Tag: technology

CIO Summit 2019

Interesting day at the CIO Summit down in London yesterday.   This was my annual visit to an event focusing on IT in the wider, including corporate, world rather than within the education sector.   I make an effort to do this simply to try and get a wider view of IT, digital transformation and digital innovation to help provide some context to my work in school.   There were four key messages which definitely resonated with me.

Its about the problem we are solving, not the Tech.

The CDIO of HMRC, Jacky Wright, outlined the importance of focussing on the problems you are seeking to solve rather than coding, or the technology you have available.   This is a message I have often heard Mark Anderson (@ICTEvangelist) state in relation to education, in that it is not about the technology, it is about Teaching and Learning.   In a more recent post I think he hit the nail on the head when he said its not really #edtech after all, its simply #Ed.  It would seem that this need to focus on the end outcome or product and not be distracted by shiny or new technology is something which impacts on the wider IT world rather than just education.

Culture eats strategy

The importance of organisational culture was stated by a number of presenters.   Like a focus on the problem being solved, mentioned above, a focus on culture was identified as being more important than the Tech being used.   I liked Rackspaces mission of providing a “Fantastical Experience” as both setting the tone and culture which they seek to achieve within the organisation.   I wonder whether schools could be a little more inspirational in the missions they set rather than the usual “developing the best learners” or “preparing students to the future” style of mission which we commonly see.  At the end of the day the culture of an organisation is key in what it achieves or does not achieve.   The people, the leadership team and the staff, shape the culture.

Sustainability

A number of presenters discussed the issue of sustainability in relation to technology.   This is a challenging area given that technology may be both part of the solution and part of the problem.   In being the problem, as we consume more data, use more technology and even personally have more devices, we need more power.   We also consume valuable resources in the manufacturing processes plus make use of valuable metals in the various tech products.   This all adds up to using more energy at a time when we want to be using less.    Thankfully tech can also be the solution here in using AI to match availability and demand, in harnessing greater amounts of renewable energy with greater levels of efficiency and in supporting remote collaboration reducing energy consumption associated with travel.     A particular area of discussion in relation to sustainability was that of the supplier chain.   It was highlighted that organisations need to be aware of the energy consumption of the third parties they use rather than treating this as an issue for the third party.  If you are using Microsoft or Google cloud services, the resultant energy usage associated with their data centres, as used to store and process your data, needs to be considered in thinking about your organisations carbon footprint and energy usage.   In addition, looking at devices, including PCs, printers, etc, we also need to consider how suppliers source their resources, manage energy use during production and also to what extent their devices can be recycled, refurbished or reused.

Cyber Security

This topic was always likely to arise as part of discussion.   I found the presentation by Brigadier Alan Hill particularly interesting in discussion his views.   The key issue is ensuring that the risk associated with cyber security is understood at a board level and then working on constant review, testing and preparation for cyber events.      As he identified any plan made won’t survive an encounter with the enemy however the act of having and more importantly testing a plan will at least make you and your team as prepared as they possibly can be for when, and not if, a cyber incident happens.

This was my 2nd CIO Summit event and once again I found it to be useful and informative.   Towards the end of the event the importance of sharing ideas and best practice with IT peers was discussed and for me attendance at this event is a key part of this.   Our best chance for innovation and for security is collaboration and cooperation;  we are all in this together.  And so as I write this on the train on the way home I look forward to reviewing my many pages of notes and identifying the actions to take as a result of this event.   I cant wait for next year.

“More” edTech anyone?

What are the barriers to “more use of edtech” in schools?   A recent British Educational Suppliers Association (BESA) survey, as recently reported in the TES, suggested that budgets and “teachers’ unwillingness” were two of the main barriers identified by the survey.   But was the right question being asked?

Firstly, looking at barriers to using “more” EdTech suggests that we don’t have enough and therefore should use more.    This is a rather simplistic viewpoint as it suggests that the volume of EdTech in use is the key factor we should be seeking to address.   In my view it isn’t.   We should be seeking to use technology effectively and where appropriate.    As Mike Sharples (@sharplm)  recently commented, “technology alone will not transform education.   Focus on pedagogy with new technology, not just the technology.”

The wide scale deployment of interactive whiteboards to schools can be considered as having increased the EdTech in education however I would challenge anyone to prove that it was effective.   It didn’t improve outcomes.   It didn’t support students in learning in new ways or improve their access to learning materials.  It didn’t empower teachers to re-imagine the learning experience.   In my view it simply allowed teachers to do what they always had been doing with a whiteboard/blackboard but using a digital surface instead, and at significant cost.

Taking the issue of budget into consideration, is it any wonder that school leaders would choose not to invest in EdTech where they can see limited added value from significant investment and where investment in other areas may show more reliable predictors of effectiveness or return on investment.    If budgets were less strained maybe the situation would be different.   As a result of this is it also therefore any small wonder that they would report that lack of budget as a reason for not investing, having themselves had to prioritise their spending.

Sticking with interactive whiteboards, the deployment of them was often to whole schools or departments.   This approach to “more” is better fails to take into account different subject, teacher, student, topic, lesson, etc needs.   It is a one shape fits all approach.     What motivation does a teacher have to learn how best to use this new classroom technology given it has been foisted upon them.     Teachers, due to not understanding the technology or having time to experiment, may also be unable to identify appropriate uses within their classroom and teaching for this new device.    Given the lack of intrinsic motivation and perceived appropriateness of the technology is it any wonder that “teachers’ unwillingness” to make use of more EdTech might be perceived and reported by schools. 

In looking at EdTech use in schools we need to adopt a more nuanced approach.  It isn’t about using more Edtech.   It should be about considering the different needs of teachers and students and allowing them to experiment and use solutions which fit these needs.    From this, best practice can be identified and shared, and approaches can be regularly reviewed and revised to maximise their impact.   I should note that an open, supportive culture and warm, friendly organisational climate is key to enabling this.

I also wonder about some teacher’s perception of what “good” use of EdTech looks like.   Social media gives us plenty of examples of exemplary teaching using EdTech however this often comes from teachers who have got to this point from long periods of trial, error and practice which isn’t evident from social media postings.    Also, the posts generally focus on the good, may be staged for marketing purposes for the school, or may be biased or divorced from the real world in other ways.   EdTech doesn’t necessarily have to be a complex all singing and dancing affair or something worthy of a photo shoot and full page spread in an educational magazine.   Good initial use of EdTech might be a simple and limited action relating to a specific part of a lesson.   It could be simply to make use of an application such as Microsoft Teams or Showbie.  From here it can built upon.      Additionally, good use of EdTech seldom comes about without significant time, effort and experimentation.   It is also worth noting that technology is always changing and new uses for existing technologies can always be found and therefore the seeking of improvement is never ending.    This is a bit like teaching in general where there is always room to build upon practice with each new lesson, topic, class or academic year.

I think back to a presentation I gave in Dubai some years ago in which I identified what I believed at the time to be the factors I thought were key to Technology use in schools.   Teacher motivation, confidence and training were some of the factors I listed and I continue to believe these are key although I think my view as to training is now broader than it was then.   Training in my eyes now includes using social media, such as twitter, peer discussion and planning, experimenting and traditional training sessions.    A key issue supporting these three factors is the culture and climate within a school.   Open and supportive school cultures promote sharing of ideas and allow for trial and error to occur.

It is with this in mind I wonder whether a better question would have been: What are the barriers to supporting teachers to use Edtech in my school?

 

Digital Literacy and big brother

Further to my recent post on digital literacy I thought I would revisit one of the areas I mentioned in a little more detail.    The implications of technology use makes for an interesting discussion with students in that there are some implications which we are well aware of, some that we are less aware of and more than likely a whole heap of implications which we haven’t as yet realised.

Taking the implications which we are currently aware of and discussing online safety, or e-safety as we previously called it, has serious implications and as such is being discussed in schools.    We are already discussing with our students about the dangers of people misrepresenting themselves on the internet, the dangers of posting too much personal information on the internet and fake news, which has been the subject of discussion in schools for some years, again hitting the headlines.   I remember teaching about the spaghetti crop failure as a way to illustrate about fake news some 10 or more years ago.    We are also discussing and teaching about the permanence of online data and how once the post, photo or video is out there it is impossible to delete.    Online privacy and security settings are also a topic of discussion with a particular focus on social media usage among our students.

The above are what I consider to be the main areas of discussion in schools around technology use.    Some lesser consideration is given to the impact of search engines such as google.    As we all use google to search for information, we all end up getting the same search results.    This potentially has the impact to narrow our focus as we seldom look beyond the first few results in google, the results which represent the popular answers.     This in turn might obscure from us alternate lines of thought and resources which previously we may have come upon in a book leading us to explore different pathways and possibly even arrive at alternative or even better solutions.

Sticking with google we also need to recognise the purpose of the site in that Google is a business.   As such they need to make money which they achieve through advertising.    What are the implications of their need to sustain or even increase their revenue on the search results they return, the way the present the results and also their gathering of data in relation to the searches we do?    Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, etc are all businesses so we need to bear this in mind.

This brings us nicely to another implication in the data gathered about us.    If we are logged in to google when we run a search, and we have location services on then google will have gathered information about us in details of the search, the time and the location.     They can, from this, build a profile of our search habits, our interests, our geographical locations and search habits in different locations and at different times.   From this they may be able to work out where we live, work and socialise including the frewuency of each.     Combined with the search habits of our family members they may then be able to start building a profile of the family.    Are we happy with this?     When I think about it I also give thought to the TV series Criminal Minds where the FBIs Behavioural Analysis team are able to gather basic information from a crime scene before providing a detailed profile of the offender or Unidentified Subject, Unsub, for use by law enforcement in arresting the said Unsub.   Through googles data gathering they can identify a lot about us as individuals and our families, beyond the data they gather, by statistical analysis.     And this extends way beyond just Google with Facebook, Target, Amazon, etc. all gathering “Big Data” for use in statistical analysis for the purposes of identifying trends and profiling.

A bigger question which may be how might the data gathered be used in shaping peoples views and perception.    This was raised in relation to Facebooks coverage of the US elections.    Through profiling of users a site or service may choose to feed users with materials targeted at them in order to change their voting or other preferences.     For example, as a user my profile may show that I am very focussed on human rights, via my search habits and postings on social media, so the service shares with me articles and incidents where the actions of the party which the service do not want me to vote for have infringed on human rights.    At the same time they may show me materials on where the party they want me to vote for have taken noble actions in relation to human rights.     When I find myself ready to put my cross on the voting ballot paper I remember one party which was good in relation to human rights, an area I focus on, while the other party were not.   I therefore tick the form accordingly however how much of my decision was influenced by technology and profiling?   Was it my decision at all?

Looking at emerging technologies, the internet of things (IoT) is definitely growing in profile.   As such more and more devices are being connected to the internet including fitness trackers, home security systems, heating and lighting control and many more systems.   We also have devices such as Amazon Echo and googles equivalent device.    Each of these devices gathers more data about us and our habits.    This data in turn can be used to infer further data about us through statistical methods.  Is this Orwells big brother becoming reality as we introduce more technology into our lives, allowing more and more data to be gathered about all we do?

I am very much for the use of technology.   The key though is in the need to consider the implications and act accordingly.   The world generally, in my opinion, exists in balance and therefore for every gain or benefit of technology there is a flip side, whether we know it or not.     With our students who often eagerly adopt new services and tech for their perceived or advertised benefits the key is the need for us as educators to ensure that they have considered the other side.

 

The internet isn’t working!!

“The internet doesn’t work”

A statement heard in my home the other day as my wife tried to access an app on her mobile phone.    I am sure the very same statement may have been uttered in households across the UK and beyond.   In itself it seems like a simple enough statement.    The issue is that it is a gross over simplification.

So let’s work through some possible issues.   First of all the issue could have been with the specific app which my wife was trying to use.   The issue may instead relate to the operating system of the phone, which in this case was Android, or to the physical hardware of the phone.   Maybe Wi-Fi was turned off on the phone or it was in aeroplane mode.   If the issue isn’t in the software or hardware of the phone it could relate to a weak wireless signal due to interference or just poor reception relating from distance or from obstructions between the device and the wireless access point or router.   The issue may relate to the Wi-Fi password and/or the security settings for the wireless network.   This brings us to the wireless access point or router which may represent an issue in terms of its functionality or its configuration.    At this point there are already a large number of things which might account for the issue being so vaguely reported however this is only a small number of the overall possible causes.

Other issues could be an issue in relation to DHCP within the router, assuming we are looking at your average home network.    It may be that the router is blocking traffic possibly.  Another option is the actual connection between the router and the ISP.    This may be incorrectly setup or there could be a physical issue in the line.   Maybe I haven’t paid the bill and the ISP has cut my home off.    Issues with the Domain Name Server (DNS) are another possible issue as are issues with the actual server with which the app is trying to communicate.

And the above only represents some of the possible causes, with other options and combinations of options being possible, and yet for all the possible causes the issue is simply presented as “the internet doesn’t work”.

Technology has become a necessity rather than a luxury.       We need it for banking, accessing council services, accessing government services and communication among many other areas.    As such we expect it to work, and that is simple; it either works or it doesn’t.     So when it doesn’t we make simple statements, which I believe highlights our generally simplistic understanding of technology, and yet we bring more and more technological devices into our home.    Do we truly understand how this tech works?   Do we understanding the implications of using it?    Do we know how to use it in a safe and secure manner?

I would suggest the answer to the above questions is No and yet we worry about the lack of understanding of our students.   How can they hope to understand and be safe with technology when we adults, the ones who they are taught by, parented by and their role models generally don’t.   Lets stop using these concerns for limiting and blocking technology use, and instead lets explore technology use with our students and children, making mistakes, and learning as we go.

Body Cameras in Schools

I found this mornings discussion on BBC with regards the use of body cameras by teachers in 2 pilot schools an unexpected turn of events in the use of technology in schools.    This story was also reported in The Guardian

Within the pilot teachers within the schools concerned will apparently make use of the cameras when there is a “perceived threat”.   I find this statement interesting when it is reported that the purpose of the cameras is related to teachers who are “fed up with low-level background disorder”.   I am not sure how low level behaviour issues are likely to amount to a perceived threat?

I am also thinking back to my own teaching career and quite often the incidents I might have wanted to capture on video as evidence are those which came unexpectedly.   I can’t really see it working where the teacher has to ask the pupils to “stop for a minute while I turn my camera on”.

I can understand why body camera might work for the police and other services where the role involves a significant amount of control and potential conflict however this is not something I would expect of our classrooms.   Within our classrooms our focus is on teaching and learning which is a social endeavour and therefore conflict should not be a regular expectation although I will acknowledge that as with any interactions between people with different views, etc. the occasional conflict is always possible.

I also wonder about what the inclusion of body cameras in schools might come to symbolize.   For some it might be seen as a symbol for safety and security however for others, and I would speculate for the majority within schools, it would be seen to indicate a lack of trust, openness and care.    Teachers have to carry body cameras to capture evidence of misbehaviour so by extension this means that teachers expect misbehaviour and teachers don’t trust students to behave correctly.   What impact would a culture a mistrust have on a school and is it worth the cost when weighed against the limited benefits of body cameras which have to be turned on to record specific incidents.

My overall feeling on this is not positive however I welcome any pilot as a way to test a potential new approach.   I do hope that the pilot includes a control group of schools and that the review of its impact is done using an appropriately scientific approach.    If I was looking to use technology I would be more positive towards CCTV in classrooms with a clear statement as to what the footage can be used for.   The reason my preference is towards this is that it captures what all, including teachers and other staff are doing, plus it serves as an excellent tool for teachers to review their lessons, work in peer groups, etc. and therefore serves as an excellent CPD tool.    CCTV can therefore be seen as something with a focus on improvement and working for the good whereas body cameras are purely for evidence collection and as a deterrent, a force for what I would consider the bad.

 

 

 

 

Smartphones in the class

There have been lots of discussions about the pros and cons of using technology in lessons each looking at the issue for a different perspective.   Some people are positive about how technology can benefit students and their learning while others cite detrimental impact to student writing ability or concentration.

A recent post in the TES presented the issue of how smart phones in particular were contributing to sexual harassment incidents in schools.   You can read the full post here.   Within the post the general secretary of the ATL explains that she feels that in too many places, sexual harassment has become acceptable.   The author of the post goes on to raise how sexual harassment has always existed however it is the impact of technology and social media which has greatly increased the scale of the problem.

I fully agree with the authors comments with regards the importance of staffs well being and dignity however I disagree with the suggestion that the solution is for schools to “insist that pupils’ phones be left at the door”.      This would remove many learning opportunities which arise where students have access to a mobile device in lessons.   In addition by removing the phone it removes the opportunity for students to learn about what is right and appropriate when it comes to using mobile devices including the cameras which they come with.    Where students previously might have drawn inappropriate sketches of their teacher, did we ban the pencil?

I also disagree with the authors comment regarding how “schools cannot cure the ills of society”.    Schools are part of society and cannot operate independently of it.     Therefore I feel we as educators have a responsibility to make sure students learn about the appropriate use of technology, the risks and challenges so that they are equipped to be better members of society.    Stopping student smart phones at the school doors either prevents or at least limits the potential for this learning.   Students will still have smart phones so if they are inclined to take inappropriate photos they are still likely to do it, albeit being more creative about how they sneak their smart phone into class.     As such we have gained little but lost the opportunity to have a discussion with pupils about how they should use their smart phones in class, in school and in society as a whole.

We need to take care in where we arrive at decisions to try and block or ban certain technologies.    Technology is now pervasive throughout society.    The issue is whether technology is put to good or ill, and working with students so that they learn to be respectful and responsible users of the power put in their hands through technology.

 

 

 

 

Would we ban the pencil had it been a sketch.

Was going to tweet this however decided not as 140char not enough to fully elaborate on my thoughts on this.

Sat Nav: Simply a tool or an extension of our being?

I should know better after reading The Glass Cage (N.Carr, 2014) however it would appear that I have learnt little. The other morning took me to Bristol for a seminar. I had been to Bristol before so roughly knew the way there although did not know the area around where I was going plus didn’t know where I was going to park. That said I still managed to get to my destination albeit a little late due to traffic. The outward journey was not the one which caused me issue, this was the inward journey.
Having returned to my car after the seminar I dutifully turned on my Sat Nav and set the destination as the school following the turn by turn directions of the soothing voice emanating from the little black device sat on the passenger seat (note to self: I really should get a proper mounting bracket for the Sat Nav).   After a good 20 minutes I came notice that the return route was steeply uphill and that the road was not generally wide enough for two vehicles to pass. This was certainly not the same route I had gone to Bristol on. I became a little worried at this point yet as I crossed more major roads I still ceded to the Sat Nav voice and continued following its direction as opposed to following sign posts that pointed in other directions.
I realized I had become a passenger in own car even although I was the one doing the steering. The outcome was the same, in that I reached my destination, however the tool, my Sat Nav, had changed both the process and the experience. I did not experience the drive home as the driver of my car, in the same way as I did the outward journey, taking in my surroundings, the road layouts, the signs and the millstones or other location markers. I experienced it as a passenger. I followed instructions from the little voice from the seat beside me. I relinquished responsibility and control to the technology.
The question is, was the purpose of my journey just to get to a given location or was the journey itself important?
This is a question we need to constantly ask in relation to technology use. How does the technology change the process, the experience and even us as users? As Nicholas Carr puts it in The Glass Cage, we suffer from a substitution bias in that we just belief Sat Nav for example is just a substitution for a paper map however this is not the case. If I had have been navigating via a map I would have never have relinquished responsibility to a piece of paper not matter how nice it looked. I wouldn’t have anyone to blame but myself so I would be motivated to avoid a recurrence through greater preparation or a test run to my destination, as opposed to being able to distance myself from fault by locating blame within a small black box. I would also have learned from the experience in terms of my ability to navigate the route in future, something that has certainly not happened during my return leg from Bristol.
As I reflect I realize that maybe my description of technology as a “tool” for teachers to use may under present the impact of technology or even of tools. Again, as Mr Carr describes, a tool is an extension of ourselves as human beings and in being an extension it changes us as individuals, the processes and tasks we undertake and our experience of these activities. Maybe this is a subject which all educators should consider and maybe even something we should discuss with our students.

Tech and attention spans

I having recently given the impact of technology on attention spans in students a little bit of thought sparked by a comment made to me.   This led me to consider the question of “does technology have a negative impact on attention span in students” a little more thought and consideration.

For me one of the big benefits of technology is its ability to provide or support responsive feedback.    Computer games aim to provide users instant feedback as to whether they are doing well or poorly.   e-Mail aims to allow us to send a message to another user such that they will receive the message and be able to reply almost instantly as opposed to having to wait for snail mail to arrive.   In the class, students can complete quizzes and tests that provide instant feedback, or they can hand in assessments which the teacher can provide instant feedback on as opposed to having to wait for their next lesson together.

Hattie and Timperley (2007) state that feedback is “one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement”.   Technologies helps to facilitate this feedback, and therefore can be viewed as also being able to have a powerful influence on learning.

We live in a world of balance therefore it is important to recognize that the suggested advantages of technology use are not without consequence.   The use of technology and resultant instant or near instant feedback leads to a need for more feedback and therefore a lack of patience or acceptance for where it is not forthcoming.   This in turn is viewed as the inattention as implied in my opening paragraph.     Students may therefore appear less capable or less willing to take on longer activities where less feedback is forthcoming.

I wonder at this point as to the prolonged activities which we are required to do.    Research for example, can now be done more quickly through the use of google without the need to pore through a long list of research texts.   Also the feedback i have referred to which is beneficial relates to learning, however often longer tasks are about application or demonstration of learning as opposed to new learning, for example being able to write a report to prove understanding of the Data Protection Act.

As such we have a strength here in techs ability to provide quick or even immediate feedback with the benefits this can have for learning however we also have an associated weakness, being the tendancy for the tech and its associated feedback to make students dependent/expectant of immediate feedback and therefore prone to display a shorter attention span.

I would suggest the key lies in a balance between learning, involving technology and regular and frequent feedback, and demonstration and application of learning, involving more focused and substantial tasks where technology may or may not be involved.

Devices in schools

I recently read a @donaldclark posting (Read the full post here) commenting on the “debacle” of deploying tablet devices to schools where he feels that laptops are the devices that should have been “purchased in the first place”.   He states that “while ipads may be appropriate for young children, they are not suitable for older children who need to acquire writing and other more sophisticated skills using tools that don’t work on iPads”.

I disagree with his point of view, believing that tablet devices do have a place in schools including secondary schools.  I do however add a note of caution here in that the deployment of devices has to be carefully considered and issues such as staff training, IT support, change management, consultation, etc need to be carefully considered.   I would suggest that any “debacle” associated with a US state wide or other deployment of devices, be it laptops or iPads, relates to a failure to fully appreciate and address one or more of these areas.

Reading Donald’s post the main item I pull out as his reason for not having iPads in schools is that they are “poor for writing”.   I will acknowledge that iPads are poor for typing and that this links directly to writing.   I have even recently been trying out an iPad Pro 9.7” with the smart keyboard and still find the device poor for typing due to the available real estate for the keyboard resulting in cramped keys.    I am not sure if this is better on the larger scale iPad having not had the opportunity to try this however I doubt it will be much better as the keyboard is unlikely to have the same feel associated with a proper laptop keyboard.      So if we are asking students to produce written content and then assessing then by their written, or typed, response then the iPad may not be the best tool.    This to me is acceptable as equally a laptop isn’t as suitable where the evidence we want to generate is video or photographic evidence.   The iPad, or laptop for that matter, could never be the only tool used.

This brings me to Donalds other point with regards his comment on the iPad device as a consumer device for consuming media as opposed to for producing media.   Having seen the devices in the hands of students facilitated by enthusiastic and creative teachers, however, I no longer believe this to be true.    Students are able to make use of app smashing techniques to combine multiple apps to create new and creative content often with unexpectedly high quality output.    I will admit that the content they produce isn’t often written content, tending to be more towards either audio or video content and mayve herein lies the issue.   If we expect students to produce evidence of higher order thinking the way we have always done it, via written content, then yes the iPad is not ideal, however if we allow our students to be creative in how they evidence their learning and therefore accept video, audio, animated, etc responses then the iPad fits the bill perfectly.    Students can prove their understanding of complex writing concepts through explain everything for example.

My focus has always been on the iPad as a tool for learning and I continue to stand by this.    I believe it CAN be used as a tool to learning about writing and about coding, another area identified by Mr Clark as a weak area for ipads, however when it comes to the skill of producing writing and of producing coding, I would suggest that maybe the iPad isn’t the best tool.    With this understanding it is acceptable then the progress with iPads in a school on the understanding that the weakness is addressed through other methods, including possibly other technology which is available with the school.    I wonder how many iPad 1:1 secondary schools still have IT Labs with devices with keyboards for this very reason.

For me the biggest danger is sweeping generalizations.   The iPad was never the one answer to tech use in schools and the error made by so many was to adapt it as a one size fits all answer.    Equally we can’t say that iPads shouldn’t be used or are ineffective within schools as there are many schools where they are being used very effectively with students.    Although I generally disagree with Mr Clarks post I will close with a point of agreement in his statement of “do the research”.     The critical issue is to examine what you hope to achieve and to ensure that you have, within your own school and own plan for using EdTech, considered all the aspects of a deployment including staff training, change management, consultation, etc. and not just the shiny new device to be deployed whether it be a laptop or an ipad.

 

 

 

Westminster Education Forum

Tuesday marked a very early start, setting off at 4:30am for the 40min drive to the train station before hopping on a 2 ½ hour train journey down to London.    Am sure for many this would just be part of the normal run of the average week however after almost 8 years in the Middle East during which time I never set foot on public transport, I consider it to be something new.     Mind you, some may consider Etihad and Emirates airways which are both UAE air carriers to be “public” transport at least within a Middle East context.

The overall purpose of the trip was an #edTech event being held in central London focusing on initiatives and ideas for the use of technology in education, in schools and in learning.    The event was titled “Digital Technologies and Innovative Teaching practice in the classroom: Latest thinking and policy options”.

It was nice one again to hear Stephen Heppell present and to have a brief chat with him and it was also good to hear Bob Harrison present although sadly I never had the opportunity to say hello in person.

Of particular note from the event was Stephen Heppell’s discussion of policy disconnect in which he suggested teachers being innovative charge ahead trying new ideas and new technologies, taking with them parents who see the impact of these new ideas and technologies.    The centralized policies which are determined at a governmental or similar high level however are unable to keep pace leading to a disconnect between what teachers and parents want and the policies which govern what should be happening in schools.   I can identify with this as I see so many examples of teachers trying new ideas, sharing tips, etc. with new and exciting suggestions appearing on the likes of twitter and other online media on a daily basis.     From this point of view it is important to keep innovating and Stephen even made the point of stating teachers should just “do it” and be the driving force.

Peter Twining however put across a slightly different viewpoint during one of the panel discussions where he suggested that success couldn’t be achieved purely through this bottom up process, and that it was equally important to have some top down leadership of educational technology usage.   He suggested that should the government or OFSTED indicate an expectation then schools would adjust accordingly in order to comply in order to avoid unsatisfactory inspection results.   As such for educational technology use to be truly successful we need to have both the grassroots leadership of educational technology, leading from the bottom up, but also the top down leadership setting out the framework and expectations.

I can see the merit in both approaches, top down and bottom up, however have always been quick to suggest that it is important to have both in place to make the best things happen.     That being said, in more recent months I have found myself prioritizing the grassroots bottom up approach over top down.   Good things can happen in lessons despite poor leadership however I am not as convinced good things can happen where grassroots teaching is poor.

Overall it was a productive day and well worth the early rise.    I hope to have the opportunity to attend further similar events in the future.