2009 and One-to-One

Working on a HotChalk column for January and thinking of what new things will be in store for One-to-One. So far the list includes:

• Bandwidth attention by the Obama team and others - hopefully the U.S. will move to a better place in the terms of Internet bandwidth plus access.  Let's hope WiMAX and other technologies become ubiquitous - and affordable.

• Cloud Computing/Portals - without a robust learning community/environment the potential for one-to-one is static.  

• Obama team pays serious attention to One-to-One - this is already starting as Don Knezek of ISTE asked me and several others for input in response to questions he'd received from the Obama team.

• Apple releases a tablet?  No insider (or outsider) information here, just resurfacing of rumors - and a sincere hope that Apple takes what they learned from iTouch, along with their design sense and knowledge of schools, and releases a tablet.

This is a short list - the longer and more detailed list will be on HotChalk in January.  

Sustainability and One-to-One

An email from a reader of my HotChalk column asked about paying for 1-to-1 which made me think about sustainibility.  Back in October, I'd had a great conversation with Leslie Wilson who heads up Michigan's One-to-One Institute, about paying for laptop/tablet programs as well as continuing them.  So between Leslie's ideas and survey results (see it to the right - please take it if you can) I'll be writing a column on sustainability.  (By the way, in February I'll be in Dearborn, Michigan for the One-to-One Institute, teaching in a 21st C. classroom, viewed by educators as part of a 2-day conference.  And in August Leslie and I are planning a peer conference for national leaders of One-to-One programs.  Will post URL's when they're available.)

Initial thought about sustaining - it's about more than money, but in the end it's about money.  If the program hasn't been accepted by stakeholders, and if the program is viewed as an extension or an add-on to "real curriculum" or real "tools" - it might be cut.  Especially in these complicated times with our economy.  Schools are going to feel the effects because the dominoes will be falling.  Public schools are funded by tax dollars and if people have lost their jobs and houses, they're not paying full taxes, if at all.  Independent schools will likely feel the pinch in enrollment for the same reasons.  It will be a tough act for every program at many schools which use a zero-sum budget model.  

But in corporate America, if you're working, you've got a computer.  It's a given that it's how business gets done.  It would seem that in schools where laptops is how learning gets done, laptop budgets will continue.

Cloud Computing, Google and 1-to-1

This week I joined the Google Teacher Academy in NYC along with 60 of my colleagues from around the country to learn more about using Google in the classroom, and am now a Google Certified Teacher.  This is exciting on many levels and I'm looking forward to designing presentations/workshops infused with Google tools.   The whole thing has me thinking about 1-to-1 and "cloud computing" - and how much this makes sense. 

Having your computing device with you anywhere you go is one thing - and a prime reason that 1-to-1 works - but what of your work?  It's either on your computer's hard drive or back at the school's network.  Was it synched and are you working on the latest version?  Did you collaborate with some other students and change things but someone else has the right version?  Did your computer start choking and make ominous noises and stop functioning?

Thinking back to Septembers when I would talk to 7th and 8th graders and share my hope that this would be the year that none of them lost any of their work due to failed computers and non-backed up files. After five years of making that speech to the 12, 13 and 14-year old rolling eyes, I wish I could say there was a year without lost work because it wasn't backed up - but there never was.  Diligent at first, as are we all, about dragging files to the server, by the time winter break rolled around, the slipping began.  Late fall or early winter there seemed to be at least one, maybe two, failed computers.  Sometimes through unavoidable mechanical failure, usually gravity claimed several.  "Were the files backed up?"  "No."  

But with cloud computing, the documents are backed up (provided the "cloud" is reliable) and accessible from another computer from home or school or the library.  The latest version is there, shared, and updated, even if several people are using it.  1-to-1 and its power amplified because collaboration, sharing, and backing up are the norm.  Maybe there may be fewer rolling eyes if the backup speech is eliminated, although in schools there are always other speeches.

Microsoft is now at a similar juncture to 10 years ago when they realized the Internet would be big - they are realizing cloud computing is going to be huge.  So they're developing tools for "the cloud" - so we can likely expect more players in the cloud computing arena before long.  It makes lots of sense for business and also for schools to combine remote computing with remote documents. 

WiMAX Goes Live in Baltimore

WiMAX (30 mile radius microwave based wireless) is live in Baltimore read about it in Computerworld - what does this mean for schools?  What about schools that sold their spectrum in 2006 or 2007, is it gone forever and do they now regret it?  I'll be writing a column about it soon and after conducting a few interviews.

1-to-1 and Constructivism/Cognitive Load Theory/Work from Kirschner and Sweller

Currently rereading an article by Paul A. Kirschner, John Sweller and Richard E. Clark from 2006's Educational Psychologist 41,(2) 75-86, available here which is challenging my thinking and will be part of a caveat for a chapter in 2nd edition of laptop book (publication Spring, 2009). The article is titled "Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching." That title definetly got my attention (and I'll be talking about this on EdTech Live! Sunday 8/3 at 11:30 a.m.) I have taught in a constructivist style for quite a while, and found it works well in a 1-to-1 environment, as well as with adults.

In spite of teaching in a constructivist style, I keep having concerns about constructivist approaches, having seen chaos ensue at times in my own classes and in others'. Plus having heard my daughter complain several times about teachers making them work on projects, saying, "why won't they just teach me!"

What follows is my interpretation along with quotes and references to the article. I would encourage you to read the article for your own interpretation.

The gist of the article's argument (that this instructional approach does not work) is based on how learning happens. To quote from the article: "Learning ... is defined as a change in long-term memory." (pg. 75) Meaning that when information moves from working memory, which can hold 7 or less things, into long-term memory, learning has occurred. And that this movement happens when there is a place for the information to go - when there is already some long-term memory in place already - some scaffolding in place to accept the new idea. The example of chess players being able to replicate complex moves from real games as they draw upon their experience/skill to quickly do so is given. But what then of being presented with problems for which there is no previous knowledge, no long-term memory to retrieve, no scaffolding in place? There's the rub for novice learners who have not been exposed to a concept, say the authors. And that's why instruction is key to prevent an overreliance on working memory (which can only hold a few items and which is lost when not "rehearsed") say the authors.

Additionally, the act of searching for information requires continual use of working memory, and when working memory is used for long periods it cannot be used to learn or to convert to long term memory.

The authors move next to looking at empirical examples concerning constructivism. The root of constructivism is that knowledge is constructed by learners and that learners need to construct their own learning in an instruction-sparse environment so that they discover the ideas on their own which then become their learning. The authors question here the withholding of information; traditionally constructivists give partial information allowing the learners to discover the rest of the information.

Here's the part that gives me pause and some trouble: the confusion by educators cited in the article between "teaching ... a discipline as inquiry...with the teaching of the discipline by inquiry" (p. 78) - and that the problem here is we (and our students) cannot be the researcher(s) with all the experience and background required to practice a discipline. (The part that gives me pause is that shouldn't there be some understanding of the research done by scientists? This is a real questioning of science labs done in middle schools and high schools everywhere.)

Moving to constructivist approaches a number of studies were cited supporting "direct instructional guidance" (p. 79) saying students learning purely by discovery "often become lost and frustrated, and their confusion can lead to misconceptions." (p. 79). The authors cite a study by Klahr and Nigam (2004) which found "Direct instruction involving considerable guidance, including examples, resulted in vastly more learning than discovery." (p. 79)

Another idea explored is cognitive load:

"free exploration of a highly complex environment may generate a heavy working memory load that is detrimental to learning...important in the case of novice learners who lack proper schemas to integrate the new information with their prior knowledge." (p. 80)

One antidote the authors suggest is worked examples for novice learners whereby they look over, in a guided way, how problems were solved. This works at least until the learners have a scaffold in place of long term memory and require less guidance.

This challenge to constructivism has left me reeling as an educator. I wonder about the examples used and the implementation. Leaving students unguided would not be my approach nor the approach of most of the educators I know. But does PBL, IBL, discovery learning, constructivism result in real learning that sticks? This article suggest that, at least for learners new to a concept, no, because these approaches rely too much on working memory and are based on taking the approaches used by experts and having student emulate these approaches - while leaving out the vast experience and knowledge these experts possess.

I need to see the other side more clearly - research on PBL, IBL and constructivism to see what that says about how (or if) it works.

Lausanne Laptop Institute - Live Blogging - Scott Kososky keynote

At the Lausanne Laptop Institute in Memphis. Hearing a presentation from the superintendent of the American School of Bombay. ASB is featured in the tablet PC of 2nd edition of my laptop book. Shabbi Luthra is the director of technology and she and ASB have a large cohort attending, including at least one recent graduate (Sunny) who wrote a very articulate piece for the tablet chapter of laptop book (to be published in Spring 2009) on what it's like to be a student in a tablet school. Getting ready to hear the keynote speaker in a minute.

Over 80 attendees at Laptop institute from outside the U.S.

Discussion on the bus with someone from an independent school in Kentucky in their 4th year of a program. Issue becomes after time, once the issues are solid, what will you do with 1-to-1?

Scott Kososky has said "technology is just a tool." First thing for me to disagree with (have written about this - laptop as a digital assistant, not "just a tool.") Tool idea, in my opinion, is too limiting. A tool has one or possibly two uses, a computer has far more.

His son changes the material the same percentage that he changed his "research" from what he found from the library except he did his with Google and found the material in 15 minutes instead of in about 3 or 4 hours. Good point!

Number 2 advertiser in the world is now Google. Drastically changed advertising. Google knows what you do and where you go online, can advertise things you have bought or looked into. Apple, not music industry company, becomes #1 seller of music in the world. When needs exist, needs get filled, not necessarily by the industry or the people you expect to fill the need. This could be the case for education - who might fill the need for education? Laptops are a rock pile until someone looks at it with a vision. Cathedral made of rocks, rocks don't have value, it's what's made from it.

Three leverage points to improve school he says:

• Learn the better "see" the future - we think too short term (agreed!) - we think of performance on the short term
• Understand the impact of technology (how does it change people, what they do, how they learn, how they digest information.

• Evolve how you teach with new tools. Teaching the same way and enabling is not the quantum leap forward, is just faster. Same report on Ghandi in 15 minutes that he took hours to do. Was anything learned? Both taught the same way and both learned as little

High beam theory - if you can only see a year ahead of time, won't see far enough, think long term enough. We'll always be polaying catch up if we don't think far enough ahead.

SecondLife mentioned. A virtual world created in China for Chinese citizens. Google mixing GoogleEarth with virtual world - when you walk into the building, turns into a virtual world. Will they merge together? Idea of making the meeting room better than the room world, move people from agree to disagree so that people move from their opinion. Some walk on, some move, speaker can see this. Give visual clues where people feel. For schools can be Understand and Don't Understand. Students move over. A way to see what is going on for the speaker/teacher. (What I LOVE about this idea is that it is the idea that technology improves something that exists in another way!)

If you are going to create value, you must infuse progress that will be relevant in the future.

How to create your community - blogger notebook about ecommunity. Young people are assembling their ecommunity to assemble their community. It is going for us to start connecting. He recommends Plaxo, Linked-In and Facebook as the starter systems to become their eCommunity. Says NetWork is not NetFun NetVisit NetPlay. It's work. You have to work at building a network.

On the grid and off the grid - people start expecting you are always working. Sometimes you need to go off the grid. Not take the cell phone.

The idea of a grid profile. First thing - check grid profile. Tools (IM, Twitter, email, where are); where you are - proximity (GPS); status - busy,invisible,available, invisible,emergency - I'm on the grid but you can't get me but I can get you, emergency you can reach only emergency; groups; how represented - avatars, profiles; best communication methods (e.g., don't call but send me email.) Think of how this will change how we communicate with each other. People call just to ask a question, when texting/IM/email might be better.

He suggests when you can call, here are the ways to link to me. How to communicate. OR click on my grid profile.

He says this is where we're headed. Is very natural for us to do.

Cloud computing - software served by others. All software can be rented. Applications untethered. Don't even need hard drives. Just need input device and a stream. Already seeing Google docs in the business world because graduates are used to collaborating on their documents. Graduates came out of college with all their cloud-based computing tools knowledge and entering the business world but hitting against standards and non-understanding of the potential.

If you can't see the world the way students see technology, with empathy, have to see the world the ways they see the world, in order to teach this generation.

Never before have there been so many tools in this world, we live in a blessed time. Let's not waste this chance and these opportunities. Don't want to waste it. Do something to use our technology skills.

NEC 2008 - Article for TechLearning - Musings under deadline

TechLearning asked me to write a short 300-500 word article on trends from NECC2008 for their August issue and I'll be turning that in tonight. But here are a few more personal observations from NECC2008.

San Antonio is a cool town. Never been there before, but really like its charm, beauty, history, and how easy it is to get around via the riverwalk. Also some great Mexican food, dancing and singing.

The ISTE book area (near and dear to my heart because of my book) was well done this year, felt like a "real" bookstore, and allowed purusing and enough space for a change.

Second Life might grow on me. But am I the only one who thinks every avatar looks like Angelina Jolie or Brad Pitt? Is this reality? It's obvious this phenomenon is expanding and people are tapping the possibilities. My friend Kevin Jarrett has promised me a guided tour sometime. Have to get over my reluctance!

Web 2.0 is no longer the toddler technology, it seems much more mature, and a given. Probably the term will disappear pretty soon.

In the vendor area, it's LMS's everywhere (Learning Management Systems.) I'm really psyched about this one. 1-to-1 needs the power of LMS. Let's all push for really great ones.

I (heart) Edubloggers and having an edublogger area. Every time I dropped in there was someone I followed on Twitter or online or knew some other way to see and talk with.

Next week I'll be at the Lausanne Laptop Institute and will post from there. Memphis in July, woo-hoo! Seeing more ed tech colleagues next week: priceless.