, mmkay?". This is necessary primarily because attempting to oppose pirating on a purely moral basis simply won't work. Speeding is illegal because it puts others in danger and ourselves. We know this, but that alone doesn't change the behavior.
The Teaching Points on Pirated Software
The dangers of pirated software come from an understanding of working with people that are operating outside of the law. Much like the dangers of druggies and drug dealers. These are people that are willing to act outside of the law with regards to how they make a living. If someone is willing to evade police in order to sell drugs, they're probably willing to rip you off or steal money from you. You can't exactly report to the police that you were scammed trying to buy drugs. Similar things exist in the realm of pirated software.
Someone who is interested in cracking software to make it publicly available may not be doing so for purely altruistic means. When you're not getting software directly from a trusted manufacturer you don't know what has been altered or imbedded in the installation files. Viruses, spyware, and other possible infections are fairly common among pirated files. Even if you find a file that looks like it is from a trusted pirate source, you don't know if someone has simply repackaged it to include a virus. However, these aren't the only dangers.
I'm constantly reminding my students that we are on a publicly owned network. The school is publicly owned and students need to behave appropriately with its resources. The same may apply in future business situations. Students simply can't use the school network for illegal purposes. When something goes out to BitComet I get a report back and have to deal with it. Simply being aware of who has access to your network information may play a significant role in understanding the dangers of pursuing illegal activity. Especially since your home IP knows every website you've been to, every search you've made, and every file you've downloaded. The information is recorded that you have been doing something illegal. At school you might lose access to the network. At home, we don't know what the long term implications will be, but your information there simply isn't exclusively private.
The final teaching point is the danger of using pirated software for business. While downloading a game and playing it at home poses minimal risk, creating media with illegal software can be catastrophic for a business. Personal use is a difficult thing to nail down. But a company that makes a product using illegal software is open up to much more liability than an individual using something illegally. This is why it is incredibly important that legal enterprises have legal copies of the software they are using.
Conclusion
I feel that reasonable tech people can't simply teach that pirating software is wrong. This kind of moral teaching just won't go far enough to reach students. In a similar way we can't simply teach students that violence is wrong, sex is wrong and name calling is wrong. Each of these things have their place in the world. The important piece is to teach students to understand the dangers and consequences of these things. With this understanding they can find their own place in the world, rather than trying to fall into a proscribed idyllic and totally hypocritical perfect student or person.
Interesting factoid #1: 1/3 of my students have a copy of Minecraft. None of them have paid for it. I then found myself having to ask my other classes if anyone had a "legal" copy of Minecraft. Surprisingly enough, it was the 6th graders who had a number of students (3) with actual legal accounts.
Interesting factoid #2: The most common response I got to my question about a legal copy was "oh, no, mine's not legal". Students were open and ready to admit that their software was acquired through less than savory channels. The simple fact that I had to ask about a legal copy indicates an interesting posture on the use of pirated software.
Teaching with Regards to Pirating
So where does this leave us as teachers of technology. I can't be the teacher who ignorantly preaches total opposition alcohol while going home to drink a glass of wine. I can't just say it's bad don't do it. I also can't really discuss the legal implications of taking this action. Students already know their actions are illegal, it is evident in their language. Realistically teaching the about the punishment if they're caught won't really work either as the chances of an individual getting busted for pirating software is incredibly low.
So what can I teach? In the end I'm forced to view pirating software much like speeding. It's possible to get busted for it, but that's not where the real danger lies. The issue with speeding is that it is dangerous. This doesn't mean that people don't speed. It means that they need to understand what it means to speed, how much danger it puts them in, and how to react when something does wrong. Most of us would barely call speeding illegal. It is more of something we could get in trouble for but is totally okay to do.
There are a few very valuable lessons that can be taught surrounding pirated software that go beyond "it's bad, mmkay?". This is necessary primarily because attempting to oppose pirating on a purely moral basis simply won't work. Speeding is illegal because it puts others in danger and ourselves. We know this, but that alone doesn't change the behavior.
The Teaching Points on Pirated Software
The dangers of pirated software come from an understanding of working with people that are operating outside of the law. Much like the dangers of druggies and drug dealers. These are people that are willing to act outside of the law with regards to how they make a living. If someone is willing to evade police in order to sell drugs, they're probably willing to rip you off or steal money from you. You can't exactly report to the police that you were scammed trying to buy drugs. Similar things exist in the realm of pirated software.
Someone who is interested in cracking software to make it publicly available may not be doing so for purely altruistic means. When you're not getting software directly from a trusted manufacturer you don't know what has been altered or imbedded in the installation files. Viruses, spyware, and other possible infections are fairly common among pirated files. Even if you find a file that looks like it is from a trusted pirate source, you don't know if someone has simply repackaged it to include a virus. However, these aren't the only dangers.
I'm constantly reminding my students that we are on a publicly owned network. The school is publicly owned and students need to behave appropriately with its resources. The same may apply in future business situations. Students simply can't use the school network for illegal purposes. When something goes out to BitComet I get a report back and have to deal with it. Simply being aware of who has access to your network information may play a significant role in understanding the dangers of pursuing illegal activity. Especially since your home IP knows every website you've been to, every search you've made, and every file you've downloaded. The information is recorded that you have been doing something illegal. At school you might lose access to the network. At home, we don't know what the long term implications will be, but your information there simply isn't exclusively private.
The final teaching point is the danger of using pirated software for business. While downloading a game and playing it at home poses minimal risk, creating media with illegal software can be catastrophic for a business. Personal use is a difficult thing to nail down. But a company that makes a product using illegal software is open up to much more liability than an individual using something illegally. This is why it is incredibly important that legal enterprises have legal copies of the software they are using.
Conclusion
I feel that reasonable tech people can't simply teach that pirating software is wrong. This kind of moral teaching just won't go far enough to reach students. In a similar way we can't simply teach students that violence is wrong, sex is wrong and name calling is wrong. Each of these things have their place in the world. The important piece is to teach students to understand the dangers and consequences of these things. With this understanding they can find their own place in the world, rather than trying to fall into a proscribed idyllic and totally hypocritical perfect student or person.
Sunday, August 26, 2012
The Digital Generation
With a number of recent derogatory comments appearing about the current generation on Facebook and from other sources, as well as endless commentary about what this generation means to us, I feel it is necessary for me to make my own stab at defining a generation, or two.
Having just this week added another member to the next generation I feel that perhaps we're running too big of a lump as a single generation. While I never end up falling into Generation X regardless of where you draw the line, currently the lines that are drawn include both my newborn son and 4 year old daughter in my generation. While I'm not a genealogist, I'm pretty sure that my kids must be in a different generation from me. That's how family trees work right?
However, I'm forced to place myself with the generation of Digital Natives, those born into a digital age. While this clearly isn't true of all people born in 1980, I was raised with a computer in my house at age 4, one in my bedroom at age 12, and internet access in its own modified form by age 14. I didn't get a cell phone until age 23 and only picked up a smartphone a little over a year ago. But as I sat in my in-law's house last week, I was surrounded by no less that six laptops, three smartphones, and numerous other pieces of modern technology. While my own kids already have a significant leap on me, I still think of the world in primarily digital terms.
Recent reports I've heard about Generation Y, or as I'll call it the Digital Generation, have indicated a number of "disturbing" trends. First off the Digital Generation is far more likely to live with their parents than previous recent generations. With large numbers of post college graduates returning to their parents homes up to ages in the early thirties. Also, we show a distinct lack of interest in buying new cars which has sent American motor companies into a bit of a tizzy trying to unlock the huge market share that seems relatively complacent to drive their parent's old cars or other used vehicles. Also, the immediacy of home ownership seems to generally be absent. I happen to be among the very few of my friends that actually own a home, even though I'm currently renting.
Many of these concrete desires of the Baby Boomers seem to hold a much lower priority. It has been suggested that some of these problems arise from a stagnant job market, inflated home prices, and unmanageable student debt. This could have some noticeable effect but I think there's more to the Digital Generation than simply being lazy or stuck in a bad economy. Most importantly, I don't think the world is ready for us, especially in education.
While innovators have for a long time been decrying the pacifying effects of a fact based education, the Digital Generation really objects to it. While even as late as the 1980s, facts were still only found in books. Anyone who has written a report before the advent of the internet remembers the struggles of both finding and then reading a vast number of books simply to get the information readily available on wikipedia today. Today facts are in my pocket. If I want to know what year Henry VIII died I could just look it up on my phone, and have the answer in less than a minute. But really, who cares when he died?
The Digital Generation not only understands how to access this information, they're rightfully insulted by being asked the question. Much like the coffee stand questions of ole, any basic fact is available by punching a few words into my phone. If you aren't going to ask a more intelligent question than that, why should I bother answering.
The truth is that what our generation never received proper education on is the practical skills that are now being demanded of us in the job market. Collaboration, project management, and problem solving are the basis of huge portions of the work that we do on a daily basis. Sociology, power dynamics, and empathy are the tools which are allowing people to climb the ladders in the work place. Artistic presentation, meaningful interpretation, and presentation skills are vital to even finding our way into an interview. The only thing we need beyond that is some sort of technical expertise that reflects our interests such as a needed programming language, understanding of the workings of medical billing, or terminology specific to the construction industry. None of the above things were I taught in school for the most part. I learned more of them in Journalism, Photography, and on the playground at lunch than I did in English, Math, or Science class.
Having just this week added another member to the next generation I feel that perhaps we're running too big of a lump as a single generation. While I never end up falling into Generation X regardless of where you draw the line, currently the lines that are drawn include both my newborn son and 4 year old daughter in my generation. While I'm not a genealogist, I'm pretty sure that my kids must be in a different generation from me. That's how family trees work right?
However, I'm forced to place myself with the generation of Digital Natives, those born into a digital age. While this clearly isn't true of all people born in 1980, I was raised with a computer in my house at age 4, one in my bedroom at age 12, and internet access in its own modified form by age 14. I didn't get a cell phone until age 23 and only picked up a smartphone a little over a year ago. But as I sat in my in-law's house last week, I was surrounded by no less that six laptops, three smartphones, and numerous other pieces of modern technology. While my own kids already have a significant leap on me, I still think of the world in primarily digital terms.
Recent reports I've heard about Generation Y, or as I'll call it the Digital Generation, have indicated a number of "disturbing" trends. First off the Digital Generation is far more likely to live with their parents than previous recent generations. With large numbers of post college graduates returning to their parents homes up to ages in the early thirties. Also, we show a distinct lack of interest in buying new cars which has sent American motor companies into a bit of a tizzy trying to unlock the huge market share that seems relatively complacent to drive their parent's old cars or other used vehicles. Also, the immediacy of home ownership seems to generally be absent. I happen to be among the very few of my friends that actually own a home, even though I'm currently renting.
Many of these concrete desires of the Baby Boomers seem to hold a much lower priority. It has been suggested that some of these problems arise from a stagnant job market, inflated home prices, and unmanageable student debt. This could have some noticeable effect but I think there's more to the Digital Generation than simply being lazy or stuck in a bad economy. Most importantly, I don't think the world is ready for us, especially in education.
While innovators have for a long time been decrying the pacifying effects of a fact based education, the Digital Generation really objects to it. While even as late as the 1980s, facts were still only found in books. Anyone who has written a report before the advent of the internet remembers the struggles of both finding and then reading a vast number of books simply to get the information readily available on wikipedia today. Today facts are in my pocket. If I want to know what year Henry VIII died I could just look it up on my phone, and have the answer in less than a minute. But really, who cares when he died?
The Digital Generation not only understands how to access this information, they're rightfully insulted by being asked the question. Much like the coffee stand questions of ole, any basic fact is available by punching a few words into my phone. If you aren't going to ask a more intelligent question than that, why should I bother answering.
The truth is that what our generation never received proper education on is the practical skills that are now being demanded of us in the job market. Collaboration, project management, and problem solving are the basis of huge portions of the work that we do on a daily basis. Sociology, power dynamics, and empathy are the tools which are allowing people to climb the ladders in the work place. Artistic presentation, meaningful interpretation, and presentation skills are vital to even finding our way into an interview. The only thing we need beyond that is some sort of technical expertise that reflects our interests such as a needed programming language, understanding of the workings of medical billing, or terminology specific to the construction industry. None of the above things were I taught in school for the most part. I learned more of them in Journalism, Photography, and on the playground at lunch than I did in English, Math, or Science class.
Monday, July 30, 2012
Why can't school be like this all the time?
Last week was the Bainbridge Island first STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) camp. I was lucky enough to be selected as one of the teachers to participate in the inaugural edition of what is sure to become an annual camp. It was a week long day camp with students broken up into their interest area in either Science, Technology, Engineering, or Math.
There were 8 Bainbridge Island Teachers (from Sakai, Woodward, or Commodore) to support approximately 100 students. There were also 20 volunteer counselors from Bainbridge High School. Needless to say, this was an ideal learning environment.
The week progressed with each morning having a spectacular science type event followed by three one hour and twenty minute periods spent in your primary class. The entire week held a space theme and we even had a visit from a brilliant NASA astronaut, John Fabian. Students spent the week making rockets, programming robots, building solar cars and editing videos. Students were engaged, intrigued, and learning.
To get an idea of what the week was like watch the following video which was made by the students in my Technology class:
BISD STEM Camp Video 2012
This brings up the question, why isn't school like this all the time? Students are heavily engaged in critical thinking, problem solving, hands on learning, storymaking, programming, and just about everything else we'd possibly want for our future engineers and scientists. Students were using angles to calculate the height of the rocket and movement of robots. They were bringing details together to create a narrative about a specific class looking at basic story elements. They were doing 3d modeling and printing their creations to test a hypothesis. Is there really anything more we want?
There are a few things here that are possibly worth looking at. First off, what students are learning can't be tested. We have some kind of sick fascination with the belief that learning that can't be tested isn't real learning. Over the past year, I feel some of the best learning done by my students wasn't on any subject that could be tested. The most important skills aren't knowledge but social skills, confidence, and self advocacy. We can really only test knowledge. This leads into the next issue about what shows up on standardized tests and state standards.
For anyone who's read any of the Washington state standards (and leading into the Common Core standards) you'd know that these standards are actually a very good target for learning. They are aimed at broad conceptual points and include the ability to think and analyze, not simply regurgitate. However, somewhere between the standards and the curriculum, this gets lost. Again, if you can't test students to show your curriculum works, how can you sell it as successful.
But the camp was successful, students learned, and there was no test at the end. Would a test have driven more students to work harder? I doubt it. It also would have made the entire process less fun. But I'm not sure that we could guarantee the same success with 28 kids and no assistants. We had a 1 to 12 student to teacher ratio with 2 high school volunteers per 10 students. We also had a $200 budget for the week per class. I know that public education can't successfully work that way. But maybe if it was just a little more similar...
There were 8 Bainbridge Island Teachers (from Sakai, Woodward, or Commodore) to support approximately 100 students. There were also 20 volunteer counselors from Bainbridge High School. Needless to say, this was an ideal learning environment.
The week progressed with each morning having a spectacular science type event followed by three one hour and twenty minute periods spent in your primary class. The entire week held a space theme and we even had a visit from a brilliant NASA astronaut, John Fabian. Students spent the week making rockets, programming robots, building solar cars and editing videos. Students were engaged, intrigued, and learning.
To get an idea of what the week was like watch the following video which was made by the students in my Technology class:
BISD STEM Camp Video 2012
This brings up the question, why isn't school like this all the time? Students are heavily engaged in critical thinking, problem solving, hands on learning, storymaking, programming, and just about everything else we'd possibly want for our future engineers and scientists. Students were using angles to calculate the height of the rocket and movement of robots. They were bringing details together to create a narrative about a specific class looking at basic story elements. They were doing 3d modeling and printing their creations to test a hypothesis. Is there really anything more we want?
There are a few things here that are possibly worth looking at. First off, what students are learning can't be tested. We have some kind of sick fascination with the belief that learning that can't be tested isn't real learning. Over the past year, I feel some of the best learning done by my students wasn't on any subject that could be tested. The most important skills aren't knowledge but social skills, confidence, and self advocacy. We can really only test knowledge. This leads into the next issue about what shows up on standardized tests and state standards.
For anyone who's read any of the Washington state standards (and leading into the Common Core standards) you'd know that these standards are actually a very good target for learning. They are aimed at broad conceptual points and include the ability to think and analyze, not simply regurgitate. However, somewhere between the standards and the curriculum, this gets lost. Again, if you can't test students to show your curriculum works, how can you sell it as successful.
But the camp was successful, students learned, and there was no test at the end. Would a test have driven more students to work harder? I doubt it. It also would have made the entire process less fun. But I'm not sure that we could guarantee the same success with 28 kids and no assistants. We had a 1 to 12 student to teacher ratio with 2 high school volunteers per 10 students. We also had a $200 budget for the week per class. I know that public education can't successfully work that way. But maybe if it was just a little more similar...
Saturday, July 21, 2012
3D Game Lab Camp on the horizon
On top of everything else going on in my life (moving, new job, baby due in August, brother in law's wedding) I'll be embarking on designing my technology classes using 3D Game Lab for the upcoming year. This will be the basis for assignments in my three technology classes next semester. In the future I'll be updating what this looks like in practice.
For those not familiar with 3D Game Lab it is a web based program being designed by the Boise State University to track student achievement in an experience point completion based model. What this means is that a student has a number of options as far as assignments (called quests) to choose from and each will give an experience point reward upon completion. Completion of certain quests may unlock other quests and the instructor may grant certain awards (called badges) for students that deserve something special for completion of a particular assignment.
In this model student grades can be based on the experience points that students earn as well as earning certain badges. An expectation for a student may be to earn 1000 exp to get an A as well as complete 3 badges that signify content area completion. However, earning these badges will only grant 500 of the total experience required allowing students to pick which assignments they will complete to earn the remaining points. An instructor could have 3000 possible points from quests allowing students to pick a number of areas that they wish to focus in or allow them to spread out and experience a number of particular areas.
With a clear goal at the beginning of the quarter or semester, students can pace themselves to reach their necessary goals. Students can also repeat an unsuccessful quest to learn the material and show mastery. Consider how different this is from traditional education. In a traditional classroom you learn teacher selected material and then are tested to prove your knowledge. If you fail to show mastery you are punished with a bad grade and the class moves on to a new subject. If you succeed, you are rewarded with a good grade and are forced to move on to a new subject, regardless of your interest in the area you've just completed.
This very model turns education on its head. It is student directed and standards based, with clear expectations and endless options. Students are working towards a clear goal at their own pace. They can pick the assignments that fit their interests, current mood, or time available. The education is accessible at home, at school, or anywhere that there is an internet connection.
Of course this model does have its problems. First off it basically requires a 1 to 1 student/computer ratio. I happen to be fortunate that I have this option in my upcoming position, even if it is just limited to netbooks. Secondly, it assumes that quest completion is equivalent across the board. Regardless of how any one quest was completed, students are essentially awarded the same experience. While instructors have the option to send a student back to do more work on a quest before it is completed, there is something inherently different from a student who is able to complete work successfully the first time with minimal guidance, and the student that may finally complete it after submitting seven failed versions. Finally, it is still product oriented. Students are required to build something and are ultimately judged on the product rather than the process. Unfortunately, learning remains a process, not a product. I've learned tons by creating something crappy, and I've created things perfectly but didn't manage to learn anything. I'm not sure that this problem can really be successfully addressed in education, but I'm not afraid to hope it can.
I'm curious to see how this plays out in my classroom and I look forward to make additional reports. While it is clear that education is not the panacea of society, it may be that the internet is the panacea of education.
For those not familiar with 3D Game Lab it is a web based program being designed by the Boise State University to track student achievement in an experience point completion based model. What this means is that a student has a number of options as far as assignments (called quests) to choose from and each will give an experience point reward upon completion. Completion of certain quests may unlock other quests and the instructor may grant certain awards (called badges) for students that deserve something special for completion of a particular assignment.
In this model student grades can be based on the experience points that students earn as well as earning certain badges. An expectation for a student may be to earn 1000 exp to get an A as well as complete 3 badges that signify content area completion. However, earning these badges will only grant 500 of the total experience required allowing students to pick which assignments they will complete to earn the remaining points. An instructor could have 3000 possible points from quests allowing students to pick a number of areas that they wish to focus in or allow them to spread out and experience a number of particular areas.
With a clear goal at the beginning of the quarter or semester, students can pace themselves to reach their necessary goals. Students can also repeat an unsuccessful quest to learn the material and show mastery. Consider how different this is from traditional education. In a traditional classroom you learn teacher selected material and then are tested to prove your knowledge. If you fail to show mastery you are punished with a bad grade and the class moves on to a new subject. If you succeed, you are rewarded with a good grade and are forced to move on to a new subject, regardless of your interest in the area you've just completed.
This very model turns education on its head. It is student directed and standards based, with clear expectations and endless options. Students are working towards a clear goal at their own pace. They can pick the assignments that fit their interests, current mood, or time available. The education is accessible at home, at school, or anywhere that there is an internet connection.
Of course this model does have its problems. First off it basically requires a 1 to 1 student/computer ratio. I happen to be fortunate that I have this option in my upcoming position, even if it is just limited to netbooks. Secondly, it assumes that quest completion is equivalent across the board. Regardless of how any one quest was completed, students are essentially awarded the same experience. While instructors have the option to send a student back to do more work on a quest before it is completed, there is something inherently different from a student who is able to complete work successfully the first time with minimal guidance, and the student that may finally complete it after submitting seven failed versions. Finally, it is still product oriented. Students are required to build something and are ultimately judged on the product rather than the process. Unfortunately, learning remains a process, not a product. I've learned tons by creating something crappy, and I've created things perfectly but didn't manage to learn anything. I'm not sure that this problem can really be successfully addressed in education, but I'm not afraid to hope it can.
I'm curious to see how this plays out in my classroom and I look forward to make additional reports. While it is clear that education is not the panacea of society, it may be that the internet is the panacea of education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)