Drowning in resources

Tech department mission: to solve problems you didn't have before there was technology
                                                                                                      Blue Skunk

Last week I had a conversation with a very earnest, smart, and ambitious young man who has a new educational technology application under development that he would like to bring to market. Its primary function would be to assist educators in their efforts to curate and share digital resources using their GoogleDrive collaboratively. It uses a sophisticated form of tagging assisted by AI. It offers a curriculum planning/project management tool. It looks great and useful and friendly. 

I wish the developer only the best but I hope he understands he is going into a tough sales market. Digital tools for educators are not just plentiful - they are overwhelming.

In our district a teacher wishing to compile a list of resources for a unit already has a very long list of options (supported by the district technology and curriculum departments):

• GoogleDocs personal document
• GoogleDocs Team Drive
• Google Classroom
• Google Sites
• Schoology Learning Management System

Then there a lots and lots of "unauthorized" tools that could provide curated lists of materials. Things like Waklet and Edublogs and Symbaloo and - well you get the drift. I would guess not a day goes by that the classroom teacher who tries to keep current on educational technology trends isn't introduced to a new "must-have" application. And those poor souls who suffer from FOMO probably get sucked into trying many of them out.

This flood of new applications may well drown some of our teaching staff and they will simply give up trying to stay afloat. It may well cause students and parents frustrations in learning to navigate 6 different tools used by 6 different teachers. It may overwhelm our tech support staff trying to evaluate these tools for CIPA compliance and to roster them, etc.

So if I had a magic wand, here is what I would require of all new classroom educational technology applications that come to market: 

• It must solve a real problem - as identified by actual classroom teachers.
• It must provide a unique set of useful features.
• It must be designed to work with current systems like popular learning management systems, GSuite, etc.
• It must have been beta tested extensively.
• It must have a clear statement of CIPA/FERPA compliance.
• It must be designed for easy integration with SSO, rostering programs, etc.
• It must come with good tutorials for those using it - for staff, students, or parents.

I am in no way complaining about those brave souls who want to help better education through the use of new applications. It is, after all, how progress is made.

But please make it easier for us in schools (and increase your chance of success) by thinking hard about why you are creating this program. That is is about solving problems in classroom  - not about problems in your bank account.

BFTP: All children can learn or will learn?

I heard the well-intentioned suggestion that educators should use as a guiding statement/principle/motto "All children will learn" rather than "All children can learn." 

And I've been thinking about that.

I've always thought the statement "All children can learn" to be simplistic and obvious. All children DO learn by nature since learning is a means to empowerment and it's human nature to want to become more powerful. Now they may not learn what we want to teach or in ways we like to teach, but all humans do learn.

"All children will learn" sounds rather threatening to my ears. (Say it with a German accent and imagine a military officer with riding crop and monocle saying it.) It's also pretty easy to turn the statement snarky by adding "to avoid punishment. Or "to find school irrelevant." Or "to cheat on homework." You get the idea.

How about a more aspirational statement if one feels such a thing is needed for professional motivation? My vote goes to something like "All children will love to learn." That's a statement I can get behind.

______________________________________

While waxing philosophical this cold Sunday morning, I thought I'd update my "Little List of Library and Technology Laws". Here are a few new ones...

Johnson's Library Mission: To get back overdue readers, not overdue books.

Johnson's Observation About Public Speaking: You're never bored when you are the one doing the talking.

Johnson's Rule of Technology Reliability: It's better to have one computer that works all the time than two computers that work 50% of the time.

Johnson's Question About Fairness: If the cure only works for 80% should we withhold it out of fairness to the other 20%?

Johnson's Observation About Office Climate: If the supervisor ain't having fun, nobody's having fun.

Johnson's Rule of Sincerity: Compliments are always more sincere when accompanied by a box of doughnuts.

Johnson's Rule on Coasting: Complacency is dangerous both in love and technology.

Johnson's Rule of Creativity in the Workplace and Classroom: You can't suppress it so you may as well channel it.

Johnson's Disclaimer: Anything I've said that you don't like, you've obviously misinterpreted.

Johnson's Law of Literacy: If one can read but is not changed by reading, why bother?

Johnson's Rule of Indispensability: If your job is eliminated, your boss should really, really come to regret it.

Johnson's Rules for Spreading Manure: 1) Always check which way the wind is blowing 2) Never lick your finger to find out.

Johnson's Technology Formula: T - t = 0 (Technology without training is a paperweight.)

Johnson's Moral Imperative: Subversion in the creation of a good school is not a vice.

Johnson's Rule of Technology Perspective: Every tech problem is a big tech problem to the person experiencing it.

Johnson's Experience in Assigning Tasks: You may as well give unpleasant jobs to people who are already unhappy.

Add your own laws!

Original post 1/5/14