Search this site
Other stuff

All banner artwork by Brady Johnson, college student and (semi-) starving artist.

Locations of visitors to this page

My latest books:


        Available now

       Available Now

Available now 

My book Machines are the easy part; people are the hard part is now available as a free download at Lulu.

 The Blue Skunk Fan Page on Facebook

EdTech Update





The relationship between tools and creativity

In Life Beyond G Suite, my friend David Jakes asks:

If you believe that the use of G Suite has made you, your students, or your school more innovative, that's good.  My question:  how long will G Suite continue to be something that inspires innovative thought and practice?

My guess:  Not forever.  G Suite will have a shelf life.  Everything does.  Of course, it will continue to grow and improve - but will that be enough for you and your kids?  More importantly, will it become more interesting for you and for your students and will it help kids learn differently?  Will G Suite still be a catalyst for innovative practice in a year? Two years?  Five years? How long before G Suite becomes the next interactive whiteboard?  It's available, it's useful, but...

I am not terribly sure whether any technology impacts one's creative or innovative capacities. Am I as a writer more or less creative using GSuite's Docs than I was in 1981 when I was using AppleWriter?  Or while using Word or AppleWorks or typing in the text editor of my blog?

Would Jakes argument require a new type of paint brush in order for da Vinci to be creative? Or providing a new kind of camera for Annie Leibovitz to take imaginative portrait?

It is not the tool, but the mind behind it, that makes us innovative - in education and in life.

The greater the transparency, the less one needs to think about how to operate a tool, the better. If I have a concern about the development of G Suite it is not about what new features it may add, but whether the new features will turn a simple tool into one so complex that it actually interferes with the creative process.


The unfollowing is brought to you by politics

This weekend I "unfollowed" a dozen or more friends, colleagues, relatives on Facebook and Twitter.

What had been a pleasant diversion (funny cat videos), a source of interesting educational news, and photos from friends and family has recently simply become a swamp of political hysteria - from both my left and right leaning friends. I am glad there is the option on Facebook to "unfollow but still stay friends."

The folks I know who send the greatest number of these stories and links out are politically involved, passionate, and well-meaning. Many of the issues about which they care don't have a direct bearing on their own circle of friends or family so they are demonstrating care about the greater good. And I know I do need to stay informed, involved, and active politically  - maybe more so now than ever in my life. But a person can only take so much.

My unfriending task this weekend has caused me to reflect as well on what kind and how much stuff I personally post on social media. Am I as guilty of over sharing as those I have just unfriended? I try to limit my stuff to personal (grandkids), kind and actually funny humor, and interesting educational bits. Were I charged $5 a post and a buck a Tweet, would I send as much stuff out? Probably not.

In 2011, I wrote a post called TMI-Signs of over-communication. In it I asked:

I whack "over-communicators" regularly from my RSS feeds (those suffering from blogorrhea), my Twitter account, and from Facebook. I regularly suspend getting messages from hyperactive mailing lists like LM_Net. 

Some guidelines?

  1. If you had to pay a couple bucks for each e-mail e-mailed, every Twitter tweeted, or every blog post posted, would you still send it?
  2. Are you the sole source of this information or are you just passing it along?
  3. Is the information actually important or just "nice to know?"
  4. Is the message of interest to a majority of those receiving it?
  5. Are you communicating through channels that are "required" or "voluntary?" (We have one school e-mail list that is not optional for district employees to receive; another that is.)
  6. Is the message as succinct, clear and non-technical as possible with the reason for the message clearly communicated? 

Send or not to send - what are your criteria?

Are we doing our personal political causes a favor by automatically re-posting or sharing each piece of politrivia (I just made that up) that flits before our eyes? How do we learn to focus on the important? I worry that we spend so much time hemming and hawing about the latest minor stupidity that we may lose track of the major changes which are important. (I believe magicians call this misdirection.)

So, if you find I don't follow you, it doesn't mean I don't like you.


BFTP: 12 signs your tech leadership is obsolescent

Soft skills are hard and hard skills can be outsourced.

Nathan Mielke

The adjective obsolescent refers to the process of passing out of use or usefulness -- becoming obsolete. The adjective obsolete means no longer in use--outmoded in design, style, or construction. (

If a person became a technology director before about 1995, he/she probably came up through the teaching ranks. As a classroom teacher or librarian, if these folks showed an aptitude for, or even an interest in, educational technology, there was a path to administering it. After about 1995 computers, district-wide educational management applications and networks became sufficiently complex and important to the day-to-day operation of schools that technology directors were hired from business or computer science programs with little or no experience as teachers.

Being able to manage the Novell server took precedence over being able to help teachers use an Apple IIe with students.

I sense another change in the technology director hiring practices is overdue. (See: The Changing Role of the CTO. November 2010.) The new technology director seems a blend of technical expert, educator, and administrator (with perhaps a soupcon of visionary leadership). And I have no idea where these folks will come from. Educational technology degree programs?

Anyway, here are few ways to know if your school's technology leadership may be past its expiration date.

12 signs your technology leadership is obsolescent*:

  1. Your district still uses school-based Exchange or Groupwise servers for e-mail. If your district isn't actively moving the cloud, you are behind the curve. Outsourcing, SaaS, and ubiquitous resource access is the name of the game.
  2. Your school still blocks all social networking sites and Web 2.0 tools. Fear, control, and convenience-driven blocking is not in the best interest of kids. CIPA is not an excuse for mining the powerful educational uses of these tools.
  3. Your school does not have a wireless network connection to the Internet for students to use and bans the use of personally-owned devices. BYOD will be the only means of having the computing resources for everyday applications for many districts. If you aren't doing this, you had at least better be discussing it.
  4. Your district does not use an advisory committee to form technology policies and priorities. Top-down technology use policies that are created without input from teachers, administrators, parents and students are usually so stringent that technology cannot not be used to its fullest. Control freaks are so last century.
  5. Your district's tech budget does not include funds for staff development. I don't know of a district that follows the old 1/3 hardware, 1/3 software/infrastructure, 1/3 training formula that has long been recommended. But there better be funds for training if any of the gadgets will be used well.
  6. Your tech director doesn't attend technology conferences and only reads technology journals. Things move too fast in both education and technology to ignore what the rest of the world is doing. Keeping one's head in the sand is not a viable survival technique. Your technology director better be reading not just PC World, but Educational Leadership and Leading and Learning.
  7. Your tech director does not have a means of coordinating his/her department's efforts with those of the office of curriculum and instruction, district and building administration, staff development, assessment, public relations, and special education. This one is tough, time-consuming and never fully realized, but its increasingly critical. The success of the technology department is determined 100% by how well it makes other departments successful. Formal communication channels are now mandatory.
  8. Your tech director can't define 21st century skills, inquiry/project-based learning, or differentiated instruction. We've gotten the "business side" of technology down in schools pretty well - SIS, payroll, transportation, HR, etc. But unless the department takes the pedagogical uses just as seriously, it's not evolving.
  9. Your school is not taking full advantage of its library media programs or librarians in technology implementations. Technology directors need all the help they can get in training and support, and empowered librarians are critical components in providing these things at a building level. If the library and technology departments are not blended, both will suffer.
  10. Your district does not have a K-12 articulated information/technology literacy skills curriculum. A district is not taking student technology skills seriously without such formal documents and guides. This needs to be a joint effort between curriculum specialists and the technology department - neither can do it alone.
  11. Your technology program brags about the 5% of the teachers who use technology well instead of the 100% who use it well. Teachers who are early adopters and technology enthusiasts can be found in every district - even those with no technology leadership at all. It's what's happening in the other 95% of the district's classrooms that defines technology leadership. What's the vision of standard practice when it comes technology use in the classroom?
  12. Your tech director doesn't have his or her own PLN. I was going to say "Your tech director doesn't read the Blue Skunk blog" but that sounds pretty self-important. However relevant technology directors do use social media - including blogs and Twitter to stay informed and involved in discussions surrounding educational technology. 

To a degree we are all obsolescent. But I would say showing six or more signs of obsolescence qualifies one as being obsolete. (I better get to work!)

Other signs your technology director should be put out to pasture?

See also: COSN's Framework of Essential Skills for the K-12 CTO  

*This post was inspired by J. Robinson's 21st Century Principal post: 5 Indications Your Leadership is Obsolete for 21st Century Schools.

Original post Dec 19, 2011