Blog

Posted on

What is Student Voice?

After the recent NECC conference in Atlanta, several edu-blogs noted the absence of students participating in any meaningful way, with some calls for student participation in future conferences, and advocating organized student blogging.

The Fischbowl – NECC Reflection #1: Where were the students?
Beyond School – “Where are the Students?” Redux: Beyond NECC (A Tirade Against Infantilization)

We’re certainly glad to have some company in this cause! We’ve had Genertion YES students participating at NECC and other conferences for many years and this year at the Constructivist Celebration. I’ll be posting some of those reflections soon, but for now, I think it’s important to share some of the things we’ve learned about student voice over the last 10 years.

Generation YES was founded by Dr. Dennis Harper (see Edutopia article) on the idea that including students in the process of improving education is crucial, and that technology is a natural vehicle for that expression. The work we do with schools helps them start sustainable programs that create authentic opportunities for students to collaborate with adults and do projects that integrate technology. The key though, is that the research we base our programs on, and the research we do on our own schools shows strongly that DOING something is the key to student voice and student empowerment.

Student “voice” does not have anything to with talking (or blogging.) It’s about empowerment with a purpose — where students are guided by caring adults through the process of long term, meaningful change. When we offer opportunities to students to come to events like NECC, we don’t consider that empowerment. Students don’t have any stake in these conferences, and although they enjoy coming to these events (praise, lots of goodies, getting out of school, etc) the real empowerment happened back at their school.

Wikipedia offers an excellent article on student voice, well worth reading. “Student voice is the individual and collective perspective and actions of young people within the context of learning and education. It is identified in schools as both a metaphorical practice and as a pragmatic concern.“

“Pragmatic concern” is a polite way to say that it’s a challenging effort that involves working against entrenched attitudes and traditional views that youth should be “seen but not heard”. It can also be the most insanely rewarding work in the world.

Adam Fletcher, coordinator of Soundout.org, is someone we work with in this arena, in fact, we used to share office space. The Soundout.org website has great resources, tools, and publications, all free. It’s not easy to create a climate for true student voice in schools, but resources like this and the work of dedicated educators can help pave the way.

Posted on

Facility vs. Fluency

We confuse kids’ facility with technology with fluency. We go on about how “tech-savvy” kids are, how the “digital natives” outpace us oldsters in what they can do. In my experience, kids who really know what they are doing technology are the exceptions, the rest of them just muddle through, doing just enough to get by. They just do it quickly, don’t get married to one service or system, and don’t get upset when things don’t work.

Digital natives are completely different than previous generations? Oh please. Of course we need to treat them differently. Every child is different, not just generationally, but individually. Of course that means a teacher has to be aware of their worldview — when has this not been true?

We wonder why students don’t have good information literacy skills, but we reap what we sow. School has traditionally set itself up to be the single, unquestioned authority – teacher, curriculum, textbook, test — all taking place in a closed classroom, the beginning, middle and end of what the student needs.

So before, kids could NOT go to the library and NOT search out primary sources and NOT find the dozens of resources that might be out there. Today, kids can NOT search effectively and NOT learn about millions of resources–really, what’s changed?

Kids have always skimmed and crammed, because you can easily complete superficial assessments that way. In fact, it’s sometimes better if you don’t think too hard, you might confuse yourself with too complex thinking on simple test questions. Now, kids just skim a lot more stuff a lot faster and more easily share their skimming with their other friends, not unlike the well-worn Cliff Notes we passed around back in the day.

We dazzle ourselves with new technology, pretending that something has changed and that by studying this change, we will magically find solutions to problems that have nothing to do with the change.

Posted on

Leadership Day – Leaders of the Future

Scott McLeod challenged edu-bloggers to blog about effective school technology leadership on Wednesday, July 4. Great leadership is inclusive leadership, yet one stakeholder group often forgotten is students. Strangely enough, this stakeholder group is the largest in K-12 schools, with the most to lose if their voices are not heard. Conviniently enough, this digital generation has more direct experience with technology than any other group–if we were listening. Sadly enough, if students aren’t included in this effort to improve education with technology, we lose more than their technical know-how, we lose the opportunity to shape the ongoing conversation and find the leaders of tomorrow.

While we wonder where the future leaders of the educational technology movement will come from, there they sit in front of us everyday, being ignored. Thinking that “school” doesn’t understand what their lives are like outside of the classroom. Wondering what their role will be in changing the world. Wishing that someone would give them the opportunity to make a difference.

Enabling youth voice in K-12 schools isn’t simple. They might not say what you expect; it takes time to teach them how to speak their minds effectively and work collaboratively. And they keep growing up and leaving, so it never ends. I’m not talking about the kind of token youth panel you often see at educational technology conferences, where students who can be counted on to say acceptable things are trotted out for an hour, everyone nods and feels good about listening to youth voice and then lunch is served while the kids are conveniently bussed back from whence they came.

This is a lose-lose situation. We lose their input, convince them we don’t care, and miss the teachable moment. We enable dependence in youth by not allowing them to participate in the process of school decision-making. And technology is only a small part of this. The curtailing of student press freedom and the blocking of online discussion creates fewer opportunities for student’s voices to be heard in every avenue and less opportunity to practice these skills.

It’s not just about leadership in educational technology, we should be worried about where the leaders of tomorrow will learn how to be informed, involved citizens of the world.

Related Download: From Vision to Action: Including Student Leadership in Your Technology Plan (PDF) This 8-page guide contains research, sample language, practical suggestions, 6 models of student involvement, and a planning worksheet. Print it out and give it to your favorite tech planning committee members!

Posted on

Information overload? Let the kids decide.

In a recent post (Information Overload: Do Kids Manage Their Media Better?) on the Shaping Youth blog (about media and marketing influence on kids), executive director Amy Jussel discusses the difference between how adults and children handle information overload.

She quotes Marketing strategist Steve Rubel in an Ad Age article (unfortunately you have to be a subscriber to view this one) –

“In-boxes, smart phones and IM windows are overflowing. Always-on connections, mobile devices and new publishing tools have expanded the media we consume to include content from peers…New networks and platforms for participation are sprouting up and going supernova overnight, with no end in sight.”

Teachers looking at Web 2.0 and other technologies are well aware of this feeling of drinking from the firehose. The textbook is not the final word on any subject anymore (if it ever really was), you search for “lesson plans” on Google and get a number best expressed in scientific notation, parents want you to respond to email AND voicemail (and neither one of them work), you are supposed to download videos and upload podcasts and oh, by the way, here are 10 new tools invented yesterday that may or may not help you.

How will we teach students to handle all of this if we are overwhelmed ourselves?

But she asks a great question –

What if we preventively look to YOUTH for some of these answers? Youth voraciously digest media and STILL somehow seem to exercise more restraint than “addicted” adults overly dependent on their mobile devices and gizmos.

Many kids are able to ingest their digital media nuggets as tasty morsels instead of the ‘portion distortion’ some adults gorge upon, tanking up with “too much of a good thing.”

In my house, for example, my tween gets enamored in fits and starts with media’s ‘Next Great Thing’ then, like a pup with a new toy, she plays with it for awhile, puts it down and goes back to her primary modus operandi.

Why does this matter for school?

It matters if adults let feelings of inadequacy color what we teach and how we treat students. Information is overwhelming…. programming is hard…. the web is a scary, dangerous place… these messages are about adult fears. Students hear these as confirmation that adults don’t “get it” and it becomes just one more reason to tune out.

Students could be doing so much more to help teachers understand how technology and information works in their lives (Previous post: Web 2.0 – share the adventure with students.) In turn, students would be more open to the very important lessons teachers can teach–like good searching, media literacy, safety and using the web for appropriate, educational purposes. If we don’t teach appropriate, educational uses of technology, it’s our own fault if students fill the vacuum with inappropriate, trivial use. But we shouldn’t color the lesson with fear.

Posted on

Constructivist Celebration

CC LogoOver 100 educators came to the Atlanta Botanical Garden the Sunday before NECC to play, construct, and share at the First (dare we say Annual?) Constructvist Celebration!

Peter Reynolds and Gary Stager kicked off the day with inspirational words about children’s ability to use computers to “reach their North Star” and “BE mathematicians, poets, artists, and programmers, not just learn ABOUT mathematicians, poets, artists or programmers”. Shooting photos in the gardenEvery member of the Constructivist Consortium introduced themselves and a few project ideas that the participants could jump into. And jump everyone did! There were photographers taking close-ups of the garden’s amazing array of flowers, trees, orchids, and sculptures. People were painting, thinking, and talking. Suddenly movies, animations, videogames, mind-maps and more were taking shape on everyone’s laptops.

Everyone ran around, and shared ideas, files, and solutions. The noise level was “joyful” as one wise teacher put it!

TechYES students from nearby Barber Middle School and their teacher were there to lend a hand, and soon were immersed in making their own projects–at the same time as helping out, running a “sneaker-net” with thumbdrives, and pouring lemonade.

Constructivist Celebration sharingAfter lunch, everyone wrapped up their projects and we walked around the room in an impromptu exhibition. Amazingly enough, in just a few hours, a group of 100 educators had created an wonderful variety of projects using multiple pieces of software without one minute of instruction from the front of the room.

In the sharing session that wrapped up the day, educators shared their feelings of being “nourished” and of finding instant friends and collegues who understood their passion for putting the power of technology into student’s hands.

This was the first event of the Constructivist Consortium, a group of educational technology companies who have passion to support progressive educators using technology in the classroom in student-centered, project-based ways. The six founding members–Generation YES, Fablevision, Inspiration, Logo Computer Systems International (LCSI), SchoolKit, and Tech4Learning all hope that the spirit of the day gives these educators collegial support and ideas–who doesn’t need that!

Posted on

NECC… Buyer Beware

When at NECC, you know that the minute you walk into the exhibit hall, you will be overwhelmed by the sheer number of vendors, all selling educational technology products. The lights, noise, free t-shirts and hats all signal that this is a place where vendors are working hard to gain your attention and your money.

On the other hand, attending sessions and keynotes at NECC is supposed to be an educational experience, since the sessions were submitted and reviewed by independent reviewers for their educational significance. They support the goals of educators using technology to improve education. Right?

Let’s take a look at one session in particular on this year’s program:

Assessing Students’ and Teachers’ Technology Skills: NETS as Benchmarks
Mila Fuller, ISTE with Don Knezek
Monday, 6/25/2007, 10:00am–11:30am; GWCC B211
Join ISTE’s CEO, Don Knezek, and other national leaders as they highlight various approaches to assessing technology literacy and ISTE’s National Educational Technology Standards. (Commercial Content) (Exhibitor-Sponsored)
Blog Tag: n07s909

Ah, it’s a session given by ISTE itself, the sponsoring organization of NECC. ISTE, a non-profit membership organization, has created a set of standards for student, teacher, and administrator technology literacy called the NETS. So this is a session about how to use those standards to assess these skills. Sounds great! But wait… what does it mean, “commercial content” and “exhibitor-sponsored”?

This is where the “other national leaders” come in. Who are these national leaders? In the extended explanation (found online, but not in the NECC program book) it says that executives from Certiport, Learning.com, Microsoft, and PBS Teacherline comprise the panel. All of these companies are ISTE 100 members, which means they pay an annual fee to ISTE. Each company has products for sale that assess teacher and student technology literacy. Each company has also paid fees to ISTE to have these products receive a “Seal of Alignment” to the NETS standards.

So, is this in fact, a session that helps educators sort through the issues of technology literacy, what assessment means, and offer educators a wide array of research-based alternatives? Or is the purpose to promote products of particular companies who pay ISTE?

While it is noted in the program that there is commercial content in this session, the implication is that since ISTE and “national leaders” are hosting the session, any commercial content will be presented fairly, with other alternatives noted. And what will be said, if anything, in the session to fully disclose the financial relationship and incentives for ISTE to promote these particular company products?

In the spirit of full disclosure, you should note that I work for a company that also works with schools to help them address student technology literacy, and we sell an alternative, project-based model of assessment, with materials for students and resources for teachers called TechYES.

The session I submitted on technology literacy was not accepted. Hey, that’s fine, I know that it was reviewed fairly (I hope, anyway) and I’ve had other sessions accepted in other years. And I was accepted for a Problem/Solution panel on Wednesday (Connaghan, Karen: ‘Assessing Student Technology Literacy’ in B213 at 8:30 on Wednesday (also: Kate Kemker, Sylvia Martinez, Mia Murphy, Nicole Piggott)).

But my panel does not have Don Knezek, CEO of ISTE, at the head of the table. This panel is more like what NECC is supposed to be, presentations of multiple viewpoints, multiple alternatives, without access sold to the highest bidder. Unfortunately, I expect the ideas discussed in our humble session will be bigger and the audience smaller.

Being fair is not hard to do. Several states have done extensive analysis of student technology literacy products and created toolkits to help schools deal with the issue of student technology literacy assessment. These states have worked hard to avoid any conflict of interest and not endorse or favor any one intervention over another. In both these cases, TechYES is the only project-based assessment on these lists.

The Georgia Department of Education created a comparison chart of approaches to the NCLB 8th grade technology mandate.

The Connecticut Regional Educational Service Center (RESC) Alliance created a report describing a variety of assessment formats and products meant to address student tech assessment.

Generation YES is not an ISTE 100 member. It’s very expensive to join ISTE’s program. We also have not submitted TechYES for the ISTE’s NETS Seal of Alignment; it’s also very expensive. We’d rather keep our products affordable. We have correlated TechYES to the ISTE NETs standards for students, and that correlation, along with the 40 pages of research supporting the methodologies of TechYES is freely available on our website. The correlation documents for the products blessed by ISTE are not publicly available.

When I presented about TechYES at NJECC a few months ago, one attendee came up to me after my session and said she was aware of a panel at NECC about tech literacy, and that she strongly felt that TechYES should be presented as an alternative. She gave me Mila Fuller’s name and suggested I email her. I did, and Mila responded that she would be happy to talk to me at NECC (of course, after this session is over). Since Mila is in charge of the ISTE 100 program, I’m guessing she’s going to “invite” Generation YES to become a member once again, and once again, I’m going to tell her that we’d rather spend our money on making great resources for students and teachers.

We have a booth on the exhibit floor, where commercial products are supposed to be. We feel like we’ve played by the rules, and this just doesn’t seem fair. Worse, it’s a misrepresentation by ISTE, and a disservice to their membership base. Educational technology educators pay their dues to ISTE with an expectation that their interests are first and foremost, that ISTE is not simply selling them out. I pay my dues to ISTE too, and I expect ISTE to promote a vision of educational technology that improves the lives of teachers and students, not one that improves the bottom line of companies who write the biggest check.

Posted on

That’s hot – Web 2.0 and the empty vessel

“____ 2.0” is turning into a catch phrase for educational technology bloggers and conference presenters, who know that anything with 2.0 in the title gets attention. Taking a dip into the marketing world, it’s easy to see why. Although Web 2.0 has a definition that relates to the underlying technology, it has come to mean much more. It’s a social movement, a defining line between who “gets it” and who doesn’t, a feeling, a look, and a value system.

It’s what marketing mavens call an “empty vessel” – a phrase or name that has no real meaning, but sort of suggests someting. In that vacuum, people can insert their own interpretation and actually feel like they understand the product or brand better as a result. By simply adding 2.0 to pretty much anything, it neatly implies the “second generation” of something with a techie twist.

So themes like Classroom 2.0 and School 2.0 become a shared idea with no real meaning. They signal that something is changing without anyone having to say exactly what that is. We can all agree that “Classroom 2.0” is a good thing, because each of us fills that empty vessel with our own idea of what a new version of a classroom looks like.

Hey, I’m the first to admit I do it – I did a conference presentation this morning about including students in Web 2.0 implementations. My version of Classroom 2.0 has students involved in constructivist projects using open-ended technology tools in a collaborative learning community. It drew a nice crowd, even though everyone came in with a completely different idea about what Web 2.0 meant to them.

But that’s OK – at least we agree that something is changing and that’s hot*

Sylvia

* For those of you who hate TV and never read trashy magazines, “That’s hot” is the catch phrase of Paris Hilton, who has turned being famous for nothing into a major career.

Posted on

Educomm – Including Students in Web 2.0

A big GenYES Blog welcome to everyone who attended my Educomm session this morning in Anaheim, Including Students in the Web 2.0 Adventure!

I’ve posted the PDF of the presentation here — all the links are active so just click and explore. Also, you might be interested in a couple of older posts in this blog, they touch on similar themes to our session this morning.

Also, the whitepaper about student leadership in your technology plan can be found on our main website, along with descriptions and research about all our programs for student involvement in technology integration activities.

Finally, it was absolutely fantastic to hear so many of the Educomm speakers talking about GenYES students in their own schools, leading the technology revolution! Scott Perloff, of the Milken Community High School in Los Angeles has been running a GenYES program so long we don’t even have records that far back! (Notes from his session) At the other end of the world, Martin Levins of The Armidale School (laptops grade 3-12) in Australia just started TechYES this year (Notes from his session). And Bruce Dixon of the Anytime, Anywhere Learning Foundation made the point that the GenYES model fits perfectly with laptops. Laptop schools empower students by literally putting computers in their hands. What better way to “walk that talk” than by having students also responsible for teaching teachers technology and tech support. (Notes from his session)

Note about the session notes: Wes Fryer takes notes like a madman! It finally dawned on me what the title of his blog means, “Moving at the Speed of Creativity” – duh. Wes had to leave early, so he missed my session, darn. I wanted to be immortalized right next to all these other amazing speakers.

It was great chatting with all the terrific educators there, the stories of what you do each and every day to create amazing educational environments for students are wonderful and inspiring.

On to NECC!

Sylvia

Posted on

Stepping Up to the Buffet

There’s been an interesting discussion going on in some educational technology blogs about women and minorities being left out of the discussion going on in the edu-blogosphere, and as leaders in educational technology. Tim Holt (Not Invited to the Buffet) explores the issue, as does Lucy Grey and Wes Fryer (The Conversation is Open) .

Before I say something about gender issues, there’s an even larger constituency group not invited into this conversation– namely, students. I’ve covered this ground many times before. It’s what Generation YES is all about – working with schools to facilitate student involvement in improving technology integration. Let’s just say that as long as we treat students as passive objects of our educational system, rather than as full partners, we will overlook them as collaborators and will miss the potential insight and solutions they might bring to the conversation.

But what I’d like to focus on in this post is the gender issue in relation to educational technology leadership. Some of this I posted as a comment on Lucy’s blog. (Note: Despite my last name, I don’t represent any racial minority. My kids do, but I don’t. So I’ll stick to what I know.)

While the issue of a lack of female leadership goes well beyond the educational technology community, there are some unique conditions here. Technology is typically the realm of the male. As an electrical engineer, I’ve been in lots of places where I’m the only woman, and believe me, it makes you think twice about your “place.” But since teaching is overwhelmingly female, you might think this would balance out. However, I believe it simply makes it easier for a man to stand out as a leader.

I also don’t believe that “inviting people to the buffet” is the right image, either. Leaders don’t wait for invitations. You either step up or step back. Lots of conventional research on gender differences suggests reasons why women do not step up to leadership roles and if they do, aren’t taken seriously.

These gender differences aren’t necessarily a bad thing. It makes women stronger in some areas, like collaboration and communication. It would stand to reason that women might be better at facilitating, blogging, and well – leading. But it’s more complex than that. Here’s just one example:

Bias in the Evaluation of Women Leaders: Gender, Status, and LeadershipCecilia L. Ridgeway, Stanford University, Journal of Social Issues, 2001

Abstract: More than a trait of individuals, gender is an institutionalized system of social practices. The gender system is deeply entwined with social hierarchy and leadership because gender stereotypes contain status beliefs that associate greater status worthiness and competence with men than women. This review uses expectation states theory to describe how gender status beliefs create a network of constraining expectations and interpersonal reactions that is a major cause of the “glass ceiling.” In mixed-sex or gender-relevant contexts, gender status beliefs shape men’s and women’s assertiveness, the attention and evaluation their performances receive, ability attributed to them on the basis of performance, the influence they achieve, and the likelihood that they emerge as leaders. Gender status beliefs also create legitimacy reactions that penalize assertive women leaders for violating the expected status order and reduce their ability to gain compliance with directives.

But back to educational technology leadership. What happens to women on the way to becoming leaders? Here’s my short list:

1. Women are more apt to include others in a conversation, and will give up the spotlight to do that.

2. Women will not compete for resources, but will negotiate so that it seems fair for everyone. This gives men an advantage in a “winner takes all” situation. (As in, who gets the single keynote slot or the top job.)

3. Women are more adaptable about rules, and in a situation where the rules might favor them, will actually back away from “winning.”

4. Men are louder, more assertive, and more sure of themselves. It’s a Catch-22. They are this way because they are rewarded for being this way. You know the joke, men are forceful and passionate, women are hysterical and emotional. Men are smart and opinionated, women are calculating and bitchy.

5. No one wants to hear a keynote that is even-handed, where “on the other hand” is the dominant theme. Yet that is often a very female response to controversy.

6. Teachers are especially humble about what they do. How many times have you heard a teacher asked what they do and they say, “I’m just a teacher.” This resonates all the way up to the top of the ladder, where even very accomplished women distrust their own ability to articulate a point and then stand back as others say what they are thinking inside.

7. Both men and women pay more attention to what men say. Like the “gender pay gap”, there is a “gender attention gap.” I guarantee that every woman has experienced this. You say something in a group and then 5 minutes later, a man says the same thing and everyone exclaims what a great idea it is. Men, if you’ve never noticed this, start listening for it. You’ll be shocked.

Finally, Lucy made a good point that many educational technology leaders are independent consultants, and have to work very hard to “hustle for speaking gigs”. It’s a full time job, yet one with no steady paycheck, a lot of risk, no pension, and no insurance. Lots of women simply don’t have the ability to make that choice for their families.

I wish I had more answers… but anyway, at least I’m out here trying, as I know many, many other women are.

Posted on

Getting ready for NECC!

NECC is just around the corner and Generation YES is getting ready. We’ve planned, ordered, organized, and packed (sort of). We’ll be at booth #1952, come by and say hi!

Prizes!
We are especially excited to be working with the new Constructivist Consortium, planning events to support progressive educators everywhere. The Consortium members will be offering an amazing prize package every day, including software, TechYES and GenYES licenses, and a virtual author visit from Fablevision’s Pete Reynolds, noted children’s book author and illustrator. Come by our booth to pick up an entry card for the prize drawings.

Sessions!
Be sure to put these sessions in your NECC calendar:

Tuesday, June 26th, 2007

Technology Literacy for All Students – Dennis Harper, Generation Yes with Sylvester Robinson, James L. Smith and Gary Stager 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM
Join us for a comprehensive, comparative look at how states and nations are defining and assessing technology literacy.

Papert Matters – Thinking About Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas
Gary Stager, Pepperdine University 3:30-4:30 PM Spotlight Session
Seymour Papert’s work has defined the frontiers of education for 40+ years. His colleagues will share what Papert’s ideas mean for the future of learning.

Wednesday, June 27th, 2007

Assessing Student Technology Literacy – Karen Connaghan, Montgomery County Intermediate Unit with Kate Kemker, Sylvia Martinez and Mia Murphy 8:30 AM – 9:30 AM
Come hear real solutions for meeting the NCLB requirement to assess technology literacy of 8th grade students.

More sessions…NECC Creative Educator Handout
If you are looking for constructivist, project-based sessions with ideas for the classroom using multimedia, Web 2.0 tools, programming for students, and more, download this handout for sessions that you’ll love.

Constructivist Celebration
We’ll also see some of you at the Constructivist Celebration! This day-long celebration of creativity, computing & constructivist learning will take place Sunday, June 24 at the beautiful Atlanta Botanical Gardens. Peter Reynolds and Gary Stager will kick the day off with an inspirational keynote address. Then, participants will jump into exciting hands-on projects led by some of the nation’s finest ed tech leaders. The day ends with an opportunity to share your creations and a panel discussion, “Sustaining Constructivist Learning,” featuring leaders of LCSI, GenYES, Schoolkit, Tech4Learning, and Fablevision. Every participant will receive a great package of software too!Unfortunately, the event before NECC is COMPLETELY sold out, but we are already hearing from other conferences about doing it in other places around the country. If you’d like to hear more about future events with the Constructivist Consortium, you can add your name to the email list.

Sylvia