There is still an unfortunate and overwhelming belief that schools are supposed to subscribe to the Qantas method of education; face the front, sit up straight, turn off all electronic communications devices, we are landing now and will be for the next 20 minutes – after, you can move freely and join the world once again.

For a generation of kids who were born into a connected world, for whom always-on constant connection is second nature (however superficial), it’s self evident that denying them such connection is only making schools increasingly irrelevant in the learning process. Note I’m not decrying the value of schools as social places, places of role models, of networking, yes of education, and friendship development, and of so much more than ‘learning’, but that’s a whole other discussion.

But! Prattling on about how iPods and PDAs and other mobile devices are good for homework – is missing the point (http://tinyurl.com/87oa8f). It makes the assumption that learning is a delimited thing by both venue and time.  Kids can only learn between the 9am bell and the 3:10 buzzer; rubbish. There should no longer be such a thing as homework; there should be less reliance on neatly bounded sharply delineated periods of learning and subject focus. Learning happens from wake up to sleep; it’s a collaborative thing between parents, peers, teachers and life in general.  If something is worth learning, kids will learn it regardless of when where or how. iPods, netpads, PDAs, game consoles, teachers faces, are nothing more than portals to information and the time kids access these should be exactly when the info is relevant and likely to stick.

Making something designated ‘homework’ is the same pointless proposition as only learning maths in this time slot only learning history during these designated minutes of the day. No kid’s mind focuses on a single subject at any timeslot, or for any predetermined time quantity. If this were not true teachers wouldn’t talk to students outside of their class time. They’d get all the maths or science or geography in those allotted moments.

Hattie’s findings (http://tinyurl.com/9jxbbu) that homework was less relevant than feedback is right – the methods are open to criticism, the numbers are easily challenged, teachers will always campaign for smaller classes, but the findings are still right.  Kids will learn when they have cause and interest to learn and they need ‘input’ in order to learn. Rename “feedback” to “providing answers, information & stimulating thought” and there it is – teaching, the thing we all do well. Hattie has supported that, but sidelong, kicked out the idea of delineated timeslots of learning.

Stop calling it homework, assume kids are connected and learning all the time and homework stops being something to endure and suffer.

Twitter is still one of the more brilliant components of a personal learning network. For example, the links to good stories and articles, websites about new innovative products and methods would be a 24×7 job to find if you’re doing it alone. This, plus the collective knowledge and memory of your followers still makes Twitter an invaluable asset. The closeness and supportiveness of some of the relationships within Twitter are very clear and obvious. Peer knowledge is unsurpassed as the way to stay ‘with-it’ and informed. Without doubt the talent and professionalism of many tweeps shines and inspires.
BUT!
There is a sense of familiarity and take-for-granted creeping in. A bit like after the first half dozen dates – no more taking extra time to appear at your best, no changing outfit six times till one looks right, no more sucking in the gut when being photographed, no more finding flowers and small gifts to bring along. Some tweeps have started feeling comfortable. Too comfortable. When the useful is interspersed with absolute nonsensical rubbish about someone’s kid being toilet trained and woots when they don’t crap themselves and how someone has a headache so they are not the happiest little vegemites in the jar, the system has become an old dressing gown. I don’t get the value of being told that someone is now in a taxi. Unless it’s the first and only taxi ride you’ve ever had and you need to share, we all know about taxis – keep it to yourself.  I don’t see the value of knowing that they ate wheeties for breakfast – and please don’t include that the reason is to keep you ‘regular’. I have no interest that you think your toothbrush needs replacing – you’re grown up, go buy one. I don’t care to share those sorts of details about life’s ablutions with any one. I even spare my beautiful everloving wife the finer details about how I neatly shaved my top lip this morning and remembered to put the toilet seat down.

Surely it is possible to be a close-nit supportive group with all the tremendous benefits that brings without resorting to mundane, inane, dull nonsense. If you haven’t anything constructive to say, don’t keep up your tweet numbers by tweeting the dull. Like my gran said, if you haven’t anything fruitful to say don’t say anything at all. Twitter isn’t a competition, there is no prize for having the most tweets, and trying to have the most tweets by being a twirp doesn’t make you worthy of a gold star on your forehead.

When face to face with your PLN members, you have good conversations, but I’d bet they never resort to “oh dear the hem on my second best dress has a slipped a stitch” – so why should Twitter do the same?

Just a thought…

All day we hear things like “the world is flat” “wisdom of crowds” “always on communications” and more and more and they are all right – in their own way. Well, except that wisdom of crowds thing. Can’t say I have a lot of faith in most individuals so a crowd of them doesn’t make it much better – just more of the same. I think we have a good example of it happening now. The current global financial crisis spread like wildfire; because there is so much “connectedness” and the doom and gloom message gets to everyone rapidly.

If there’d been less availability of the bad news, then far fewer people would have gone into panic, far fewer banks would have started foreclosing, far fewer people would have sold shares. But, that all happened, the spirits of doom and gloom won.

Since the capacity of people to react so fast to something bad is so powerful why hasn’t someone researched how to harness that same capacity to spread the good stuff? Why are we still trying to spread the good word about the capabilities of educational technology to improve a teacher’s lot? How is it, the right people still don’t know a student’s study life improves with some classroom 2.0 support? What is it that stymies the good, but filters through the bad? I wish I knew. I wish we’d found the way to stop telling each other in the choir and got the congregations singing too.

Wisdom of crowds? Pffft!

There is a common myth, a technological myopia, applicable to the current generation of students. Most students regularly use technologies like SMS texting, iPods, games consoles, internet chats, etc. It is highly visible and this leads to the (reasonable?) assumption that there is a broad and deep understanding of the associated technologies. This is a myth, although there is a superficial appearance of being technology savvy the understanding of what can be done goes no further than the instantaneous end user activity. These are not necessarily transferable skills; they are situational and students cannot always apply those skills in a new environment, situation, or context. As digital migrants, we do not know what we do not know; more importantly we do not know how to check what the students don’t know and consequently have low expectations of their technology use. That superficial use appears to be acceptable and even amazing. It will, however, not suffice in the increasingly dynamic, increasingly information packed, increasingly demanding, increasingly competitive world students are part of. 
 

In order to be a successful learner not only through junior school – senior school – University, but also in the rapidly changing workplace, adaptability is key.  The ability to learn, change, relearn and apply known skills in as yet unknown situations will be vital for our current students. One of the central tenets of success in the work place will be lifelong learning. 
 

Lifelong learning will be dependant upon the successful construction of a Personal Learning Network. This will involve as set of self sufficiencies, constant availability of updated resources, some physically tangible (libraries, etc.,) some personal, (family, teachers, SMEs, etc.,) and many many virtual ones (social networks, micro blogs, online resources, Wikipedia, Google, etc,). Additionally, collaboration will become more and more vital, not just for the social aspects but for the diversity of thought processes. 
 

Current curricula are jam packed with knowledge and students have timetables full to overflowing, not only with academic but also co-curricula material. There is little time for reflection, questioning, time for ideas to sink in, and time for ideas to form and surface. Concept development happens during interaction and collaborative exchange. New possibilities appear when ideas are bounced around among peers, mentors and other creative people. Two students sharing, synergistically, produce better work than two students working separately.

Transferable and adaptive skills and in depth knowledge of technological possibilities will be vital to student success in the workforce. We are educating children for a future that we cannot even envision.

Back in the not-so-old days, when I was much the age of the children I now teach, it was de-rigueur to have a pen pal; someone from far flung climes, or exotic sounding places and using foreign languages like… American. The intervening years between then and now, saw the popularity of correspondence and correspondents wane to a sad low. Sadly, because although I struggled with the discipline of being a writer, I never lost the pleasure that came with reading a well penned letter. I’m of the belief most of you reading this feel the same. Why is this significant? There is a massive, technology supported resurgence of pen pals.  More correctly, we might now say key-pals. They may not be superficially recognised as the pen pal of old, but the concept has remained. E-mail, sms, instant chat and other ephemeral versions of the letter abound. In fact often five or more at a time, each in little individual envelopes on the computer screen all beeping for instant attention. Without question, they have supplanted the printed and written word, but have regenerated the desire to connect in ‘writing’. What is the educational impact of this, if any? An opportunity to develop better writing skills. Good grammar and appropriate punctuation is the domain of the printed and written word. The transitory nature of digital correspondence conspires to reduce the value of the content and leads the writer to believe that a sloppy approach is acceptable. Even, that the reduction in effort is justified by the corresponding gain in speed and rapidity of response that the use of technology appears to demand. Our capacity to think equally fast so that we write what we mean, is a topic for another bulletin. This need for speed is made concrete by the fact that I cn wrt 2 U and dun hv to fink mch as long as im fast.  In the world of sms and instant chat, I concede that we must move with the times and I’ll take poor correspondence over no connection any day. The connection of a techno granny with her geographically disperse grandchildren is something to be celebrated even though the clash of writing cultures may produce confusion and astonishment on both sides of the connection. On second thoughts, that clash may well be an opportunity in itself. If we are encouraging our children’s use of technology within their study, at what point and at which level do we start to make allowances or tolerate a decline in standards?  Of course that’s a rhetorical question — at no point do we tolerate it. We just need to manage or delineate where and when the standards are applied or allowed to be by-passed. An sms on little phone screens makes CUL8R acceptable. An email using ROTFL is IMHO acceptable. School assignments for any faculty, projects or essays, just because they are produced with a word-processor, are not places for techno-tolerance. If anything, the use of technology should be producing an improvement in grammar and writing skills. Not for a microsecond am I thinking here of the in-built spelling and grammar checking that comes with modern applications. Auto checking is a blot on the landscape of good writing, if ever there was one, and without wishing to offend, there is no such thing as American English. That’s just a figment of Bill’s imagination. The crisp legible appearance of documents on screen is equal to hand writing 2 or 3 successive drafts. It more clearly shows up flaws and errors giving an opportunity to correct them before going public. Typing is also easier and faster than writing by hand. Successive edits don’t require the whole document to be begun from scratch. Supportive material resulting from your extensive research can be added in easily. And, please don’t forget, just as easily, properly acknowledged. Higher quality results can be achieved with a fraction of the physical effort required with pen a paper. This leaves you free for more mental effort and plenty of time in which to give it. When your kids ask why, in this day and age, it’s still important to write well, remind them, apart from getting good marks at school, that it is an outward sign of their approach to pretty much everything. Sloppiness is pervasive. As it says in a national newspaper’s style guide (quote pinched from Lynne Truss) “punctuation is a courtesy designed to help the reader to understand your writing without stumbling”. This connection with good manners and consideration of the reader (you can substitute ‘other people’ here) isn’t coincidental; there’s an implication of what type of person you are.  In addition, good writing skills are not subject specific; they are as valuable in Science, Maths, Art, and even PE as they are in English.  Remember too, they are learned skills. It might be nice if we could inherit them (and in some ways I believe we do) but improvement only comes with practice and guidance. Encourage the use of technology with your daughters, even lead by example, but remain vigilant in the delineation of where tolerance is and importantly is not going to be enacted.   Finally, for this article at least, and importantly, encourage, encourage, encourage.