Category: events

Posted on

Conference 2.0 – changing how sessions are selected

I blogged about EdubloggerCon West the other day as an example of an “unconference” (Conferences must change with the times) and discussed how conferences must move forward to become more dynamic, timely, and better meet the needs of attendees both physical and virtual.

How conference sessions are selected sets the tone for the event. Right now, most conferences select sessions based on a review system created for academic conferences. This system usually consists of a group of readers who rate the proposals. The submissions that score the best from the most reviewers are accepted.

Sounds fair, right? But read on…

Session selection – a bit of history
For academic conferences, session selection is part of the process by which accepted papers are published as proceedings, which enhance the reputation of an academic (publish or perish). The process weeds out papers that don’t meet the conference or journal criteria, makes sure that relevant research results are properly cited, and that the papers form a serious, robust representation of the most current research in the field.

However, conferences that aren’t based on academic publishing tend to retain this legacy. It has become a tradition that no one questions. So the question is — is this unchallenged system really work?

What’s wrong with this process?
I was surprised to find a strong, well-researched argument against the standard session review process on a website from KGCM 2008 (the 3rd International Conference on Knowledge Generation, Communication and Management.)

Now, I don’t know these people at all, but the organization is interested in learning how people learn at conferences. Who knew there was such a thing!

For their own conference and journal, they found that the tried-and-true method of paper and session selection was deeply flawed. Their conclusion – the standard review process is “faulty,” “unreliable,” and worse, tends “…to refuse good papers because of the reviewers’ bias against new ideas or new paradigms.”

“So, it is evident that acceptance policies based on the positive agreement of reviewers will increase the probability of refusing good papers.”

Bias against new ideas
This is bad news for educators going to conferences looking for big ideas that will fundamentally change education. The session selection process works to deny you this opportunity.

Let’s be honest — it’s human nature to resist change. One bad score from one reviewer could easily mean a session is declined, even if other reviewers score it well. It’s why Olympics-style judging throws out the high and low scores.

It’s also natural to want to fit in with the group. When reviewers work together to rate sessions against a rubric, it’s hard not to favor sessions that you think will fit in and make the conference organizers happy.

So in looking at session selection policy, is it any wonder that this method leads to homogenous, cookie cutter selections that represent the acceptable norm? Shouldn’t we be concerned that in times that call for radical change, the standard method for conference session selection is biased against radical proposals?

So what to do instead?
The method this conference uses is different. Instead of scores, they rely on reviewers to recommend either accept or deny. Then:

  1. The majority rule, when there is no agreement among the reviewers with regards to acceptance or non-acceptance, of a given submission.
  2. The non-acceptance of the submission when there is agreement among its reviewers for not accepting it.
  3. Acceptance of the paper when in doubt (a draw or a tie among the opinions of the reviewers, for example).

This seems like a tiny change. Yet the outcome could be completely different.

Would this mean too many accepted sessions? Maybe. But I’m sure there are creative ways to solve these problems. If you read the research-based methodology from KGCM, they have a process designed to pare down the selections. Technology could be part of the answer too. Presentations could go online, for example. Many conferences are also experimenting with shorter sessions, blogger cafes, open forums, and other innovations.

I don’t claim to have “Conference 2.0” figured out, but I think a necessary first step is to challenge our assumptions about how conference programs are assembled.

Sylvia

Posted on

Constructivist Celebration at NECC – Sold out!

Constructivist Celebration logoThe second annual Constructivist Celebration @ NECC 2008 in San Antonio is sold out!

I didn’t even get a chance to post it here. That’s why I’m almost afraid to write this – don’t hate me! We sent an announcement email to the list of people who had signed up on the Constructivist Consortium website, and emails to the customers of the six member companies. It got out on Twitter, too, and the event instantly filled up. Seriously, that fast.

The good news is that it’s going to be a great event celebrating creative, constructive software use by educators from around the world.

Sylvia

Posted on

Conferences must change with the times

TCEA Tweet-upWhen you work with schools across the nation, you soon realize that February and March are never going to be your own again. These are the months where many states schedule their state educational technology conferences. In the last couple of weeks, I’ve been to Texas (TCEA), Washington (NCCE), Washington DC (CoSN) and of course, my home state of California (CUE).

If I could have cloned myself, I could have gone to Florida (FETC), Illinois (IL-TCE), Arizona (MEC), Michigan (MACUL), New Jersey (NJECC) and probably more I’m forgetting. (I can’t even bring myself to find all the full names and links to these terrific conferences! Bad blogger!)

TCEA Tweet-upThese conferences give technology-using educators a chance to reflect and recharge, hear inspiring speakers and talk to colleagues from near and far. This year, more than ever, I met folks who previously have only been virtual avatars, Twitter buddies, or names on blogs. The opportunities to use Web 2.0 tools and social networks to build a Personal Learning Network has changed many educator’s lives, and brought new spark to a traditionally isolated profession.

I believe conferences must change as well, or risk being a relic of the past.

Technical difficulties, of courseAt CUE, I participated in a day long “unconference” event called EdubloggerCon West run by Steve Hargadon of Classroom 2.0 (a social network for educators.) Instead of submitting session ideas months in advance, and a faceless committee deciding which sessions are presented, the attendees shaped the day to our own needs. A wiki was used to plan the event. People signed up, and added their ideas to another page for ideas about what to talk about.

At the event, the first item on the agenda was to decide what the day would become. Imagine that, the attendees shaped their own day of learning to their personal needs!

Alice Mercer and Gail DeslerSomeone volunteered to edit the wiki, and an agenda emerged on the fly. Some people wanted to talk about technology and language development. Some people wanted to talk about project-based learning. Concepts got merged and people stepped forward to offer new ideas. There were some mini-sessions (5 minutes!) on various tools. At the end of the day, the wiki stood as both a record of what happened, and links to the tools and ideas we talked about.

It was an interesting day, both for the learning taking place and the concept that conferences could change and adapt to new technology that allows more personalized learning. It felt like a mash-up of the best conference sessions you’ve ever been to, combined with the most interesting conversations you tend to have when committed, passionate educators gather after-hours.

Lisa Linn at EdubloggerCon WestWhile this exact format might not work for thousands of attendees, there are certainly elements that can be adapted and experimented with. Conferences as we know them today are going to change as technology and culture change — or become obsolete.

Steve is getting to be pretty good at structuring these events. It’s an interesting combination of leadership, experimentation on the bleeding edge of technology, herding cats, and stepping back gracefully to allow others to share the spotlight. It’s one of those skills that looks magically effortless when it’s done right, but isn’t. Sort of teaching.

EdubloggerCon WestThese days, change happens quickly, even for those who feel ready for it. In fact, the name EdubloggerCon seemed cutting edge a year or two ago, but now it’s too focused on one tool in a universe of possibilities. It’s really about changing education for the modern world.

Congratulations to CUE and executive director Mike Lawrence for allowing this experiment to take place and not being afraid of the future.

If you are attending the National Educational Computer Conference (NECC) in San Antonio in June, there is a similar event being held two days before NECC starts. More information here.

Posted on

“I’m the luckiest teacher in Philadelphia”

SLA Teachers Rock!Last month I attended Educon 2.0 in Philadelphia, an “unconference” that grew out of a grass roots movement by many educators who blog and work with Web 2.0 tools. In my opinion, it was a spectacular success, not just because 250 educators showed up on a wintery weekend in Philadelphia, most on their own dime, but because of the showcase it provided for the Science Leadership Academy – especially the teachers and students.

While it was terrific to meet the people behind the avatars and screen names, it was even more impressive to get a chance to see what a well-designed, well-executed progressive school looks like up close.

It looks like teachers.

Sure, I could go on and on about how the principal, Chris Lehmann, has shaped this school based on an “ethic of care” — meaning you teach kids before you teach subjects. The idea is so simple it’s almost startling. Brilliant leaders excel at making the simple, powerful truths concrete. Of course, caring about kids is not a secret, and Chris would be the first to admit that he stands on the shoulders of giants as he guides this school.

And the kids, of course, the kids were fabulous. Smart, friendly, look-you-in-the-eye teens who got up early on a weekend morning to make this event work. And not just help, but participate. SLA studentThese teens waded into discussions and spoke their minds. They facilitated discussions of diverse educational issues, sharing their opinions and experiences with people they’d never met before. It’s obvious these young adults are being listened to and know they can share their voice.

But when I get discouraged about the future of this thing we call school, and whether it can make systemic changes needed to survive and serve our society well, I’m going to have a new vision to call on. And it will be these SLA teachers who painted this picture for me more clearly than ever.

In one session in particular, four SLA teachers presented their experience of their first year. Learning to Teach: First Year Teaching in a Progressive School – SLA teachersJillian Gierke, Melissa Yarborough, Matt Kay, and Kenneth Rochester. They discussed what they learned, what they tried, what worked and what didn’t. It was a fabulous session. There is a video and handouts online, but there would be no way to capture the energy of the room as we moved to various centers, each run by one teacher who shared their classroom experiences with us. We tried our hand at designing a lesson using the Understanding by Design method, and found that 1) it was hard fun and 2) different groups came up with some really interesting yet completely different approaches.

SLA sessionOne teacher shared the lesson he learned over the year – “less is more,” he quietly said. And you could see the conviction in his eyes that this wasn’t the third bullet on a list of rules he’d been handed. He’d lived it and learned it. Another teacher shared how her ongoing discussions with other faculty shaped her classroom style, and how she planned to continue this as new faculty joined the SLA.

But finally, one teacher wrapped it up for me, “I’m the luckiest teacher in Philadelphia,” she said with a smile. She looked around at the chaos of voices, papers, computers, backpacks and jackets littering the room and continued, “I can’t small group discussionimagine being anywhere else.” The ethic of care at this school obviously includes the teachers, and that makes all the difference.

The truth is, great leaders have to do more than lead, they have to transfer their leadership abilities to everyone in their sphere of influence. And everyone has to accept that gift. Kids can, and will do it easily, given encouragement and consistent support. Adults are harder. Their habits are set, their expectations are lower, and their life lessons ring in their ears, drowning out the voice of hope. But it is possible.

Sometimes, when I visit a great school, I wish I was a student there. At SLA, I wished I was a teacher.

 

Posted on

Blogs vs. wikis vs. podcasts – why schools like wikis & podcasts

At TCEA 2008, I heard a number of teachers say that they are able to use wikis or make podcasts at their schools, whereas blogs were discouraged or blocked. My initial reaction was that it was simply a knee jerk reaction based on popular uses of each. Blogs = MySpace = pedophiles, while podcasts seem safe and wikis are associated with Wikipedia, which at least sounds educational.

But as I thought more about it, I don’t think it’s that simple. I think it reflects a larger issue of assessment and comfort with the status quo. In most schools, curriculum focuses on student product rather than process.

A wiki is a means to collaboratively get to an end product, something a teacher can look at, assess, and grade. It’s easier to adapt existing curriculum to use a wiki, since most curriculum is also product focused. While wikis may offer some terrific efficiencies for group work, and does provide some support for the collaborative process (like a history of changes,) the strength of a wiki is that at the end of the day, it stands as a completed product.

Podcasts are also a product. Student podcasts can be substituted for the traditional report as the culminating product of a unit. Podcasts created by teachers or other experts are simply a lecture. While there is certainly a lot to learn as a student creates a podcast, the end result is a comfortable, known quantity.

But blogs reflect the process of learning, of going through a learning experience that may not result in a final product. Where’s the report, the culminating evidence of mastery, the final draft? How do you grade a student who might be changing over time? How do you not be involved in the conversation? It almost seems like cheating, after all, you don’t sit down with a student while they are taking a test and discuss their answers halfway through so they can try again.

In this light, wikis and podcasts represent an updated and more efficient way to do traditional classroom assessment, while blogs challenge the status quo. Traditional = more comfortable, challenge = change = discomfort.

Sylvia

Posted on

Educon 2.0 Sunday morning panel – live

I’m sitting in front of the room in front of a growing  audience at Educon 2.0. Will Richardson is sitting next to me setting up a live blog.

To kick off day two, David Jakes, Joyce Valenza, Gary Stager, Will Richardson and I are going to do an opening panel called, “The Future of Learning.” Heady stuff, but I think I really saw the future of learning yesterday at a session run by the first year teachers from the Science Learning Academy.

The panel is also being broadcast and archived on UStream here. Check the conference wiki for links to all the session archives.

Sylvia

Posted on

A virtual conversation on the future of education – come one, come all!

Educon 2.0 is this weekend, January 26 & 27. This “un-conference” is being held at the Science Leadership Academy in Philadelphia to discuss the future of education. There are no traditional presentations – the agenda is to create conversations on various topics, and to not be restricted by time or space. No small vision here!

So – here’s your chance. Please join in the conversation!

Not only will there be a free-flowing conversation in the room, each session has access to a Ustream channel and a wiki associated with it. Ustream is an online video streaming site that can broadcast live video feeds. If the technology gods smile on us, we will be ustreaming the conversation live. People can participate by watching online and text chatting their comments, contributions, and virtual rotten tomatoes. I hope to have someone at the session act as the moderator for the ustream chat and bring comments and conversation into the room.

This means that people (you?) can participate in a number of different ways, by suggesting conversation topics ahead of time on the wiki or by viewing the live video stream and chatting as it happens.

Help Wanted
If you will be at Educon 2.0 in person, I need a volunteer (or two) to help monitor the video feed and text chat and be the voice of the virtual attendees. If Ustream doesn’t work, we could try Twitter or Skype to enable virtual attendee participation. We are the first session at the conference, so we get to be the pioneers on the bleeding edge. Fame and fortune await. If you are a session facillitor at a later session, you might want to help out just to see how (or if) it will work for you. You may just want to have a good laugh! Either way, email me at sylvia at genyes.com and I will be eternally grateful.

I’m involved in facilitating two sessions:

Influence without Authority: Finding the Common Ground to Frame Innovation and Change (with Kevin Jarrett)
Session Time: Sat. 10 – 11:30 EST (US Eastern)
Everyone loves conferences. You come, see amazing presentations, meet incredible people, have thought-provoking conversations, and leave inspired. The next day, you’re back at your district. The memories are still fresh, and your Twitter network waits at the ready, but you’re all alone. What do you work on first? Where do you begin? How do you advance your ideas? Facilitate change? Make a difference?This is a conversation about techniques, processes and best practices surrounding change in what some say is one of the most change-resistant organizational environments on the planet – our own public schools.

Wiki: Click here for resources
On Saturday at 10 – 11:30 AM (EST) – Join the uStream video and chat: EduCon Channel 1

What is Student Voice?
Session Time: Sun. 12:30 – 2:00 EST (US Eastern)
Web 2.0 advocates often list “enabling student voice” as one of the reasons to use collaborative tools in the classroom. However, what is “student voice”? It’s obviously not just students talking; it’s something more subtle and complicated than that. It can be looked at as a classroom practice, as a school practice, as impacting the local community and also the larger educational community.

Wiki: Click here to add to the conversation starters
On Sunday at 12:30PM (EST) – Join the uStream video and chat: EduCon Channel 1

Posted on

Survey shows schools need more tech support

eSchool news (partnered with SchoolDude.com) just released a new survey showing that many schools are working with technology support staffing and budgeting well below standards and are failing to meet goals.

Nearly three out of four school leaders say they don’t have enough IT staff to support their needs effectively, according to the survey. Fifty-five percent of respondents said they can’t maintain their network adequately, 63 percent said they can’t plan for new technologies, and 76 percent said they have trouble implementing new technologies.

This is no surprise – Generation YES has been working with schools for a decade to create innovative models that teach students to help support infrastructure and teachers in their own schools. As we work with schools, I think I’ve heard about every tech support horror story out there.

Forrester Research, an independent market research firm, published a recent report titled “Staffing for Technology Support: The Need May Be Far Greater Than You Think,” which concluded that large corporations typically employ one support person for every 50 PCs, at a cost of $142 per computer, per year. According to this model, a school district with 1,000 PCs would need a staff of 20 and an annual tech-support budget of $1.4 million.

Yet, some larger school districts are approaching a ratio of one IT person for every 1,500 computers or more, says Laurie Keating, vice president of technology, learning, and planning for the Center for Educational Leadership and Technology.

I’ve shown this research to educators in conference sessions and workshops across the U.S. I know I can get a guaranteed laugh from the audience with the “one support person for every 60 PCs” number. I’ve had tech coordinators share their stories – increasing number of computers to support, constantly increasing complexity, and increasing expectations for instant, interconnected systems. And most of the time, a decreasing budget.

So what can you do when faced with this situation? There are only a few solutions:

1. You can reduce the chance of something going wrong by locking down the systems. Teachers look at this solution as a restriction on them or mistrust of their competence. In reality, it’s a lose-lose solution that a desperate tech support department must implement to keep their heads above water. It creates friction and resentment between teachers and IT staff who should be working together to improve education.

2. You redefine your expectations for adequate tech support. Some teachers wait for weeks to get simple problems solved. It’s easy to see why a teacher who constantly has to go to “Plan B” when the hardware doesn’t work just gives up on their technology-infused “Plan A.”

3. People work harder as you try to squeeze blood out of a stone. Educators are notorious for shoestring solutions and working beyond all reason because it’s “for the kids.” However, 80 hour workweeks without proper resources leads to early burnout. Even worse, other teachers see the hard work required to be a tech-using teacher and decide it’s not worth it.

4. Find new resources. While you might be able to find a few volunteer techie parents who will pop in every once in a while, there is actually a HUGE, largely untapped resource already at the school site. This digital generation is quite capable of learning to provide support to teachers integrating technology. Contrary to what many believe, it’s not impossible, not scary, and not a security threat. Students are 92% of the population in most school buildings. It is simply irrational to continue to ignore this resource in the face of this dire situation.

Plus, it’s a win-win situation. Schools get the help they need, and students learn valuable lessons as they troubleshoot and help teachers with the typical simple issues that block classroom use. We help schools see past security fears and use tried and true models that actually reduce student hacking and increase student ownership.

You can read more about the Generation TECH tools and curriculum on our website, or listen to this podcast from my workshop called Student Tech Support – the 21st Century A/V Club. (There are also links to the handouts and slides.)

The hard truth is, any hope for increasing technology use in schools rests on solving this problem. Teachers using technology in innovative ways result in MORE tech support, and tech support that understands education, not just the wires. And let’s face it, no matter what you do, or how much money you pour into tech support, it’s never enough. There is always something more you can do, more you can try, make the systems better, and support teachers better.

There is no other resource in schools that is as ready to help and as underutilized as students. As educators struggle to find solutions, it might help to look up at the faces that sit directly in front of you every day, young people ready, willing and able to help solve this problem.

All we have to do is teach them, guide them, and let them.

Sylvia

Posted on

Save the date in 2008 – Constructivist Celebration at NECC

Constructivist Celebration logoMark your calendars – the Second Annual Constructivist Celebration at NECC will take place Sunday June 29, 2008 in San Antonio.

Not a lot of details yet, but the Constructivist Consortium member companies (Generation YES, LCSI, Tech4Learning, Inspiration, Fablevision, and SchoolKit) will host a day of learning and playing with creative software with other like-minded educators. I wrote about the first Constructivist Celebration last June and we are still hearing from attendees about what a great experience it was!

If you are already planning and budgeting for your NECC 2008 travel, be sure to be there for the all-day Sunday event. We’ll wrap up before the NECC opening reception, so you won’t miss a thing!

To find out more, keep an eye on this blog (subscribe) or go to the Constructivist Consortium website and signup to get notified of events by email.

See you in San Antonio!

Posted on

Don’t blame the kids

David Warlick writes one of the most popular blogs in the education and technology space. He has inspired quite a few educators to take a harder look at technology. David often writes about how students are using technology outside of the classroom in ways that surpass their use inside the classroom.

But today’s blog, Be Very Careful about Student Panels, is a real shame that may do damage in the effort to create opportunities for authentic student voice. Warlick relates an experience where he was hired by a school district in Pennsylvania to keynote a day-long celebration of their new laptop program. After the keynote he moderated a panel of 12 students (four times too many).

The problems began even before the students took the stage. First, three students, “…apparently panicked at the crowd of teachers and fled out a side door.” Next, the remaining nine students didn’t perform as anticipated.

First of all, these were bright kids. They were funny and they were compelling — the kind of students any teacher would love to have in their class. But I could tell pretty early that things weren’t going where we wanted them to. My first question was, “How many of you use IM, text messaging, social networks, video games, etc.” The all raised their hands for IM and text messaging, and most raised their hands for Facebook (MySpace seems to be passe now). Only one, and finally two then three, admitted to playing video games.

I realized that many of the questions that I’d planned were not going to work, because I wanted us to learn what these kids were learning from their outside the classroom information experiences and how they were learning it. Instead, we learned that they all spent all of their time doing homework and considered video games a distraction, and the few minutes they spend with Facebook, they consider to be mindless interactions.

David analyzes the problem:

We had the “A” students who were enrolled in AP classes. These were the kids we don’t have to reach, the kids who do what they’re told and who have learned, from many years in the classroom, to tell us what they think we want to hear.

So, what is David’s solution? Just make sure you prep the kids to repeat your message:

But I know now that you have to be very careful in selecting the kids, and you might even consider holding a pre-meeting with the panelists to orient them to what you’re looking for. You want to get out of the classroom and you want to talk about (learn from) the information experiences that are distracting to them and disrupting to us. We want to learn about those experiences.

This is so wrong on so many levels.

  1. Student voice is not about kids talking. It’s not about having them parrot your message, even if you think your message is “subversive”
  2. Students do have opinions and different life experiences that adults can learn from. But we can’t expect them spill their guts in front of an audience and to trust a stranger who shows up for a few hours and will never be seen again.
  3. This cannot be fixed by simply picking different kids. Sometimes unconventional students will give you a better “show” but isn’t student voice about ALL students? Can’t we learn something from Type A students AND at-risk students?
  4. Student voice comes from action. It’s developed as adults and students work together, build trust and accomplish something real that’s worth sharing with an audience.

Now, a prominent voice in educational technology is warning everyone to “be very careful about student panels” – what a great excuse not to even try.

Kids shine when they share their work, and they get better at it when caring adults work with them to support their project development. They should be praised for real accomplishments and the ability to articulate them, not what happens to fall out their mouths. It’s a failure of adults not to create those conditions EVERY DAY.

Article coverI hope that some of David Warlick’s readers will take the time to read Sharing Student Voice: Students Presenting at Conferences. It’s a 12 page PDF based on decades of experience from Generation YES educators and experts on enabling student voice. You can find it, along with other free resources on the Generation YES website.

In it, there is a special section specifically about student panels. I blogged about that section a while back, because it’s such a misunderstood topic. David, I hope you read it before you attempt your next student panel.

Sylvia