Scare Em!

Yesterday, I wrote about and pointed to the eSchool New pages with articles about the new literacies. With a new government, and the atmosphere of change that such events can inspire, I suspect that we will be hearing more about new visions of teaching a learning. We may even get some relief from the debilitating demands of NCLB, at it may be altered to reflect a more contemporary reality, rather than just preparing children for the 1950s.

That said, there will continue to be resistance from some educators and education leaders who are simply comfortable with teaching and classroom styles that have been successfully used for decades. Several times, during my online and event presentations that I have delivered over the past couple of weeks, I have been asked questions just like this one, commented yesterday on the Digital Communication Skills blog yesterday, by Bill Ferriter.

My greatest struggles, however, are in trying to justify my work to colleagues who are still very traditional in their thinking and committed to delivering the content in our curriculum and preparing students for standardized tests. While I know that I can meet those goals using the technology of the Read/Write Web, there are doubts among peers who are unaware of or uncomfortable with technology.

2 Cents Worth » About Building Digital Communication Skills…

Several days ago, I was delivering an online presentation for the Discovery Educator Network, and at the end someone asked, “How do we convince other educators that these changes need to take place?”

I was tired. It had been a long day of travel, and I’d just been talking into the computer for nearly an hour. I was exhausted, and I flippantly said, “Scare Em!”

So what do you think? Is this a legitimate avenue for affecting change? Does fear motivate people to change? Might it motivate reluctant teachers to modernize their practices?

Is there reason to be afraid?

What do you think?

Allow me to ellaborate: When I suggest using fear, what I am talking about is a fear that we are not doing our jobs. Are we adequately preparing our children for a rapidly changing world, or just teaching them how to be taught to — not so much how to continue to adapt?

I think that another angle is, should we be afraid that we are so missing the boat in terms of our students and their on sense of need, that they may just switch us off, and just stop paying attention, stop taking tests, stop doing our worksheets — stop playing school. I must admit some fear myself, about the future of my country. Can we possibly continue our economic security in the much more global 21st century, when we’re still preparing our children for the 1950s?

technorati tags:, , ,

Blogged with Flock

13 thoughts on “Scare Em!”

  1. I have found that the best salesmen at my school are my students. Yesterday, a student who has a history portfolio (printed out) came to me frustrated — she (like me) has trouble with an extended project as she prints out and ultimately loses or dog ears the pages that are to be turned in. Yes, some would argue this is an important skill in business and it is – however students don’t have filing cabinets.

    So, she put together a proposal to do her work on a wiki. She listed the reasons she would be more effective on a wiki including the creation and inclusion of videos on the topics she is covering. Her teacher, who basically uses the computer as an expensive piece of solitaire equipment, said Yes!

    Because ultimately I have found that most teachers want to be good teachers. They will listen to students but have learned to tune out “that computer geek” down the hall.

    A lot of techno-crats lost face with the Y2K “scare em” tactics they used to get new equipment. I think scaring them only goes so far and can backfire.

    Yes, I think there is a reason to be afraid as children overseas don’t think anything of working extra hours to gain an advantage over American students who cry “foul” for more than one hour of homework.

    However, I believe that I’ve seen teachers at my school change via the student advocates that I proselytize and educate. They are making movies in Science, gliffy drawings for spanish, and now wikis for history. All of this not because of an in service or a lecture to the teachers from me, but because the students believe they learn better. And the teachers I work with are wise enough to recognize student enthusiasm when they see it.

    Idealistic, perhaps, however, it is what I’ve found has worked to change 30 year habits in some of my amazing counterparts who are not comfortable with technology. Let the students focus on “what button to push” and the teachers focus on content — train students and create an environment where they are allowed to contribute.

    Thank you for your leadership!

  2. Hi Dave and all the others. No there is no reason being afraid.

    Some observations from my side. Every new inkulturation of technology has its own and specific fears. as I was a young boy i read in one of my firt books how the peoples where thinking about the effects of traveling (with the incredible speed of more than 15 km/h) by train and the health.

    But on the other side what i think also is how difficult in dead it is to convince all about the good reasons going the different way. And i digged deeper and deeper trying to understand why it is so difficult to explain. The reason for me lies in the phenomena of the emmergenz. This means every part of all the learning processes describes just an part of it and in fact there is a lot more you cant describe. For instance the synergie-effects and side effects.

    And also it is touching the wound of the great digital devide. This means in my point of view Those qho know about everything and those who can’t imagine.

    So hopefully this may give you the needed push and also explains the need of your work, which seems to struggle and explain everytime the same things to different adiences. But there is the need about the good argues to convince all the sceptical provisos.

    So – take a deep breath and best whishes from Germany – where there is a very larger way to go. But maybe with the same reasons.

    Andreas Auwärter

    PS: “Beeing not afraid” means not beeing uncritical – About what to do and how doing the best possible.

  3. I sense some irony. Let’s see if I can communicate it. Currently, many schools are filtered out of the ability to use read/write web tools. Why are they filtered? I think they are filtered because of fear: fear of the unknown tools (how they work), fear of the boogeyman (student safety), and fear of the virus (the network will be invaded). The people in charge of setting filters (many of whom have no education in pedagogy) are making decisions AND WINNING THE BATTLE of restricting access to the tools we crave to use.

    Do we fight “fear” with “FEAR?” Maybe, but the battle plan needs more detail.

    How do we scare people into believing our children are being left behind because we do not use tools our students will need in their world? There is no quantitative research to demonstrate student achievement because they use Web 2.0 strategies…yet.

    I think in order to “scare ’em” we will have to demonstrate that Web 2.0 tools increase test scores. Even with a possible shift in NCLB, test scores always drive K-12 education. That, however, is a totally different problem.

  4. I always thought suspectious about filtering mechanisms and all the technological indistrie contra how to convince somebody how to deal with new learning tools.

    Perhaps i’ve the wrong calculation in mind, but what to invest the time upgrading the securing web in explaning the useability and the utility of the internet?

    OK. Mostly in germany the admnistrators in school are teachers of science who spent as a hobbie hosting all the needed services and the computer lab. And there is no way to convince them that there is no need for a computer lab. Few ordinators per classroom embedded in good strategies are enough.

    Typing this i can see a link between rics and davids approach.

    But going again to the topic. I see two ways of strategy embedded in the situation now. One is going from the root and base up – directly dealing in between students and teachers, schools and society interests. Others going from the strategic educational planners side. During the ones have to explain and to fight for their ideas and conviction the orthers decide and expect decisions. One is the implementation theorie of small steps the other is the way of argue and training. and there is a lot in the middle. and both bring up valuable and respectable experiences, results and practice.
    Perhaps it is not a military sounding question of how to win the battle against —- whom? Perhaps thinking otherway around is more helpul: How to bolster all those who have to argue again and again. And That’s what you, Dave are doing.

  5. I definitely see quite a few of my colleagues being scared of technology. Their complaint is this: “Not enough training on how to implement in the classroom” and “Some programs/software/tools not very user-friendly”. I have begun using wikis and blogs with my students and they go back and tell their homeroom teachers about what they are doing in my class. I now have these ‘scared’ teachers asking me to explain more about the projects although at some point the conversation turns to justification. hmmmm

    I just shared this post with my students to see what they thought: (from my blog-WebExplorer)

    Here I am at Starbucks and I am suppose to be working on a new web page I’m designing. But, as I sit down with my venti Pumpkin Spice Latte-4 shots espresso (caffeine is a good thing!) I start reading my cup. Starbucks has random thoughts they call “The Way I See It”. Well this thought #90 and it goes like this:

    If we really want to understand innovation and collaboration, we

    have to explore shared space.

    Consider Watson & Crick: How many experiemnts did they do to

    confirm DNA’s double helix? Zero. Not one.

    They built models based on other people’s data. These

    models were their shared space. Their collaboration in that shared space

    powered their Nobel Prize-winning breakthrough. If you don’t have a shared

    space, you’re not collaborating.

    (Michael Schrage-MIT design researcher and author of Serious Play)

    Pretty much hits the nail on the head. To expand ourselves, our knowledge, our community, our world, our universe – we must take the time to collaborate. Learn from each other. Take what others know and expand it to help not only ourselves grow but those around us.

    My students are starting to feel the collaboration and I think they are hooked- They’re asking for more.

  6. David,

    If you really believe that change is required in education, might I humbily suggest you stop saying things like the following…

    >That said, there will continue to be resistance from some educators and education leaders who are simply comfortable with teaching and classroom styles that have been successfully used for decades.

    John Dewey knew that such practices were unsuccessful a century ago. Why celebrate the pedagogical strategies of the good ol’ days?

    I think that the situation you are describing is not about technology. It’s about a refusal to continue learning and growing. They ever-popular “teachers who refuse to change” could be labeled as oppositionally defiant, non-learners or even learning disabled. Why would you want such people teaching children especially since this defiance shows such contempt for the students they serve.

    Happy Thanksgiving!

    -=Gary

    PS: Someday I’d like to learn what we’re all supposed to change into. I have my ideas. I’d love to hear yours.

  7. David, thanks for the elaboration. I want to connect my original comment to your update.

    I believe many teachers are being “scared into thinking” that their job is about the high-stakes testing. If the children do poorly, it is the teacher’s fault in the eyes of many. (Yet again a totally different problem). Preparing kids to pass a test is not preparing them for “a rapidly changing world,” especially when you consider that many tests are a few years old already. In today’s world a few years equals decades in the past world (1950s).

    In your second updated paragraph, you state what I think is already happening: students have switched off when the come to school. It is ritual engagement, at best, as depicted in Office Space (the movie). Students punch their clock, they sit at their desk, and wait for the final bell. Once school is out they rush home so their learning can begin…through their network on MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, etc. A friend at the high school in our district was really excited one day when her students were engaged in her HTML lesson. She thought, it’s about time. They need to know this, because it is part of the curriculum. The next day, she found out the real reason they were engaged…they went home to update the MySpace pages so they could develop a unique feature/identity their friends did not have on their spaces.

    Our teachers are often upset because students appear to be too tired to do their school work. One reason, according to students, is they are staying up late to playing WarCraft and other multiplayer games with people from across the country/world. They are making connections with people and learning more than the game.

    In speaking to your economic concern, I think we must teach our students how to leverage the relationships they are already making through their networks. So instead of dissuading social networking cites, we teach not only proper use (Information Literacy skills) but leveraging skills. Talk about a scary proposition to many of our colleagues.

    P.S. – Hitchhiking off of Vicki’s comment, you were missed at GAETC this year. There were many good offerings, but I was struck by how far we have to go, when I saw so few people in Will’s sessions…and even more mind-boggling, was how few people new who he was. Before we get our students prepared for their world, we have much work to do with our teachers, even the ones who are considered “tech savvy.” OR we wait for the next generation of teachers to come into our classrooms, who will expect Web 2.0 tools to be part of the business model. But by then, will they be willing to participate in Web 4.0? Yikes!

  8. Dave,

    I think the instillation of fear in technology resistant educators will only go so far without some system changes being made. I mean, what fear are we talking about? The fear of educators losing their jobs? In most education institutions, teachers are protected from being fired by tenure. Even without the relative security of official tenure, most schools are reluctant to fire an educator for any reason other than gross misconduct or personality issues with administration. There is no great fear of the notion…“ I must stay competitive or I will be replaced” like there is in the corporate sector.
    There is also little fear of not getting a bonus or any other monetary reward for staying competitive in the educational field. There is no fear because in most cases there are no rewards available. There are modest salary increases for acquiring advanced degrees but even that practice is being done away with at many schools districts to try offset rising healthcare and benefit costs. The yearly salary increases that most educators do receive are state mandated and therefore are generally applied to everyone across the board. The educators that do take pride in their profession, are innovative and creative problem solvers are undermined those who “ put in time till retirement” but receive the same salary increase.

    So…No fear of being fired…No fear of not receiving a bonus or rewards. Where does that leave us?

    Currently, the only real motivation in staying competitive with technology for an educator is intrinsic. Teachers must want continuous improvement of their skills because they consider themselves professionals and they love what they do. They want to be the best teachers they can be. The use of technology can be a key to unlocking the creative, time-saving and innovative job practices that can enable those “professional educators” to be the best at what they do.

    The upper administration of any institution must lead the effort for teachers to adopt better practices. The quickest ways to disenfranchise a person or group of people is intentionally or unintentionally relay the notion that no matter what they do nothing good or bad will happen to them if they continue their current behavior. Administration ignoring the issue of widespread use of instructional technology is not acceptable anymore. Students are demanding services that did not exist five years ago. Therefore, faculty must be prepared to meet those student demands now and in the future.

    Theory of the Stick
    How do you motivate the “non-professional” educator? There must be a “carrot on a stick” to motivate those educators that are “putting in the time” or disenfranchised. The reward could be monetary, time-off, maybe just simple recognition innovate practices. There also needs to be a little bit of a fear of the “administration stick”. A little fear of replacement is a good thing. Of course, there should not be a fear of impending unemployment every day an educator shows up for work but accountability and professionalism at all levels should be expected and demanded.

    Thanks for your efforts,
    Jon Sweetin
    Instructional Technologist

  9. Jon wrote:
    Currently, the only real motivation in staying competitive with technology for an educator is intrinsic. Teachers must want continuous improvement of their skills because they consider themselves professionals and they love what they do. They want to be the best teachers they can be. The use of technology can be a key to unlocking the creative, time-saving and innovative job practices that can enable those “professional educators” to be the best at what they do.

    Jon makes a good point here…the only real motivation for me to use technology has been intrinsic—I know that technology allows me to reach my students in ways that other teachers struggle with. No one has rewarded me for my efforts–that’s for sure—and I would have received high evaluations from my administrators even if the overhead projector was my idea of a technological revolution!

    But the timesaving element of technology is often a long way off! Developing new skills and implementing them into my instructional practice takes careful reflection and revision over long periods of time. Simply discovering the practice is step one—It takes countless hours sometimes to see it bear fruit.

    When it does, great things happen…I just wonder if the majority of teachers will ever have the perseverance to see new technologies become a part of their daily practice.

    Maybe the problem isn’t scaring or carrot and sticking teachers into using technology….Maybe it is a matter of creating more time for them to play with new practices and to make them their own.

    Sure is a knotty problem, huh?

    Thanks for stimulating my thinking before the holiday break! At least my brain will burn some calories….

    Bill

  10. Just a note to say that the intrinsic is not an insignificant motivation. The reason why most teachers became teachers is intrinsic. This is why I emphasize the idea that teachers who are not using the contemporary information landscape as a platform for teaching (using technology), are not doing their jobs. If we can create that vision of teaching, we might get somewhere with a lot of teacher.

    Or not! Just don’t know, sometimes!

    — dave —

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *