Have To or Get To

Seth Godin's post Get to vs. have to resonated with me. In it he asks:

How much of your day is spent doing things you have to do (as opposed to the things you get to do)?

and suggests the higher the percentage of things you "get to do" as opposed to "have to do," the greater the likelihood of happiness and success.

Were Jessica Hagy at indexed to look at this, she might draw:

Yes, it's a book checkout card, not an index card. Tough noogies.

One workshop I give touches on the difference between intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation, revisiting Ed Psych 101. A question I pose to illustrate the difference is "If you won the lottery tomorrow and never HAD to work again, what things do you do at work that you would continue to do?" I am sometimes disappointed that teachers and librarians are rather slow to come up with tasks that they like to do so much that they'd keep doing them.

Eventually a short list appears:

• I'd still read children/YA literature.
• I'd still read aloud to kids.
• I'd still teach kids how to use ____________ software (KidPix, Inspiration, PowerPoint).
• I'd still try out new software or technologies.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi in his old book Flow writes about people who are able to take even mundane tasks (washing dishes, loading trucks, working on assembly lines, etc.) and turn them into intrinsic challenges by setting personal goals or challenges. I expect many of us have figured out how to do this one way or another.

So far I run about 80% "get to" parts vs. 20% "have to" parts of my job. I genuinely like coming to work everyday. Well, almost everyday. It's a combination of luck and attitude probably. If ever the "have to" portion of my job gets bigger than the "get to" part, I hope I have the good sense and courage to move on.

What's on your list of "get to's?" What would you keep doing even if you won the lottery? How do we encourage those poor people who seem to live an entire work-life of "have to's" to find a more fitting position?

Handouts for sessions that don't need'm

Printed on card stock, four per page. Whadda ya think? Satisfy those who both like and hate handouts?

Conference season is on us me. Inquiring minds need to know.

Follow-up on IWB entry

Wes Fryer, being the great guy he is, wrote a long, thoughtful reply to my snip at him for one of his recent posts on IWBs. I hate it when I get "out-niced" and Wes gave me a better reply than I deserved. Humbled.

Jim, the teacherninja, asked a good question:

What about your district, Doug? Are there IWBs in every class or just a number in each school or what?

We now have installed about 200 or so IWBs (Smartboards) along with mounted LCD projectors in our 7200 student district. This is the third year of a seven year plan to so equip all classrooms and teaching areas in our schools.

I've written about (and defended) this project a few times in the Blue Skunk. IWBs seem to draw a good deal of criticism from constructivism fundamentalists like Gary Stager (who I also recognize as a true child advocate).

These are among the observations I've made about SmartBoards. Oh, be sure to read the comments - they are often more informative than the posts themselves. And notice how most of the writers who like IWBs are actual teachers; those who don't like them are pundits.

• Why IWBs? Survey results
• How to get an IWB in our district
• The technology glass
• Why I love tech-using kids
• (If anyone is interested in a more generic description of my school district and its technology use, it can be found here: What would Karl see?.

While it can seem frustrating, not having the funds to do all-at-once, top-down technology projects is a good thing. Most technologies we roll out over a number of years. Because of this the early adapters and enthusiasts get them first, suffer the problems of being on the bleeding-edge, and truly create a teacher-led, teacher-changed school culture. (You are now odder if you don't use an IWB in most schools in our district than if you do.)

And as with all technology implementations, we do our best with staff training given the resources at our disposal. Each teacher who gets a SmartBoard is required to participate in eight hours of direct instruction on its use, has the benefit of a shared pool of resources for SmartBoard, and the services of an excellent in-house trainer (a media specialist who has 20% of her time dedicated to the IWB project.)

OK, let the arrows fly - again.