Dear Post-Conference Self

Dear Post-Conference-Self:

A few days (weeks, months) ago, you were at the (Massachusetts Music Educator's Professional Development) Conference.  You were energized, psyched, stoked, jacked!  You came in contact with inspirational people, ideas, students and programs which you thought at the time you would like to emulate in some way.  You were full of hope and renewed vigor and a revived sense of purpose.

In his talk, Dr. Gordon reminded you of the deep, enduring value of music to humans.  He also reminded you that if you want music to endure in schools, that is critically important to teach well.  Mr. Butera cautioned that you should be proactive in your support for music in schools.  He reminded you that, unfortunately, not everyone who runs schools has music education as a priority.  

The many sessions you attended provided concrete examples of HOW to teach well.  You took notes and you jotted down sites that could serve as resources for you.  You planted the seeds of change and transformation in the sessions.  You vowed in those moments- in those sessions- that you would teach different next week.  You vowed to review all this stuff when you got home.  You dared yourself to 'be the change you want to see in the world.' 

You did.  So where are the notes?  Do yourself a favor, post-conference self.  Find yourself alone with those notes and reflect on those little, silent promises you made to yourself.  Make a simple list of 5 things you will follow up on and implement them.  You can do it.  You can.  Because you are worth it and because your students deserve this empowered, transformed you.  And so does the profession.  Do it for Music if nothing else.  

And next year?  Lead a session on your Newfound Skills.

Sincerely,

At-Conference-Self

Making the Case for Technology Integration Without Invoking the Digital Native Paradigm

(Preamble: In this post, when I refer to students, I am referring to middle school-aged students in a rural-suburban area of Western, MA that I teach but I suspect that others may relate to my experience with regard to students and tech. use. I submit that students are NOT as tech savvy as most ed. tech enthusiasts would have us believe. The Digital Native Argument is alive and well but in my experience it is erroneous. After spending 3 years of my life as an Educational Blogger blogging about the need to change how we teach to accommodate ‘digital natives’, I have had to stop in my tracks and retreat from my position based on the real students before me. Their lives, experiences and even their interests were not in sync with the Digital Native Argument-a very seductive argument, indeed. So, here's my first blog post from the other side of the fence so to speak. With apologies to Marc Prensky whom I greatly respect.)

How do you make the case for technology integration?

How do you make the case for technology integration? Is it because kids are incessantly using technology, including many multifunctional mobile devices and they ‘demand’ that our pedagogical choices match their ‘digital learning style’ ‘in the 21st Century’? Are they really wired differently?

Most of what I read (and view) on the web regarding the why’s of tech use in education makes this argument. I’ll call it the Digital Native Argument. Videos are put up (copycat versions of original videos) that star ‘wise’, ‘tech-savvy’ children confronting an (apparently) ignorant non-tech using teacher. The claims are that kids spend countless hours immersed in media, texting, 'surfing', etc. and if teachers aren’t allowing them to do the same at school, they are out of touch and, well, ‘bad teachers’. These videos would have us believe that all this time spent doing media is all good. Unstructured, undifferentiated time but time well spent! Hmm.

Here’s where I fight a serious case of cognitive dissonance. I want to believe this is true. It’s tempting to believe in the past 9 or so years that students have suddenly and spontaneously evolved new brains; that they are wired differently and we should teach them accordingly. There is something to this but making blanket claims that ALL kids experience this type of engagement with technology all the time is simply untrue. That the time they spend using media is all ‘good’, ‘productive’ and ‘educational’ is seriously misleading, too. I know this is NOT true because I actually teach real, live, students not 'actors' on You Tube Videos repeating words scripted for them by adults. I teach in a technology lab. In the last 5 years, in a class of 20 students, maybe 5 have what I would call basic technological competence. They do not know the difference between a file, a software program or folder let alone the myriad uses and learning potential of blogs, wikis, podcasts and social learning networks. They do not know how to change the volume on a computer and they do not know how to do a basic Google search, let alone fire up a web browser other than Internet Explorer (to get to Facebook). Most, however, have handheld gadgets like cell phones or ipods and/or ipod touches. So, many otherwise technologically illiterate students have the ability to open i-Tunes and use it to sync music to their players.

When students do use technology, what do they use it for?

The middle-schoolers I teach (as did middle-schoolers 20 years ago) have one over-powering objective: socialization and connection with fellow friends and classmates. So guess why they love their gadgets? SO. THEY. CAN.CONNECT. WITH. EACH. OTHER. Once connected, they can spread the rumor about the pool on the third floor or the story about how Mr. Jensen tripped over a dry erase marker 3rd period. Or make plans to play or ride bikes. In other words, the majority of tech use by the majority of students is decidedly low tech. They are simply using tech to do what they have always done offline: connect, cajole, connive, and sometimes create. (future blog post). Mostly, students text or talk into a device that could be considered a tech device. Texting, of course is just typed talking. (Tsup? Nthn. Gowin 2 the game? Na. K. Cya. l8ter).

What’s the other thing students use technology for? MUSIC. Consuming (and making) music. Teens and music have always gone hand in hand. Thanks to technology, they can bring ‘their’ music with them wherever they go and 'share' with friends digitally (remember the mixtape?). There is an element of education and learning going on with all the music downloading and sharing which is encouraging and provides a good starting point for tech use in the classroom. We can examine how students find, download, consume and share music and use that as a model for how they can find, identify, examine, synthesize and share information related to our subject matter. Skilled i-Tunes use, however, does not qualify a student as a Digital Native. But, interestingly, the reason they have become skilled at i-Tunes use despite being decidedly technologically illiterate is that they want access to music and learning the basics of surfing, finding, downloading and syncing with i-Tunes had to be learned to get at it and then have it (music) as their own. Kids are fully and enthusiastically engaged in these processes. There is more to this which deserves another blog post but it illustrates the point that tech use is just a tool for achieving what students want. It's not about technology use for it's own sake. That is a good thing. We can learn from this. We adults DO get to caught up with the technology itself. In an education setting, tech use should rarely be about itself but about the subject matter at hand and increasing engagement and learning objectives through it's use.

So, how do you make the case for technology integration? I submit that one can justify technology use in the classroom for these reasons:

1- Cultural Competence

Technology is here to stay-both gadgets and software. It has become embedded in our social and cultural norms. Businesses are using technologies routinely and require tech. competency in a global climate. Individuals rely on personal computers and devices to absorb, synthesize and transmit information. As educational institutions we should be the ones teaching how to use technology for the highest possible purposes of investigating, researching, creating, thinking, reflecting, writing, documenting, connecting, collaborating, and remixing and synthesizing. In short: learning.

2- Engagement.

It is becoming increasingly evident without the need for the Digital Native argument that young people are truly engaged when they are using technology. Student engagement is the number one priority of any educational institution. Sadly, of course, it is lacking in many classrooms which look and feel irrelevant and outdated to young people (whether or not they use technology). Well planned technology use appears to be a cure for disengaged, "bored" students since having a hands-on experience using technology suddenly feels like the "real world" to students.

3. Individuation and Differentiation

I have written before that there is no such thing as a "class". And if a teacher actually utters those dreaded words, "Now class...." they immediately become Charlie Brown's teacher. No student sits in a classroom and identifies with the notion that they are part of this nebulous thing called a class. They are Julie, or Michael, Cesar or Alycia. And they want nothing more than to engage in activities that they can do as an individual...even if they might ultimately contribute to a larger group. Technology, makes this a reality for students-especially in 1:1 environments where students can complete tasks (learning objectives) using a computer, laptop or tablet PC. Once students are working on their own (individuation), we as teachers have the ability to differentiate learning activities as well depending on student capacity. The possibilities for differentiation using technologies are enormous and not limited to one mode (students can read, write, consume and create stories and media among other things).

FINAL WORD: Flip the Digital Native Paradigm

Our curricula and learning objectives should always drive our efforts at tech integration. Not the other way around. But, as teachers, we need to know what is out there. What website, software or app would enhance/enrich a student’s experience with your subject? We must always be on the lookout. Always learning (RSS feeds, anyone!).

We can be the Digital Natives for Education. We should stay ahead of the curve and know what’s out there and how it can best be used in our classrooms to support already existent educational aims, content and objectives.

If Textbooks Go Digital, Do We Lose Deep Learning?

It really is a fascinating time to be living and to be an Educator. Why? Because it's all changing. Quickly, too- '21st century skills', 'flat world', 'long tail', digital distribution', 'Google everything', 'wikis', 'mashups', 'twitter', 'learners as content creators', 'digital 'text'books'-these are all 'recent' inductees into the lexicon of Education professionals everywhere. They cause excitement for some, and confusion, frustration or resistance for others. Digesting it all and figuring out how students can benefit from any of it is a huge undertaking.

TOOLS OR GAME CHANGERS?
I will cut to the chase. New digital technologies are both Tools AND Paradigm Busters. If they were just tools, teachers everywhere could simply say, "No thanks, I'm not 'into' technology. I'll keep doing what I've been doing." One argument I have heard is that going digital (think online textbooks) will create shortcuts to reflection, knowledge and understanding. I have deep respect for this concern because they (reflection, knowledge and understanding) are the bedrock to all we do as Educators. But I have to ask: Why would going digital be considered a shortcut to any of these?

Take a moment to think about each of these:

• Think about a Textbook.


• Think about You Tube.

When you thought about a textbook chances are, you 'saw' a flat, unopened, thick, worn, book sitting on a desk in front of you. Nothing dynamic or interesting about it. There is no chance for interaction with a textbook. When you thought of You Tube, maybe you thought of a specific video you saw recently, or just had a palpable feeling of the potential things you could view there (redeeming or otherwise). At the very least, you realize there would be clicking, searching and viewing going on at You Tube based on your interests and inclinations.
Let me clarify a significant difference between the two: Textbooks are not primary source documents. They are amalgamations of second-hand information produced by "experts" and marketed by profit-oriented companies. You Tube, on the other hand, contains nothing but primary source material whether by kids, adults, teachers, musicians, amateurs or professionals. Which is more authentic? Which do think has more appeal to students aged 10-18?

It seems having interaction with dynamic, multimedia-rich information has the potential to plant the seeds to richer, deeper learning-if the online versions are themselves organized. That's the key. We can't just turn on computers and the internet and say, "OK, kids, have at it! Go learn about cellular biology (or trigonometry or contrapuntal analysis or parts of speech) ". It will take Educators from everywhere to compile and organize the digital resources and produce new kinds of 'textbooks' that include text but also photographs, interactive maps, documents, videos and primary sources of all kinds gathered for each and every topic of each and every Unit taught each year.

REFLECTION, KNOWLEDGE and UNDERSTANDING

What is the nature of Reflection?
By nature, reflection is something done 'after' (and sometimes during) exposure to some stimulus (event, book, new information, conversation, etc..). Teachers have forever guided the reflective moments and thoughts of students. Perhaps the new way of doing this starts with this: "Now, please turn off the computer monitor for a moment think about...." I'm not convinced that we will lose the ability to reflect because we read and absorb information from digital sources rather than books.

How do we gain Knowledge?
Typically, if we have learned a thing to the point that it resides in our memories for easy recall and/or the new information has changed us in some way, we believe have gained knowledge. If we (students) experience a concept in diverse ways (say a paragraph of text about the Parthenon, followed by Flickr photos taken by 'amateurs' of it, followed by a digital reproduction of a Parthenon metope). Contrast this with how you would have learned about the Parthenon in a traditional textbook. Have you learned more? Less? It's hard to believe that learning the digital way would yield less knowledge. (Incidentally, what using amateur photos does is store the idea in the mind of a student that Greece is a place she can physically travel to when she has the opportunity. It becomes more 'authentic'. She KNOWS it's still around and is a relic from the past.)

What does it mean to Understand something?
This has always been a perplexing, philosophical question. Does knowing something mean we understand it? Not necessarily. As an example: How can something such as a photon or electron be both a wave and a particle? Quantum physics proves it to be so. But do we understand why? What we do know about understanding comes about by sharing knowledge. Are there digital (online) places where people routinely share knowledge? Yes! they're called social networks and they can't be found in texbooks. Classes are, by design, social networks. By sharing information and knowledge offline and online, better understanding will result. But again, there is no loss of understanding using online networks. It's just a change in venue from the classroom.

THE POTENTIAL FOR DEEP LEARNING IN (OUR) DIGITAL FUTURE
Far from being the beginning of the end of reflection, knowledge and understanding, I believe we are on the brink of an Education Renaissance where deep learning will be routine precisely because of the digital availability of information once all of us realize that the digital tools represent something far greater- a total paradigm shift away from teachers (and textbooks) being the 'sage on the stage', once and for all. Teachers would benefit from understanding that their new role is to find, remix and make available the exact information that they want students to reflect on, to know and to understand.