As part of the presentation, our MSHS Principal showed the clip “Learning to Change – Changing to Learn” from the Consortium for School Networking. I hadn’t seen the clip since we showed it to our first group of parents last year. After a year of teaching in 1:1 classrooms, it was amazing to realize the reflective nature of the internal monologue inside my head as I watched this clip. Some quotes that were particularly noteworthy:

• The student is at the center and school is just one of the places where they learn. (1:53)
• We’ve got a classroom system when we could have a community system. (2:23)
• Start with teachers. If I want my students to be making global connections, then I’m going to start with my teachers first. (2:48)
• The coin of the realm will be: do you know how to find information, do you know how to validate it, do you know how to synthesize it, do you know how to leverage it, do you know how to communicate it, do you know how to collaborate with it, do you know how to problem solve with it? (4:11)
• It’s the death of education, but the dawn of learning. (4:55)

I’m referring to a new blogging sharing platform called Posterous. Yes, I realize I called it “blogging” in the title of the post, but on 2nd thought, I’m not sure that it’s “true” blogging. It’s really just a place to post and share things, without all the bells and whistles. If you are an educator who has been thinking about blogging but not sure where to start, or maybe you’re intimidated by all the “techie” stuff associated with blogging, Posterous is for you. Heck, even if you’re not an educator and you just want a quick-and-dirty way to share stuff with friends or family, it’s worth checking out.

If I were new to all this Web2.0 tech stuff for learning (which I’m clearly not, but play along, now), I think that Posterous would be the hands-down simplest place to start. I mean, seriously — you don’t even need an ACCOUNT. All you need to do is send stuff to them from your email address and suddenly you’ve created a page.  I don’t think it gets any easier than this! They say on their site it’s dead simple, and they’re not kidding.

Here’s what I did to try it out:

1. Went to their website.
2. Clicked the link where it says Step 2: email anything to post@posterous.com.
3. My GMail account opened, from which I sent a very simple message to post@posterous.com.
4. Within seconds, I received an email telling me that my post had been created.
5. Clicking on the links brought me to my new post in my new and ultra-sleek blog.

The lovely and simple email message from Posterous:

And here is the actual new post:

Now if that ain’t a pocket o’change, I dunno what is. Seriously — try it. You have nothing to lose but 30 seconds. It really couldn’t be easier.

He is not alone.

Within 5 minutes, another colleague (from a different department) joined our conversation and before I knew it, questions were pouring out all over the table. Generally, both teachers felt they wanted to “do all this stuff” but didn’t know where to start. My response: Start small.*

“But what is ’small’?” they asked.

“How do I know where to start?” they continued.

I spent 20 minutes with them, during which I showed them a couple of different blog platforms, a few “key” edutech bloggers they might want to follow, and some great wiki examples. I (hopefully) calmed their fears a bit and allayed concerns about being so far behind in the edutech world. It was a great little mini-session, and not an unusual one, I might add. However, the conversation was a genesis for this very blog post because I hope very much that educators in their position don’t get overwhelmed and stop altogether!

My 5 Tips for Starting Small:

1. Remember: you can’t do it all. You just can’t. 
2. Choose one thing to do differently. When you feel comfortable with that one thing, choose one more thing. (Give each “thing” at least 2 weeks, incidentally. Psychologists already know that it takes 21 days for the brain to be rewired into thinking something is a habit.)
3. Read 3 or 4 blogs / websites of other educators you admire who are using tech in ways you want to. Note: I actually advise against reading some of those “big names” regularly when you are just starting your edutech journey. Why? Because they can be overwhelming! Remember, those Big Guys (and Gals) have been doing this for a while, and they often generally assume that their audience is up-to-date on the latest and greatest trends. Beginners usually aren’t. I instead advise finding someone to regularly follow who seems just ahead of you, not miles ahead. Success will feel more attainable that way. (Personal example: I am still continually overwhelmed and amazed by Wes Fryer – though I love what he does I often feel like I’ll never get there. However, I began my journey following people whose names are perhaps not as well known, but were doing things I thought were pretty dang cool. And I daresay their names are becoming “bigger”!)
4. Choose a platform to reflect and share on your process. A blog, Twitter, Plurk, the Classroom 2.0 Ning  – these are all easy places to start.
5. Keep doing it! And when you get discouraged, read Tip #1 again!

www.change.gov

Not long after McCain conceded the race, this site was up and running. The Administration-Elect has a blog. The Presiden-Elect is asking me, you, anybody, everybody to

“share your vision for what America can be, where President-Elect Obama should lead this country. Where should we start together?”

Talk about democracy in action! The Obama Administration is actively seeking input¹ directly from concerned citizens: no Senatorial filters or Congressional messengers. And it’s seeking it in a way that is most likely to appeal to the change-agents of the future: our students. In 8 years, students who are currently in Grade 6 will be given the right to vote. But they no longer have to wait for their voices to be heard. Long before they are granted the power of the ballot, our students have been given the power of the Internet.

Of course, it remains to be seen how this information will be acted upon. I, for one, am grateful for the opportunity to participate.

¹ – People talk debate about technology being transformative. In the ‘old days’ (i.e. before November 4, 2008) students used to send letters (I sent mine to Reagan when I was in 4th grade!) or emails to the White House uninvited, with little hope of them being read and even less hope of a response.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Can you think of the many ways to use the Wordle tool for speeches in your classroom?

Image at http://www.wordle.net.

Edit: Just to be balanced, here is the same text done with a Tag Crowd.

It’s a term, and nothing more. Here is what I think is most important: IT IS NOTHING NEW.

“edupunk is student-centered, resourceful, teacher- or community-created rather than corporate-sourced, and underwritten by a progressive political stance. . . . Edupunk, it seems, takes old-school Progressive educational tactics–hands-on learning that starts with the learner’s interests–and makes them relevant to today’s digital age, sometimes by forgoing digital technologies entirely.”

-definition provided by Stephen Downes

I have seen it discussed in flurries on Twitter. I have read Jim Groom’s original post, where he coined the term. I have followed some of my favorite bloggers’ posts about the term, and found some new ones, too. I saw a student’s take on it (insightful, as usual) and I have seen the much discussed stub on Wikipedia. I’ve done my research. I was even invited to share all the best “edupunk” ideas I use regularly (though I had to respectfully decline). I’ve seen all the hype and I just can’t shake the feeling that we have seen this all before.

With all respect to Andy Rush — I know, I know, maybe I shouldn’t take it all so seriously. After all, Jim Groom just seems like a crazy dude with a love for technology and learning. But here’s the thing: lots of other educators (and students) out there ARE taking it seriously. And it’s turning into a bunch of hoopla.

Good educators have been creating “student-centered, resourceful, teacher- or community-created rather than corporate-sourced” learning experiences for centuries. It is JUST GOOD PRACTICE. Let’s assume we are all well-read, well-versed educators who have studied the theory as well as had the experience. We have all read Piaget, Skinner, Postman, and Montessori. We have been teaching our students (maybe even through trial and error? God forbid!) and we have learned what works best. We know that “hands-on learning that starts with the learner’s interests–and makes them relevant” is the best — whether that includes digital technologies or not. So why do we need to label it something other than what it is already? It is already GOOD PRACTICE. To paraphrase Tina Turner (who definitely was not punk): What’s punk got to do with it?

I agree with Warlick when he says:

The term is important . . . because it associates with people’s images of themselves and what they do. . .

Edupunk as Portal comments, in reply to Stephen Downes

And although Warlick thinks it’s a good term because it gets people’s attention, we have to recognize that perhaps “punk” is not how all educators see themselves and what they do. This is, I think, what Mrs. Durff was getting at in her comment about it being a “distasteful” term. If I do all the things that are considered “edupunk,” why do I have to be called this? Can’t I just be called a creative teacher? I don’t feel “punk” and I don’t really want to be “punk,” for that matter. I just want to be a good (if not great) educator who does what’s best for her students and their learning.

Like Gardner Campbell, I am skeptical of this term. I agree with him when he says,

There was DIY long before punk, and long after.

Yes, it has sparked some interesting discussion, but will it change anything? David Gran thinks all this debate is furthering our understanding of eduators’ relationships to the global community via technology. I can’t agree with that. I think my understanding of relationships to and within the global community will continue to be fostered and developed without this misnomer. I fear this new term will be the measuring stick for our future educational endeavors. Will we be asking ourselves at every new lesson, assessment task, or faculty meeting, “Are we edupunk enough?” Do we really want this?

I can understand and take into consideration the true spirit that the term embodies, and I can see the creative vibes that it originated out of. That’s all fine and good — and perhaps Jim Groom never intended it to go this far. But I’ve already decided that I don’t really want the term “edupunk” to be how I am described as an educator, for reasons I’ve outlined above. Nevertheless, I do have a few genuine questions:

Insightful Question #1:

I have to wonder if the reason why this term gained such ground in the post-secondary edublogosphere is because post-secondary institutions traditionally have not been hotbeds of ultra-progressive, uber-hip, pedagogically sound teaching and learning. (FLASHBACK: I can count on one hand the number of professors I had who actually were good teachers. I distinctly recall one professor who gave entire lectures standing in one spot, reading from the textbook, pausing between pages to look at the ceiling — we all wondered if he was signalling to the mothership.)

This situation, that is the lack of effective teaching in universities, is of course changing. Many university professors are now actually (gasp!) certified teachers with B.Ed.s and the like. But I wonder how many university professors (outside of the Faculty of Education) have spent time in a kindergarten classroom? That’s where the REAL D.I.Y., hands-on, teaching and learning happens, ladies and gentlemen — we all have MUCH to learn from these very talented KG teachers, and I daresay more high school and university educators would benefit by spending some time in their classrooms.

Insightful Question #2:

If “edupunk” is anti-establishment and anti-corporation, does that mean a true Edupunk does not use any tools provided by large-scale companies? So does that mean no Google? no Flickr? no QuickTime? Alas – these are all tools provided by corporations. Does my using them mean I am succumbing to corporate interests? What about my association with and work for the IBO? They are a non-profit organization but still a recognized “brand.” Yet they are an organization that I believe represents learning needs and goals of students around the world, in the most open-minded way possible.

Image credits:

• Too much information by Violator3 licensed under CC 2.0.
• question con 3 by svilen001 under image license agreement.

The sad and unfortunate truth in many schools is that we work in isolation, trapped in our classrooms, our departments, our sections, our schools or our districts.

After a weekend conference at our school, I was inspired to use the former to combat the latter. Collaborating with another teacher, I’ve implemented a school-wide wiki – available only on our portal, unfortunately – to share practices of differentiation. There are areas for differentiating by readiness, interest, or learning profile. Within each of these three categories, teachers can add resources to help with diagnostics, content, process, product or affect differentiation.

I’ve modeled the concept on that of a Creative Commons license, without referring to it as such.. Specifically, “there is only one rule: If you modify an existing resource, please add your new creation to the wiki so that another teacher may benefit from your work.”

If there is one thing I’ve heard from teachers, it’s that they want concrete
examples of how to implement change in their classrooms. This is an opportunity to provide those concrete examples for each other. I hope that some of us can lead by example, easily and freely sharing and distributing our best-practice. I hope that somebody else will come along, take my work and make it better. And I hope they share it with me again.

Together Everyone can Achieve More

Photos:
“driveby tree” by Lorrie McClanahan
“The World at my Fingertips” by Jill Greenseth

With all due respect to Gil Scot-Heron… 

True revolutions are not created or planned. They are organic: they arise when the needs of the masses (students, teachers, and even administrators) outstrip what the dominant establishment (the monolithic entity of ‘Education’) is able to supply.

We are on the precipice of a revolution.  There is a growing number of teachers who realize there is a better way.  There is a change in the demographics of both teachers and administrators as innovators and early adopters of these new technologies take up positions of responsibility within schools. There are groups of students who are becoming more aware of the vast educational possibilities that collaborative technologies allow.

There are two ways for this revolution to be truly initiated: either a watershed event a la the Boston Tea Party, or through a methodical plan of actively searching out the agents of change, slowly proselytizing by example and converting whoever we can whenever we can.  In either case, the goal is to create the critical mass necessary to evoke true reform and revolution in the sphere of education.

Once 50% +1 of a school or even a department are using collaborative technologies in a meaningful and productive way, can the remaining population afford not to? Once the teachers in these trailblazing departments or schools move on to their next destination, as is always the case in international schools, will they willingly go back to the way things were?  These teachers then become the messengers of change as they enter their new schools, bringing with them their expertise and the power of their personal network.

This revolution will be a grass-roots, bottom-up shift from teachers who understand the power of Web 2.0. There should not, can not, and will not be shift in educational philosophy decreed by the powers. That’s not the way revolution works.

Photo Credit: localsurfer