Month: July 2021

The EdTech Big Guns

Microsoft, Google and Apple are the big guns when it comes to EdTech however each of their offerings is somewhat different.  As such I thought I would share some of my personal thoughts as to the big three.

Apple

For me, Apple has always been about the hardware and the ecosystem.    Apple were first to the market with an excellent tablet device, in the iPad, which fitted the educational space, being reliable, usable and flexible albeit not cheap.   The reliability was largely built on the fact that Apple operate a closed eco-system and therefore control the software including OS and the hardware.   This also has helped in terms of usability as they can enforce standards for the apps available on their platform.   As to the eco-system itself, having been in play the longest, Apple has built up a comprehensive collection of apps in their store which can be used in schools and colleges with an equally comprehensive number of videos and other online resources to support teachers in using iPads in lessons.     The eco-system includes Augmented Reality apps which are often shown on video case studies from schools due to looking particularly flash and impressive albeit I suspect the longer term usable and impact of such apps across a full school year may not be quite as impressive.   With the addition of pen support in 2015/16 allowing digital inking, plus with the availability of cases, complete with a keyboard, the iPad still continues to present as a great device for use in a school context.    If there was one thing Apple lacks, it is a single productivity suite to pull the educational resources together and to provide the collaboration and communication space needed in schools.   I know they have iTunesU but I just don’t feel that fills the space which Google Workspaces or Office 365 fill.  That said Apple devices can gain this functionality via the use of the Google or Microsoft platforms, but on the Apple device.

Google

Googles main contribution in my eyes is Google Suite for Education, now titled Google Workspace for Education.    This provided a productivity suite in Docs, Sheets, etc but also Google Classroom to pull the whole education experience together.    Accessible on any device either via native apps or via a browser, I have long been a fan of Googles offering and have used it in schools where Windows PCs were the standard hardware.     Adding to this Google then introduced their own hardware in Chromebooks to go with their productivity suite, with this hardware available from several hardware manufacturers.     This hardware quickly became popular due to the lower unit cost when compared with the alternatives plus the overall cloud-based nature making them easier to manage and support, again impacting the cost, but this time in terms of the total cost of ownership.    You could also use the Chromium OS on old PC/Laptop kit to rejuvenate it and get a couple more years use out of it where funds may be limited.   One of the limitations with Google is the eco system which is growing but obviously lags behind that of Apple, however given we tend towards using core apps such as Docs, Sheets, etc, significantly more than other apps, this doesn’t pose much of a problem.   The other limitation I have found is the minor differences between Docs, Sheets, etc and the more commonly used Microsoft equivalent in Word, Excel, etc.   When working with a brand new school this hasn’t been too much of a problem but I have found it to be a more significant challenge where trying to change setup from Microsoft to Google due to familiarity which users build up in prolonged use of a given platform. This familiarity builds attachment in users.

Microsoft

Windows continues to be the most common OS in use in the world as a whole.  It also continues to be the most common solution in place in school IT labs the world over.    In the productivity world, MS Office is almost equally popular with the move to Office 365 allowing the apps to be accessed on any device, either via native apps or via a browser, in much the same was as you can with Googles solution.    The benefit for Microsoft here, is the familiarity which the Microsoft Office 365 solution presents with its natively installed Office counterpart, plus the logical progression it provides students where a Windows environment is likely to be encountered in higher education and beyond.   I also like the extended range of Office 365 apps which allow those who are more adventurous to dig into automation via Power Automate, or data analysis through PowerBI.    From an eco-system point of view Microsoft windows has access to a large number of apps, but managing them isnt as easy as it is for Apple users.   The Microsoft store should help to address this going forward but for now I find this to be rather limited.   Microsoft have also now been in the business of producing hardware for a while now, with the Surface range the most notable from an education point of view, not mentioning laptops from other vendors where Windows is the standard OS.   I myself currently use a Pro 7 however have previously dabbled with the Surface Go as a main device.   The advantage in the Surface range is the full desktop operating system experience but with the added ability to use digital inking and the device in a tablet format.   Cost is a factor here, in that the surface devices come in more expensive than the iPad range, but for the price you are getting a full desktop operating system so I believe this is understandable.  The Surface Go and Go 2 as cheaper devices aim to help to address this, and I suspect would make for a more than adequate student device,

Conclusion

In my current school we have settled with the iPad hardware with the Microsoft Office 365 productivity suite for now, although I see possible benefits in use of something like the Surface or a device with a full desktop OS for older students studying their A-Levels or Level 3 vocational qualifications.  That said, different schools are using different solutions.   This shouldn’t be a surprise given each school is different in terms of its staff, students, parents, community, etc.   Equally the options are complex in terms of hardware, operating system, cloud productivity suite, third party apps, managing devices, ownership of devices, 1:1 or shared, teacher confidence, student confidence and many other aspects.

For me there is no one solution which would fit all schools, just the one solution for each individual school.    Each schools solution should be based on their own needs and wants.  If I do have a concern, it is that moving from one platform to another is becoming increasing difficult in terms of staff training and confidence in schools forming silos around a given solution.   As mentioned earlier, the familiarity builds attachment which in turn shows as a reluctance to change. This to me is a concern as it might prevent schools which could benefit from moving, from making such a move.   Thankfully, the increasing ability to mix and match using Microsoft, Google and Apple solutions together, to form an overall solution maximising the benefits of each solution, is only a good one and should therefore make change, if there is a need to do so, more palatable albeit still not particularly easy.

Windows 365 and Education?

I recently read Microsoft’s announcement regarding the launch of Windows 365.   Now the launch is focussed on Enterprise customers but I can see so much potential within the education space, especially after the last year and the pandemic.

Win 365 basically is a virtual computer in the cloud running Windows.    You can watch the launch video above.    From an education standpoint I can see a couple of significant benefits both from a teacher and student point of view:

  1. Consistency and personalisation across devices
  2. School hardware purchasing
  3. Data Protection.

Lets deal with each of the above one by one.

Consistency and personalisation

Students are likely to have to access learning content plus to create portfolios and evidence learning using different devices.    They might use school PCs while in school computer labs, access materials via a laptop, desktop or tablet when at home, and even use a laptop or tablet in general lessons where shared or 1:1 devices are available.   The challenge for this has always been the different operating systems and the resultant differences in apps across platforms.  Where apps have different user interfaces or functionality across platforms, this puts a cognitive load on students, which takes away from their capacity to focus on the learning content itself.     Providing students a consistent interface across devices therefore allows students to focus more of their thinking capacity on the content at hand rather than the tool to access it.    Additionally, students can jump between devices, picking up exactly where they left off.   So a student might be working on a presentation on a desktop PC with a nice large screen in a lab, but then jump back into the same piece of work later in the day, from their tablet, at exactly the point they left the work when they left the lab.

Another issue with the current multi-device setup is personalisation. Students may setup their tablet, but then have to do the same on their laptop and school computer, assuming the school allows for some personalisation. Using a virtual computer, students can setup their preferences once and then will see these no matter what device they access.

School hardware Purchasing

Purchasing of client devices for schools has proven problematic as schools havent been able to establish appropriate replacement plans plus have to wrestle with different subjects having different requirements in relation to the specification of computers.   A media studies class working on video editing is likely to need more than an English class doing some simple word processing.   This then leads to a variety of different kit in different locations in a school.   A move to a virtual computer approach simplifies the hardware, as the main requirement is simply to be able to handle the streamed content from the virtual computer.   As such this may mean the hardware can be cheaper and hopefully from this effective replacement cycles can be established.   It also means that we no longer have the complexity of different hardware in different subject areas.    Where we need better resources, we simply provision a better virtual computer, but all accessible from whatever device the teacher/student has in front of them.   I will however note that this will obviously depend on the cost associated with the virtual computers themselves; We havent yet seen the pricing for Win 365 from Microsoft with this likely to be key in education.

Data Protection

The last year has required staff and students to make use of personal devices at times.   This brings with it the risk of data being stored on personal devices where it may remain even when the device is disposed of, leading to the data being leaked.    A switch to virtual computers would address this as the data wouldn’t be stored on the local computer, but instead on the virtual computer which can be accessed from any device. 

Conclusion

Win365 just reminds me so much of Thin client computing and the potential it promised when I looked at it back in 2015/16.    At the time I couldn’t make Thin client work for my schools’ needs possibly due to the technology and flexibility not quite being there at the time.    Maybe with Win365 and Azure this may now have changed.    Maybe we can finally have a solution which allows the students to access their digital learning space from anywhere, anytime and on any device, but with a consistent and persistent interface. Obviously the pricing will be key here, however I note that the cost of storage and of computer power is only coming down, so even if not viable now I see this as the direction of travel.

If G-Suite and Office 365 represented the big jump over the last 5 years, putting students files, conversations and meetings in the cloud, it may be that Win365, and putting their very computer in the cloud, is the next big thing.

Social Media – A magnifier on society

Social Media acts as a magnifier on society.   This can both be a good thing and a bad thing.   In a good way it allows the quiet masses to have a voice and to express their opinion.   Before social media these people would not stand up or write an article in a newspaper or otherwise be able to express their views publicly.   Now they can easily like or share those posts they agree with, adding their voice to the message.   And if feeling strongly they can even add their own comments and thoughts reasonably safe in the knowledge that their voice won’t stand out.  We have seen this over the last few days as messages rejecting racism have been liked and shared in their thousands.   Social media has enabled a larger part of the population to contribute to the collective voice online.

But there is a flip side to this.  Social media provides a platform for a minority of people to share inappropriate comments with the masses, including racist views.    Prior to social media these people might have expressed the same racist views in public, but they never had much of an audience and the message never got very far.   Now, with social media, they can share their views instantly with millions of people.   They also feel safe in the knowledge that identifying them, where they have taken precautions, is not easy and therefore their comments are likely without consequence.    Social media has enabled this minority to engage a larger part of the population with their inappropriate messaging.

For me racism has no place in todays society and should be called out and challenged at every opportunity.    

I would however highlight an additional concern in relation to viewing society through social media, through the magnifier of social media, and how this can result in a distorted view on society.    Social media, to me, suggests that racism is more prevalent based on the large number of social media posts calling our racism, and by extension the suggestion of a larger number of racist tweets.   I am not sure, based on my experiences, it is more prevalent.   I suspect the availability bias is playing a part here.   I believe I heard racist comments more frequently when I was younger than I do now, so this might at least suggest we are heading in the right direction, albeit we can never stop until racism has been eliminated.

I also have concerns about the viral nature of social media, which can lead to massive outpourings of support or concern, etc, but for a short period of time, followed by people moving on to the next viral message.    Racism is linked to culture, and culture is changed gradually through consistent changes is behaviours, the stories that are told, etc.    Viral but short-lived messaging is likely to do little to impact culture and the prevalence of racism.  It is only prolonged and consistent changes in behaviour and messaging which will have this effect.   I personally started questioning the taking of the knee at the start of football events, as being a little bit of tokenism, however considering it again, maybe the consistent message conveyed is what we continue to need in the hope of long-term change.

Social media for me, isnt the problem here, but magnifies and possibly distorts it.   I am concerned that in seeking to address the issue at hand, currently racism in particular, we focus on social media and the social media companies.   Yes, they need to do all they can and possibly more than they are doing, but the issue is a societal one not a technology one.    Technology is just making it more visible, but maybe distorting the situation in the process.   

As such I think the key here is greater awareness as to how social media fits into situations like this.   How social media doesn’t just report and share news, but how it’s very use shapes the news and message being shared.   I hope this post maybe contributes a little to this awareness.

Mobile phones in schools: Again?

We have just been through a period in history where the technology in our schools has suddenly became critical to continuing teaching and learning.   And yet, we now are once again contemplating banning some personal technology, in the form of students phones, in schools.   How can this be the case?

Before I go any further let me acknowledge that schools operate in vastly different contexts across the world and even within the UK.    As such all I can offer is a general viewpoint based on the schools I have worked upon.   I will therefore accept that there are contexts where it is totally appropriate and advisable to ban student mobile phones.   I suspect the most common reasoning is likely to be due to challenging student behaviour.     I do not however accept that banning mobile phones is the correct approach for all or even most schools. 

So, what are my reasons for this view:

Digital Citizenship

We wish to develop our students as digital citizens ready to live in an increasingly digital world.    In our digital world the mobile phone and other mobile devices, plus the apps that run on them are becoming more important.   As such we need to work with students to understand how to best use mobile phones and also how to use them safely and responsibly.    If we don’t tackle this in schools then we leave it to chance that students will be able to manage their mobile technology use themselves.

Digital skills and familiarity

The pandemic required us to quickly pivot to online teaching and learning.   For those schools which were already using technology widely in face to face lessons, this was easier than it was for those schools who were teaching in a more “traditional” and technology-less manner.    If we accept that online teaching and learning may happen in future, whether due to a pandemic or maybe just a snow day, then we need to get students used to using technology across the curriculum and their studies.  Using mobile phones constructively in lessons helps towards this, whereas banning mobile phones removes a potentially beneficial technology from the classroom.

Cyber Security

One of the key security features to keep online services safe is the use of Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA).   This is something we need to be applying to our school services including student accounts, plus something we need to encourage students to enable for their personal accounts.   Mobile phones as the second factor are key to this.   Banning mobile phones means we cannot enforce and encourage MFA use, thereby making our school systems and our students less secure.

Conclusion

As I said, I understand that contexts exist where banning mobile phones might be acceptable and even the best solution.   I don’t however believe this to be an approach which should be applied to all.   I very much believe that school leaders are the best people to judge their own schools context and the approach they wish to take towards technology use and the use or not of student mobile phones within school.

My view is that student mobile phones are a technological swiss army knife of tools.   With them students can search for information, record key learning from lessons, explore new worlds and many other things.   They are also likely to play a key part in students lives beyond school and therefore it is important we start developing the relevant skills and understanding as to their positive use, starting in schools, starting now.   Mobile phones, with their biometric authentication, combined with MFA, also help to make students digital existence more secure.

Given all that has happened over the last year or so, and the critical part that technology played plus the issues around access to appropriate student devices, I find it strange that we are still discussing a blanket ban of mobile phones, a technology device, from schools.    We should be seeking to make more and better use of technology in schools not banning it.