Jen Hegna is making the case for Facebook

Facebook is distracting my personal time with learning. Jen Hegna

My friend and colleague Jen Hegna over in the Byron schools has a great post "Making the Case for Facebook" on her Grin and Bear I.T. blog.

Jen writes:

Facebook ... is blocked for students and staff in my district. In my own personal use of the tool, I am now recognizing that work and personal information are blurring. I subscribe to many educational Fan Pages, Groups, and have had some fantastic discussions with folks all over the world via Facebook! ...  I decided I had to do something to start a conversation in my own district to consider opening Facebook to staff and students. If I were an innovative and talented teacher, who had a couple of job offers on the table:

• District A: Great school district, great community, great kids, BLOCKS social media tools like Youtube, Twitter, and Facebook from staff and students.
• District B: Great school district, great community, great kids, social media is OPEN to staff and students and teachers are encouraged to find educational use of the tool that all kids are using anyway.

Which one I would choose? To me its easy.   Sure, there may be those who would much prefer District A – but for district leaders – who do you want in your talent pool?

I'll not steal Jen's thunder by repeating her post here - go read the original and watch her slideshow (and subscribe to her blog). But reading the post made me think of some things:

1. Even if one is the tech "director" in a district, one still needs to get buy in from fellow staff members. Jen's collaborative style of approaching this issue - through education and persuasion - creates a healthy attitude toward technology in a district. Change, light losing weight, is probably more permanent when done slowly and deliberately. 
2. Having a personal vision of education is vital. Jen's personal vision shines through. That vision, combined with actual steps toward moving other toward it, make a dynamite combination. How many educators have enough energy to whine about a policy, but don't go beyond complaining?
3. As Jen admits, her efforts have not yet been successful. But she, like anyone who has ever tried to create change, knows that is persistance, not brilliance, that gets things done.  Thanks goodness.

Thanks for sharing you efforts, Jen, and good luck. See you on Facebook!

BFTP: Why librarians should be in charge of educational technology

A weekend Blue Skunk "feature" will be a revision of an old post. I'm calling this BFTP: Blast from the Past. Original post February 20, 2006. I got fairly well blasted for this post five years ago with the number one comment - "But my librarian is nothing like you describe." Don't worry, folks, the non-tech librarians won't be around after this round of budget cuts.

If you want well and appropriately used educational technology in your school, turn its planning and implementation over to your library media specialists because they have:

1. A healthy attitude toward technology. The LMS considers and teaches not just how to use technology, but why and under what circumstances it should be used. (A sexist syllogism: Most librarians are women.  Women have a heathier attitude toward technology than men. Therefore most librarians have a healthy attitude toward technology.)

2. Good teaching skills. Unlike technicians they are more likely to use good pedagogical techniques and have more developed human relations and communication skills. Librarians are understanding and empathetic when technologically related stress occurs in the classroom.

3. An understanding of the use of technology in the information literacy process and its use in fostering higher level thinking skills. We view technology as just one more, extremely powerful tool that can be used by students completing well-designed information literacy projects. Many “technologists” are just now getting this.

4. Experience as skill integrators and collaborators. Integration of research and information literacy projects has been a long-term goal of school library programs, and as a result many LMSs have become excellent collaborators with classroom teaches, successfully strengthening the curriculum with information literacy projects. Librarians know kids, know technology and know what works.

5. Been models for the successful use of technology. The library’s automated library catalogs, circulation systems, electronic reference materials, and student accessible workstations all showed up well before classroom technologies. Teachers rightfully see the LMS as the educator with the most comfort with technology as well, which in turn bolsters their own self-confidence.

6. Provided in-building support. A flexibly scheduled LMS is a real asset to teachers learning to use or integrate technology. The LMS can work with the teacher in the library, lab or classroom. The LMS is available for questions that might otherwise derail a teacher’s application of technology. This as a primary advantage of the LMS as opposed to a classroom teacher having primary responsibility for staff development in technology.

7. A whole school view. Next to the principal, the LMS has the most inclusive view of the school and its resources. The LMS can make recommendations on where technology needs to be placed or upgraded as well as on what departments or teachers may need extra training and support in its use.

8. Concerns about the safe and ethical use of technology. Students will need to have the skills to self-evaluate information; understand online copyright laws and intellectual property issues; and follow the rules of safety and appropriate use of resources. Who but the librarian worries about this stuff?

Your reasons why to turn tech over to librarians?



Three futures: So what's the point?

I am working on the last chapter of my technology "survival" book for classoom teachers. Its focus is on the future and how it is up to each of us to help create the future we desire for ourselves and our students. The chapter will start with three possible scenarios for "high tech schools," based on trends I see today. I'll be sharing the drafts of these scenarios over the next few days. Your comments, as always, are welcome.

Three futures: So what's the point?

 The best way to predict the future is to invent it. Alan Kay

It’s really tough to be “for” or “against” technology in schools. As you can tell from the examples in the previous blog posts, “technology in schools” means different things to different people and to different organizations. In each scenario, there are aspects that that most of us like and aspects that we dislike – or even find frightening.

Skinner Elementary School had a single, focused mission: to get as many kids to pass tests at the lowest cost possible. And technology allowed it to do this. At Dewey High School, technology was a tool for helping create problem-solvers, team-workers, and independent learners. Duncan Middle School teachers used technology to engage students and enhance traditional teaching practices.

Yet each school also had problems. Skinner Elementary ignored most child development needs and treated children like robots. Dewey High could not satisfy parents or the state that their program provided sufficient rigor and met standards. And while Duncan Middle teachers provided “pockets of wow,” engaging technology use was the exception rather than the rule throughout the school and technology had no quantifiable impact on its mission.

In which school would you want to teach? Which school would you want your children or grandchildren to attend? With which school would be most proud to be associated? What school will be the school of the future? What does your ideal future school look like and use technology?

The biggest mistake teachers can make in technology use is to simply let the future happen to them rather than be a serious part of creating it. But how do you do this as a classroom teacher and still teach school full time and satisfy you current administrators?

That’s what the rest of the chapter will explore – how teachers can make their own technology futures.