Plans and Actions #NETP2016.

For the last year and a half I have been extremely fortunate to work for the Redmond School District. It has been empowering to work with so many caring and dedicated individuals that have our students learning and growth at the heart of everything they do. I consider myself extremely fortunate to be part of such a team.
Earlier last year I found myself in a similar situation, but on a relatively larger stage. I was approached by the Office of Educational Technology (OET) from the Department of Education in Washington, D.C. to be part of a technical working group that would provide insight and experience in a collaborative effort to help revise the National Education Technology Plan (originally released in 2010). The team included leading educators, technology innovators, and researchers from across the country. It was an eclectic bunch. While many of us were educators by profession, some came from other industries and professional backgrounds. It was a humbling experience to work with so many dedicated to the improvement and progress of education in our nation.
The bulk of the work was completed by OET and partners at the American Institutes for Research (AIR). Their relentless effort and selfless dedication paid off late 2015 when the Department of Education announced the 2016 plan, Future Ready Learning: Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education.
I belive in this plan. I believe in the work behind it, and I believe in the work ahead of us that the NETP will help guide.
Despite having worked on the plan over the course of 2015, I am still learning from it. As I continue to work through the NETP, I hope to share Redmond’s experiences along the way. And I hope many of you will do the same.

"The National Education Technology Plan is the flagship educational technology policy document for the United States. The 2016 Plan, Future Ready Learning: Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education, articulates a vision of equity, active use, and collaborative leadership to make everywhere, all-the-time learning possible. While acknowledging the continuing need to provide greater equity of access to technology itself, the plan goes further to call upon all involved in American education to ensure equity of access to transformational learning experiences enabled by technology."
The NETP touches on five key areas that must be addressed if we are to truly support student learning in today’s world. While this plan is written (and even titled) with a focus on technology, Learning is at its core.
We once lived in a society, in a world, where “learning" — and by this I primarily mean content — was scarce. The knowledge and information was typically found in libraries and educational institutions. This knowledge was served and consumed in these spaces. With the advent of the information age and the rise of the Internet, such knowledge and “learning" became more and more accessible. We are at the point now where knowledge is an easily accessible commodity, and most of us care around that access in our pockets.
But content knowledge is only the first level of Learning that we need to be focusing on. The NETP does a good job of addressing the need to look beyond such low hanging fruit and begins to hone in on the other facets that make up Learning — such as agency, non-cognitive competencies, and soft skills that are necessary for all learners to find success in and out of school.
I’m not going to dive into the examples or suggestions that the NETP offers. You can begin to read about them here, for yourself. I do, however, want to mention one last piece of the NETP that I feel makes it so great. The NETP’s focus is on technology and transforming learning, but its goal is to do this while providing greater equity and accessibility. We must provide all students with access to greater educational opportunities that help close gaps and remove barriers. Technology cannot do this alone. It takes the human element to make this happen.

Schooled 2

I’m a believer (to a degree) that you get out of life or school or your job or a movie or a cheeseburger what you put into it. While I haven’t enjoyed my current online learning experience, I also haven’t made much of an effort to make it any more meaningful.

I found myself last week upset because I was given 3.75/4 on that week’s discussion. Apparently I didn’t use enough of that week’s reading in my original post — which in my mind is the professor’s way of assessing whether or not we did that week’s reading. I guess I deserved the mark because (1) I didn’t include a lot of the reading in my post, and (2) I didn’t do all my reading. What bothered me the most about the loss of a quarter of a point was that fact that I got worked up about losing a quarter of a point.

I had got sucked back into the game. I thought I was over it. Finishing high school for me was like finishing a game of Jumanji. Despite being a good student I had realized that it was a game and that in order to survive I had to play the game until it was over. But like Bonnie Hunt’s character in the movie Jumanji, I found myself sucked back into the game that I thought I had escaped so many years ago.

Anyway…back to my opener. So this week I made sure to read, but also start a thread that moved the conversation in a direction that was less expected. While my comments this week were very typical of the mandatory “comment on at least two other threads" comments, I’m hoping that I can get a few others to start pushing each other’s thinking.

We’ll see how it goes.

Schooled 1

I was challenged recently to write about “going back to school." I don’t have a lot of time to write. So the challenge was then to keep each post to 200 words. Not only am I not brief in my thoughts, the word succinct induces sharp pains in my neck.

The whole point of this is to reflect — to reflect on being back in the system as a student — to reflect on what I preach as an educator (or “educational technologist") — and to reflect on how I can bring both of those perspectives into one of growth and improvement as an individual learner, and in a broader sense, and as educational system.

So I’ll give it a try.

I am currently in my second semester of my Initial Administrative License (IAL) program. I chose just the license route because I didn’t want to go through another masters program. The program is all online at this point. For so many of us edtechies, this is the answer, right?

Unfortunately this is my second experience with online learning (I “earned" my masters degree online), and I haven’t enjoyed either one.

Does “enjoying" the experience matter? School is school, right?

Miami Device

Reacting to reactions

We all do this. We react to another’s reactions. We often react just as dramatically or irrationally as the reaction we are reacting to.

Yesterday, KCCI News reported on an Ames Community School District’s decision to shut down chat and video messaging within their Google Apps domain. And this was my immediate reaction.

If you read through the comments in my Facebook post, you’ll see that my reaction seems validated by some of the comments. I felt disgruntled by the news and sought to advocate for student rights! Yeah. Not so much. Then stepped in Mrs. “I’m going to be the adult here," or as her friends call her Rachel. She had a valid point. Our discussion surrounding this issue in Ames continued on through the morning. I decided that I wasn’t going to back down. In fact, I leaned in. Regardless of what reasonable explanations she approached me with, I turned it back around on the district. As the conversation came to a momentary conclusion, I realized that my issue wasn’t so much with the school district, or their decision even, but with how it was reported. If you go back and watch the video, it all seems a bit over dramatic and slightly staged. I’m not even sure why this would be news, let alone make the evening news. There are WAY too many details that aren’t explained here: Was the bullying and inappropriate behaviors wide-spread or isolated to a small group? Were the instigators and perpetuators of these behaviors identified? What additional digital citizenship curriculum has or hasn’t been provided to the teachers and middle schoolers? Did teachers receive any significant professional development on purposeful integration and classroom management strategies? Were teachers even using these in the classroom? And so on.

I don’t see this as a Chromebook problem. I see this as a behavioral problem and a teacher-readiness problem.

The Behavioral Problem
Bullying, sharing of sexually explicit images and content, inappropriate language, and the perpetuation of these acts are all behaviors. In fact, they are all behaviors that exist with or without technology. Technology has the power to amplify what we do. In this case it amplified a group of middle schoolers' propensity to show their age, their immaturity, and act, well, like middle schoolers. Their behaviors were obviously inappropriate and most (probably safe to say all) school districts have policies surrounding these types of misconduct. And I am confident that Ames will conduct themselves appropriately while dealing with the students.

But this isn’t a technology problem. Bullying is bullying; on or offline. Yes, as I mentioned before, it’s effects and extent are amplified by technology — but it is still bullying. To me, the news broadcast was about singling out the technology that led the students to do bad things.

Teacher-Readiness Problem
Were the teachers ready for something like this? Have they been reinforcing digital citizenship and appropriate online behaviors since the initial open-house in August? I don’t know. The teacher who took center stage to declare that the Chromebooks were "distracting them from staying focused in the class" sure didn’t seem ready (at least not for a distraction). To me, distraction is distraction is distraction. Distractions have and will always exist. Mobile devices and computers are just the latest iteration of distraction (for young and old). I would like to know how much professional development was provided to teachers prior to students getting their devices. And, if PD was provided, how much actually focused on instructional and learning strategies as opposed to how-tos and trouble-shooting? While both would be great for teachers, if there is no practical connection to instructional practices and student learning, the devices will remain a distraction — especially in classrooms where they aren’t being used regularly or appropriately (appropriately could be replaced with effectively, purposefully, relevantly, among other things).

And I’m not blaming the teachers. My concern is with what preparations were made to support teachers with such a transition.

All that said, I’m not sure I can say that I would have reacted differently. In fact, looking back, I think Ames’s reaction was measured and appropriate. The article even states that this may be just a temporary suspension of chat and video functions. They didn’t take away all of the devices; they didn’t suspend all of the student accounts; they didn’t blame the technology. Ames (hopefully) has only momentarily turned off the chat features to take a better look at how students are and should be using that particular tool, not necessarily the entire device.

I’m in a role now that shouldn’t be governed by knee-jerk reactions or judgmental overreactions. I have to be in the details to better understand the big picture. I don’t know all of the details here and I probably misreacted (I just made that word up) to the bigger picture. I actually hope to speak with Ames in the near future to discuss this situation and their course of action. This is a bigger deal than just one small school district in Iowa. These behaviors are happening all over the country (on and offline) and our teachers aren’t provided with the time and professional development they need to make these big changes in their classrooms.

What would you have done?