Like most (if not all) publicly funded institutions, my workplace has certain warnings about the electronic files we keep and where we work. Do work at home on your own PC? This is a big no-no. Because what if there was some sort of lawsuit someday and it was noted that you had work files on your computer or PDA or cell phone (including your calendar)? Ah, a judge might see fit to order your hardware confiscated. By bringing work into your personal space, you have now opened those up to public disclosure. (Mind you, someone said that there is a better chance of winning the lottery, but still, that means there's a chance.) My new employer is far more fussy about this than any previous ones, even though they have all been subject to same rules.

But this brings up some issues. First of all, I can't always have access to the servers at work...and with this particular job, I will be on the road a few days a month (at least). Actually "working" from 8 - 5, Monday through Friday is not always going to be possible...just as keeping "classroom hours" was never a reality. Sometimes, it's easier to work on a project evenings or weekends when you have some quiet time...or when a really great idea hits you. I also want access to my calendar when I'm not on a computer. When I'm at the dentist trying to schedule my next app't., I need to be able to see when I'm available...and yet, I'm not allowed to sync Outlook to my Palm without my PDA being opened up to public disclosure laws.

There are a couple of ways around this. First of all, a work-issued laptop and some software which allows me to remotely access the servers will take care of a lot of the file issues. The calendar? I think I can sync work to Google and then download from home---but what a pain in the ass: input-upload-download-sync vs. input-sync. However, if I just think about Google Apps for a moment, this could potentially solve a lot of issues. Why not just upload the documents I use most and then not have to worry about the whole which-machine-does-what sort of thing? I can work on a GoogleDoc to my heart's content and it won't matter one lick which computer I use. Nothing has to be stored or downloaded. If a court order wants to get the files from Google, more power to 'em.

All of this begs the questions of just how many copies of information one needs and the best places to store it. We talk a lot at how the volume of available info is doubling in shorter and shorter time frames, but if we just look at our personal piece of that...hmmm. Aren't we assuming a lot when we upload hundreds of photos to Flickr? It's an amazing platform, but it isn't bound to last forever. Are we better off leaving them on those servers...or should we be burning things to CD or DVD? Do we really need to think about how much documentation of our lives we really need? As long as I pay to renew my domain for this space, it's mine. But my hosting service could well go out of business. I build posts in Blogger, but that doesn't mean this format will be available in the future. When all is said and done with this blog, how will I make an archive for myself?

One of my friends recently referred to The Cloud of data we are leaving on-line. Public school districts and agencies might not like employees using social networking and web 2.0 tools, but they are certainly not going to be able to stop their use. Acceptable Use Policies should be updated yearly (not every 6 or 7 years, as most are now) with input from users, not simply IT people. While it is understandable that an employer has a right to set the rules with the hardware and bandwidth it purchases, tools like GoogleDocs, del.icio.us, and so forth are not their provenance. The litmus test should be whether or not the employee is using the tool to advance the work being done (vs. personal use). (As an aside, my favourite comment from the last few weeks was an observation that my previous employer's attitude toward web 2.0 was "Neanderthal." I couldn't have summarized it any better.) The tide has turned, the horse has left the barn---pick your euphemism. With the daily emergence of various tools, it would be wiser to focus on responsible use vs. denial of existence.

I don't mind the big stinky Cloud of information I'm leaving in my wake. I've made my peace with it. Someone else recently pointed out that "Just because someone is a trailblazer doesn't mean they should end up being burned at the stake." I think that in the past, that risk was much greater. It doesn't mean that it can't happen now or in the future, but the prevalence of use of Flickr, Twitter, Blogger, GoogleApps and other platforms means that most people aren't giving their users a second glance. It's an on-line world now. Time to accept it and keep on trailblazing.

Labels: technology

What does this mean? It means that when you tell people you write, read or listen to blogs, wikis, podcasts, social networks and online video - if they give you a funny look, it is now officially them that's a freak, not you.

Too bad the new admin at my old school isn't likely to read this article on how the Fastest Growing US Companies Are Rapidly Adopting Social Media, as it is he who refers to social networkers as freaky.

A one year follow up on a study of social media adoption at 500 of the fastest growing companies in the US has found that familiarity with and use of blogs, podcasting, wikis, online video and social networking has skyrocketed in 2008 to nearly double what it was in 2007. 77% of respondents now report at least some use of a social media tool in their business.

What does this mean for schools?

It means that internet filters have got to be lifted. While they will never be completely removed, school administration has got to get out of bed with their tech nazis and on the side of preparing students. As Scott McLeod points out in his post (shown in entirety below), From the Head of Zeus:

Most schools currently expect students to somehow (maybe magically?) be responsible, successful digital citizens upon graduation from high school - able to navigate all of the intricacies of a digital, global world - despite having little to no opportunity to learn or meaningfully practice what that means during their 12+ years of schooling. Continuing my analogy from my previous post, we have to stop pretending that students are like Athena, able to burst forth fully-formed from the head of Zeus (or the cocoon of schools), ready to successfully function in a complex adult world without prior practice or experience.

I saw a lot of angst last year in the edusphere. Lots of posts expressing frustration with outdated and narrow internet policies and closed-minded IT departments and colleagues. Now that we as a society may be over the hump in terms of how we view social media (Huzzah!), perhaps we can use this momentum to bring others into the light.

Labels: technology

Cell phones and teens seem to go together like PB & J these days. It's hard to imagine one without the other...and yet cell phone technology is banned in most classrooms. Is it possible, however, that we might make peace with these tools---even use them for our benefit?

Liz Kolb thinks so. Her blog, From Toy to Tool: Cell Phones in Learning, has me thinking about all sorts of new things. I admit that I don't use my cell phone for much more than a few calls and some text messaging. I have used the camera option a few times to document some information, but I truly haven't thought about the range of this tool.

One of my favourite new discoveries is Poll Everywhere. How cool is this for teachers? You know those fancy-dancy clicker systems? You don't need them now. Just set up your questions ahead of time and then have students use cell phones to respond. What a great way to do formative assessment during lessons. Imagine the power of using this in staff development. People can text questions into you, participate in formative assessment polls, and more. I SO want to give this a test drive at my OSPI presentation at the end of the month.

Did you know that Google has all sorts of cell phone apps? Need directions? Just text the location (if your phone has GPS, you don't even have to supply it with the starting point). You can do searches for information and Google with text your answer to you. Can you see kids finding information to questions while you work with them or they do another activity?

What about broadcasting reminder messages via text (or audio) to students? What about them recording information and sending it to you? Imagine them using their camera phones to document changes in an experimental setup over time and then using those to create a product (either digital or on paper).

I can see that you would need to work with kids to make it clear when and why the phones could be out being used during class time. There would need to be some procedural training, but then that would be true for other classroom routines. This is just a new aspect.

If all of this is piquing your interest, too, here are a couple more useful sites developed by Liz:

• New Tools: Cell Phones as Classroom Learning Tools from the 2008 K-12 Online Conference
• Cell Phones in Learning wiki

Maybe cell phones aren't the enemy of our classrooms. Perhaps it's time to make our peace with them and put them to work.

Labels: technology

Teachers are packrats. The saving grace of the digital age is that most resources don't have to take up real space, just occupy spots on a server. Thank goodness for that, because with new tools and ideas generated daily, there would never be room for them all. My del.icio.us account keeps growing (if you want to add me to your network, e me for details as I have things there under my real name). I really do like this service. I'm rarely check my network for new ideas, but I also like that I can bookmark all sorts of things, label them, and then access them from anywhere.

Here are a few highlights which were either suggested to me or that I stumbled upon as I was rollin' around the web:

• Two new and interesting mind-mapping tools. One is Text 2 Mind Map and the other Mindomo. (Screen shots for each are below. Click to embiggen.) I think that Mindomo has many more great features and classroom applications. I like that you can link the map to other areas on the web, notations, etc. And you can download maps onto your classroom website. Text 2 Mind Map, however, is really simple to use and has an easy interface for moving between an outline and graphic form. Speaking of graphic organizers, check out this great page with 100 Helpful Web Tools for Every Kind of Learner. There are amazing ideas for differentiation using technology here.

• Privnote is truly just for fun. In Mission Impossible form, you can send e-mail that will self-destruct after it is read. I can imagine what a kick it would be to send students reminders about deadlines or tests or other events using this tool. It would be great for communicating with peers about meetings, too.
• In terms of meeting up, have you ever struggled to find a time and date which works for everyone? Next time you're trying to set up something, why not give When Is Good? a try? You click the times on a grid which work best for you and then send the link to others so that they can do the same. This saves a ton of e-mail time and hassle with coordination. Let this site save you from an aching head.
• Have a look at all of these game templates. While I can easily imagine using some of these with student and teacher groups, I can also see where it would be great to have students build their own representations of learning. Kids can also develop their own study aids over at the Flash Card Maker.
• iRubric will help you build and integrate scoring guides for your classroom while PageOnce can act as your personal assistant on the web to "remember" all kinds of information for you while you cruise.

I seem to add to my list daily. Am I using all of these consistently? No, not yet---but that's okay. There are different tools for different jobs. It's good to have the variety at hand for when I need it. Is there anything else you'd recommend I have a look at?

Labels: technology

You know the old joke about being given The Mushroom Treatment, right: kept in the dark and fed a steady diet of shit? I sometimes wonder if kids aren't subjected to that more than we realize. While I understand that there are some topics that might not be considered age-appropriate or school-appropriate, there is also a regular assumption that kids can't be burdened (enlightened?) with things which do affect them.

For example, plenty of my students are frustrated by the internet filters at school, but no one has ever talked to them about the ins and outs of these decisions.

I asked them to tell me the kinds of sites/programs to which they didn't have access at school. I wrote them on the board, grouping them into two categories (which I didn't label until later): those things that would be required under the Childhood Internet Protection Act (CIPA) and those which were just a district choice.

The things that fell into the CIPA category included pornography, gambling, illegal drug use, making oneself an easy target for child predators. All of these are pretty fuzzy, mind you. In fact, we talked some about "pornography." Now, before you start getting all nervous, I didn't ask for any details. What we did talk a bit about was that "porn" is hard to label. There are diagrams of naked people, sex organs, etc. in their biology book---does that qualify? Why is that any different from a photograph of a nude person? They hadn't thought about this much before; however, because gambling, porn, and other things are not available to them (or shouldn't be) until they are 18, they don't mind the blocked access at school. I'm sure some of them figure that they can just look at those things at home. Kids do have their own range of what they think is and isn't "school appropriate." We also talked a bit about the magic age of 18. Most of my students were turning 16: the magical age for getting a driver's license. I promised them that no one was going to sprinkle them with some sort of fairy dust at the moment between their last day of being 17 and their first day of being 18...dust which would confer all manner of wisdom. There's no special part of the brain which unlocks when Poof! You're 18! But as a society, we have to draw lines somewhere and this is the spot we've agreed to. Other countries or cultures do different things based on their own interpretations of the word "adult." Anyway, this part is okay with them.

In the other category were listed things such as MySpace, Facebook, wikipedia (and all other wikis), e-mail, GoogleApps, Flickr, blogs, twitter/plurk, etc. I asked them what all of these had in common. Ah---social networking possibilities. Now, one could make the argument that Flickr, Photobucket, and other such sites could be blocked due to CIPA. After all, the district has to restrict access to pictures, not written content. However, as long as one can do image searches using Google or Yahoo! or other engines, I'm not so sure what good it does. Meanwhile, most of us have likely had the experience of using a perfectly plain search term and getting back some not appropriate for school suggestions. This happened to me at the end of the year when I was using Flickr to find something for the word "Pride." Most of what I got were pictures from gay pride parades---many of the photos containing painted nudes, having a wonderful time. The pix were great, my search term as innocuous as they come, and the lion's share of the results weren't what I needed for school. Anyway, the fact is that with new social networking tools coming out daily, it seems foolish for any school district to think that they will be able to ban them all. It's going to be like pushing back the ocean with a broom.

We also talked about kids' ideas of what "public" and "private" is. Most of them have a "public" MySpace page. Is it their intention that anyone with internet access read it? Are they truly putting content there for everybody? They were a bit taken aback with this idea. Of course they aren't. "Public" for them means their friends or others who know them and might have an interest in what they post. They feel the information should be considered "private" for all others. This is, of course, part of the issue The District worries about. What they post is public from our perspective...but not theirs. However, instead of talking with kids about this and how to be safe with information, we just tell them to do it at home where we don't have to see or think about what they're doing.

I told them that The District is choosing to block these sites for a couple of reasons. One is the concern that they might read something "obscene." In other words, we can't use wikis because someone somewhere might edit the wiki to include a bad word or lewd comment. The district doesn't operate from a standpoint that if given a choice, people tend to do the right thing. But more importantly, as described in Here Comes Everybody, the reason why wikipedia and similar sites have been so successful is because of the sheer volume of people out there who want them to succeed. Sure, you can go in and create something stupid---but all of your efforts can be erased in seconds...and there are far more people interested in doing that than in damaging things.

The other reason The District wants to eliminate access is a very Big Brother one: they can't control the content. If a student uses MS Word to write a paper and saves it on the school's server, the school can read, delete, or do whatever it likes with the work. They can't do this with GoogleDocs. There, a student's work belongs to the student.

My little mushrooms enjoyed the conversation. I brought them into the light a bit and fed them a nicer diet. The question, of course, is where do they go from here. They can't fight the CIPA stuff---and really, they don't seem to want to. What they do need to do is use the social networking tools to take some action...and I think we'll have to get their parents into the mix. (Is their Right to Freedom of Assembly being impinged? An interesting thought, to be sure.) For now, I'll do what I can to make sure that they aren't being treated as mushrooms. Our kids deserve more respect than that.

Labels: students, technology

I want to spend my $.02 today talking about choice. It's Independence Day in the states, with an emphasis of freedom, but an underlying message that this gives one the ability to choose. It does not, however, provide the motivation to do so. And today, I specifically want to respond to Scott McLeod's call for leadership in technology because what I see all too often is a lack of leadership in this area. There is no choice to be professional.

Shall we talk about what it means to be a professional educator/role model in the 21^st century?

Does this include reflection on one’s practice? Does it include collaboration with other educators? Would the description entail something to do with continual professional development and intellectual curiosity? Staying current with best practices? Might it involve the integration of technology into lessons? Does being “professional” mean that you do whatever it takes to help students reach the standards---putting student learning at the heart of every decision you make, from the posters on your walls to the words you use in talking with students about their work?

I am fortunate to have developed an extensive personal learning network over the last few years. I’ll have tens of thousands of visitors to my site this year who will help me shape my personal reflections on my professional life. I have regular daily contact with superintendents, principals, technology leaders, teachers, and others not only in Washington state, but around the world. These contacts supply me with a constant stream of updated information for the classroom---whether they are new technologies or new applications for the classroom. In this ongoing collaborative network, kids come first. There are continual questions about how best to meet the needs of all learners and a supportive attitude of making things happen.

The real world of my school district is not so “professional” in this sense. If reflection is important, then where are the blogs of administrators? Why is it okay for one of our building principals to refer to those who use social networking as "freaky." To our district technology "leaders"---I don’t see you on Twitter or a Ning. Do you not believe in the technology you represent? Where is your role modeling for others? When will there be trainings available for teachers on social networking tools as opposed to just Microsoft wares?

Where is your leadership? How do you justify to parents the inequity of access to 21st century skills you are developing in their children? No wikis, no blogs, no nings, no cell phones, no GoogleDocs, no streaming media, no right-click options on computer mice. The big list of "No!" goes on and on. When will you realize that technology is not just "stuff" like document cameras and projectors used as no more than glorified overhead projectors? When will you step up to the plate and be leaders?

I know how easy it must be to dismiss these tools. You think you have the very convenient excuse that you're too busy...that there's no time. And yet I see evidence of other administrators in the US and Canada making time to blog, participate on Twitter or a Ning, or use a wiki to support professional development. I applaud their interest in choosing to be professional...in choosing to model intellectual curiosity...to do what's best for kids. I know our "leadership" attends various conferences and meetings, but so far, there are no district leaders here who create content and present to others. How do you expect those who work for you to believe that you are learning when you only absorb what you can from others and do nothing to show your thinking and application? We don't accept this level of effort from kids in our classrooms---why do you think that it's okay for you to model that it is?

Has anyone else noticed the lack of district level information services people in Classroom 2.0 discussions? I see blogs by school board members, teachers, building principals, state leaders, students, and district personnel. I see none by school IT people. There are one or two of these gatekeepers in most districts who ensure 21st century tools stay out of the hands of teachers and students, yet they do not seem to participate in any sort of way with the rest of us who are on-line. I find it odd that there is no apparent interest on their part. Is this what leadership in technology should look like?

The graphic for the post today comes from Married to the Sea. They published it earlier this week and it seemed fitting to use it today. And while this post has become a rant of sorts, I can't emphasize enough that those who are in leadership roles have made the choice to be there, with all of the associated responsibilities and privileges. Maybe it's time you stepped up and showed that you should earn the right to be called professional.

Labels: technology

Last year, I worked with a school that was in the midst of re-centering itself. It's all too easy in the midst of the Death by 1000 Mandates governing us to remember why it is that we choose to be in the classroom---much less think about the future and what we want our schools to be.

I asked the staff to consider three questions: What happens? What matters? What matters most?

They wrote their answers into three concentric rings like this:




The outer ring contained all sorts of ideas about the school day (what happens). The middle ring was meant to focus ideas a bit---our of all the things that happen in a given day, which of those matter? Finally, the center ring was to capture what mattered the most out of everything. People from all walks of school participated and, as you might imagine, a range of answers were generated.

With their permission, I organized the information for them. I chose to use tag clouds. I could have used a graph instead---we could have counted how many people mentioned "parents" or "data." But I don't think it would have had the same impact as the clouds. I used TagCrowd for generating the visuals because it allowed me to put in my own text (most cloud services use URL or other on-line data).

Here is What Happens:


Here is What Matters:


Here is What Matters Most:



You can click on any of the graphics to make them bigger (and more readable). If you're unfamiliar with this sort of graphic representation, all you need to know is that the bigger and bolder the font, the more times the idea was mentioned by the staff.

I have to say that "What happens?" is my favourite. It's this delightful snapshot of a school day---everything from the pledge of allegiance in the morning to kids tipping over chairs to the after school safety patrol groups. There is a certain sense of cacophony to visual. You get a real sense that life in the school is "noisy" and that you are pulled a hundred different directions. It's also interesting to me to see how not only does that noise get dialed back as you progress through the visuals, but the things which garnered the most attention for "What happens?" are not the same things that matter the most. This served as a great jumping off point for talking about why there was this disparity and what we could do about it.

I have to say that it was one of my most favourite staff development activities that I've ever done. I think the visual was powerful in allowing everyone on staff to have a voice in the process and to see it reflected in the work they did together. I am hoping to have an opportunity to use a similar process in the future. There are so many new ways to visualize data, from microcharts to infoporn (safe to click---it's just about where the calories are in grocery stores) to motion graphs. We need to find ways to bring these to the classroom and staff room. They make the stories of our schools come alive and are more than worth 1000 numbers in what they communicate.

Labels: staff development, technology

Many edubloggers are in San Antonio this week attending the NECC conference. Perhaps next year I'll make my way to the extravaganza in D.C., but this year, I'm going to content myself with watching the discussion on Twitter and participating in a fringe way. First up is Blocked Blogs Week. It begins today and runs through Saturday, July 5.

If you're reading this, count yourself lucky. In many school districts, blogs and other web 2.0 tools are blocked. It doesn't take much time looking around the edusphere to gauge the continual frustration teachers have.

The purpose of Blocked Blogs week is "To promote awareness of the need for more informed filtering of the Read/Write Web for all learners. We recognize that some material on the internet is not appropriate and in some cases is harmful to children and adolescents. However, we are opposed to blanket bans on all Read/Write Web resources such as blogs, wikis, and some social networking tools. Read/Write Web resources provide valuable and necessary experience with 21st Century communication and collaboration tools, and we believe that it is in the best interests of our learners if we take the time to TEACH them how to use these tools appropriately, safely, effectively, and efficiently rather than just block their use altogether."

Does this describe you? Do you believe that information literacy is important to our children? Do you find the ignorant use of filters in your district to be over the top---especially knowing that other schools and districts are better serving the children in their classrooms? Post your thoughts this week. I would especially encourage you to participate in the leadership call-out scheduled for July 4 and headed up by Scott McLeod.


Want a button for your blog? You can find them on the wiki for Blocked Blogs Week or you might use another graphic from Adrian Bruce like the one at the right.

In a recent comment on this blog, someone mentioned that we don't merely warn our children about the dangers of street traffic and then send them out to cross a highway. We hold their hands. We walk with them. We show them how to be safe. The same should be true for internet traffic.

You might have seen a recent study about the Educational Benefits of Social Networking Sites:

"What we found was that students using social networking sites are actually practicing the kinds of 21st century skills we want them to develop to be successful today," said Christine Greenhow, a learning technologies researcher in the university's College of Education and Human Development and principal investigator of the study. "Students are developing a positive attitude towards using technology systems, editing and customizing content and thinking about online design and layout. They're also sharing creative original work like poetry and film and practicing safe and responsible use of information and technology. The Web sites offer tremendous educational potential."

Isn't this what we should want for our classrooms? The NEA and AFT recently worked on identifying the gaps and gains in educational technology. Their findings revealed "that although all educators and students in public schools have some access to computers and the Internet, we have few assurances that they are able to use technology effectively for teaching and learning." The use of filtering software is creating serious issues of equity for students across the United States. Have a look at these examples of Classroom 2.0 in practice? Can you do these things with your students in your classrooms? I can't. Which of our kids are going to be better prepared for the working world in a few years? When will purposeful reflection by teachers be seen as professional and not scandalous?

Will a series of posts about greater access to technology cause a tear down of filtering software akin to the Berlin Wall? Not likely. However, it's time to start raising general public awareness. It's time that business owners and corporations realized that one or two people in school districts are impeding skill development of future workers. It's time that parents and families realized that a Big Brother mentality is eroding the rights of our students to share their thoughts with authentic audiences. It's time to let politicians and policy makers know that their intents for equitable education are not being realized in all places due to uneven use of filtering software. It's time to get loud.

Labels: blogging, technology

No matter how tech savvy I get, I don't believe that paper and pencil will ever be replaced. There is something about the experience of writing with those tools---the way the paper looks, the feel of the graphite sliding over it, the smell of the cedar in the pencil. Although typing allows me to convey my ideas (once formed) more quickly, I almost always need that concrete experience of writing first as a way to just brainstorm ideas. Paper captures random thoughts better than other media. I have a little Levenger notebook like the one shown at the left. It's small enough to carry in hand or slip into a purse so that it's always available. I always have so many projects going that I like the idea of being able to jot down ideas and reminders as they come. I never know when I'm going to have time to think, much less organize those thoughts.

I really liked this article on The Paper Version of the Web when I saw it earlier in the week. Twitter, Vimeo, Flickr Places, and more all started out as sketches---simpler communications as people shared and refined ideas before building them. But, we rarely see this part of the development process. On the right there is a sketch for the proposed word processing program for the one laptop per child project. There are many more interesting photos of sketches posted with the article. It is the modern version of a cabinet of curiosity: relics and whimsy all mixed together.

Most of my original notes wind up in the trash because, really, who cares what they were? But perhaps there is something metacognitive I could do with them. Might they convey how to move a process along? Below are my stages as I prepare for my grading workshop a month from now. The first is just scrawls. These were my original notes, scribbled as I thought of things. This page was intended as no more than a place to capture ideas over a few days...a holding tank of sorts. Perhaps as my students worked on an assignment and I had a thought about the presentation, I would jot the information here. (If you're interested in getting a closer look, you can click on any of the images to enlarge them.)

At the next stage, I'm a bit more serious. When I'm not in a hurry and am making a concerted effort to plan, my handwriting actually becomes legible. The next two pictures represent my attempt to take the random thoughts I'd had and make something useful. The little numbers to the left of some of the bullets represent the time I planned to allot and the circled numbers represent the final order of the agenda I chose. You'll see that there are some "Activity?" queries in the margins. This is meant to remind me that I want participants to be doing something with these ideas here---it shouldn't be me yapping at them. I have other notes in the margins. They are things I thought of later and wanted to include in the final version. You'll even see my notes about the graphs I shared yesterday. The only alterations to these pictures that I have made is to "paint" over two student names. As these were my notes, I included them as reminders to me. Now that I am sharing them with a wider audience, I need to protect my kids.
























Finally, we have a further refinement of the first parts of the workshop. It contains more details for me regarding discussion questions to use. There are more pegs to hang ideas on. Even the elements on this page are likely to change in the final draft; however, once I get to this point in the process, I'm able to set the ideas aside and focus on other things. I know that if something happened and I didn't get to have one more iteration of revision, I would still be able to take this and make it work just fine.

























There you have it. A bit of my own process for you. What are you using to organize your ideas?

Labels: technology

The title of the article is "A Computer Lab the Students Use, But Never See." This means that the lab described has something in common with the one at my school: students never see it. In a building with 1400 kids, there is one computer lab...plus another that is booked half a day every day for the computer science classes. It's fortunate that science classrooms have some computers, or else my kids would never have some semblance of access to digital resources. I know a lot of people think that kids can just use computers at home, but many families just have one machine (and some have no computer)---and there are lots with only dial-up access for the internet. Asking students to use resources that are unavailable and/or blocked at school (such as e-mail or wikipedia) to complete work is unfair. While I doubt that the high school is likely to be full of kids with laptops in the near future, I do like the idea of a Virtual Computing Lab.

Users enter it remotely, from their own computers in dormitory rooms or libraries. They get all the features they've had in the past, including access to expensive software packages, like 3-D modeling tools and advanced statistical programs, that they need for courses. But now the programs run on powerful computer servers behind the scenes, instead of on desktop PC's. And this lab never closes.

Officials here also say that the virtual lab could be the beginning in a more fundamental shift, one that could change the way technology staffs on campuses do business. The goal of the virtual-lab approach is to build Web-based tools that professors can control on their own, without having to ask permission from a staff member to add something to a university computer.

"I got tired of telling users what they couldn't do," says Samuel F. Averitt, vice provost for information technology at North Carolina State. "The central-IT guy is about control and ownership. We're trying to get out of that business, and say, Do it however you want to do it."

What a refreshing mindset that is, don't you think?

I heard this week that the U.S. government (specifically the FCC) is going to auction off a chunk of the broadband spectrum so that the winning company could build a free public wi-fi network. Should this happen, we would likely be years away from it becoming reality, but I already can't help but wonder how this might impact schools. When the district DIS doesn't control the signals used to connect to the internet, their precious filters will be useless. GoogleApps? Wikipedia? YouTube? All available for the classroom. Yes, other things---inappropriate things---will be available, too. But if students are using their own equipment with an independent source for internet access, will schools have the same responsibilities for protecting children? Or are they only accountable for their own hardware, software, and infrastructure? If a student comes to my class tomorrow with a laptop and an aircard, are they allowed to use it as they please---just as they do with their own pencils and paper?

There are new tools and platforms available daily, it seems. If we are already making a shift in how we use our hardware (from traditional computer labs to virtual ones), when will the shift in how we use the intangible pieces (e.g. software) with students come?

Labels: technology

...only outlaws will have GoogleDocs.

I did manage a way for kids to try GoogleDocs over the last couple of days (until The Tree-Killer shut us down). I have to say that it has been two of the most fun and rewarding days I've had in the classroom in a long time---maybe all year. It was one of those times where the end definitely justified the means, even if the example of rule-breaking is not one that I typically believe is right.

But to watch 30 kids...all working...all engaged...all collaborating on four documents for a real audience was a powerful and awesome thing. I gave minimal instructions. I really think that most kids have an intuitive sense of programs these days. They don't need me to hold their hands and explain every little button on the menu bar. We did a short (as in one sentence) assignment at first so that they could see how to create a document, embed a link, and invite someone to see or collaborate with them. After that, I shared a bare bones lesson plan with them for the kindergartners and told them to have at it.

And, oh, did they.

Students had a blast. It was not only collaborative---it was competitive. Who could find the best picture of a sand dollar? Who could make the format easier to read? Some did get a bit silly in terms of deleting one another's edits, but it really was in fun. When was the last time you saw your kids laughing while they were writing? There was a lot of exploration and joy. It's well worth any hassle or grief The Tree-Killer attempts to cause. Kids were already talking about all of the ways they want to use the tool...how happy they'd be not to have to carry a thumb drive...the ability to work with anyone, anywhere on projects.

In Here Comes Everybody, Shirky speaks to the kind of "bargain" that comes with collaborations like this (and like Wikipedia). It's true that someone can add bad information to a document just as easily as good information. It would have been simple enough for any of my students to trash the whole project. But it is also true that just one click is all it takes to restore things...that the number of people willing to buy in for the good of the project easily overwhelms the one or two vandalizing apples. As a result, the overall result is one of continuous improvement through small changes.

The number of edits (so far) to the lesson plans range from 266 - 745. That's a lot of kids doing a lot of work to a skeleton document. The results are kid-like, as you might imagine. There is a rainbow of text colours, some stream of consciousness comments, interesting pictures (e.g. comparing a pile worm to a Swiffer duster) and this great sense of collective voice and enthusiasm. I'm really proud of them.

The kids are, of course, very unhappy about having the tool blocked. I explained to them that Mordac said blocking GoogleDocs is not due to fears of exposing them to predators---it's because the school district is afraid of any information that they can't control. Since the documents would not be housed on a district server, they have no ability to monitor what kids are doing. And while I appreciate the need for monitoring student behavior, I also think that they're trying to push back the tide with a broom. None of the information kids are accessing on-line is stored on our servers. It belongs to someone else. I've posted this comic strip here before, but it bears repeating:

Although I shared a document with my students, I did not give them the necessary permissions to invite other collaborators or viewers. What they create is another matter, of course. But within my province---especially because this was our first attempt to use these tools together---I made sure the information stayed within our small circle and kept a continual watch on the computers. I told them that if they're really upset about being shut out, then they should collaborate on a letter. They have the tools and know-how now. Can the power for change be far behind?

Labels: classroom, student learning, technology

Please head on over to Mrs. Bluebird's place and check out this week's Carnival of Education. It is truly an oasis of thought and reason in an insane world.

Don't look for the voice of reason in this district. I'm trying to prep my tenth graders to work with my kindergartners next week. I wanted to use GoogleDocs to coordinate my different class periods---and allow them to communicate with the teachers in the other district. As feared, however, the district techs believe that GoogleDocs is a filthy site, not worthy of passing through our filters. We can't have children actually collaborating on a project, now can we? (Never mind that the kindergartners can access GoogleDocs in the other district if they wanted to.) Why, we would surely be leading kids into a lifetime of internet debauchery if we allowed them to create and share a lesson plan on tidepools or otherwise learn about these collaborative tools. Shame on me.

I am exaggerating, but only slightly. The interesting thing is that only "docs" are blocked by the filter---not the other social tools in Google. Now that my kids have accounts (a story unto itself), I could actually share this post with them using Reader, along with comments about why I was sending it. We could build a common calendar for the remainder of the school year. And more. But we can't use the word processing feature because one person in this school district doesn't want us to do so. Perfectly reasonable, right?

Labels: Carnival, technology

I wrapped up my reading of Here Comes Everybody earlier in the week and am still thinking about several ideas contained within the text. The book is about how recent platforms like blogs, wikis, Twitter, Flickr, and other social networks have changed our abilities to organize and effect action. While there are no examples provided about education, I believe that there some lessons to be learned from all of this.

Here is an older idea we can consider in a new context:


With this graphic, Shirky is showing how the complexity of possible connections within an organization grows faster than its size. The group on the left has five members with 10 total connections; the middle has 10 members needing 45 connections; and the one on the right has a mere 15 members, but needs over 100 lines to connect everyone.

Stop for a moment and think about the web this would create within your classroom of 30 kids...let alone how a school or district has had to traditionally organize itself in order to make communications seemingly efficient.

As groups grow, it becomes impossible for everyone to interact directly with everyone else. If maintaining a connection between two people takes any effort at all, at some size, that effort becomes unstable...Running an organization is difficult in and of itself, no matter what its goals. Every transaction it undertakes---every contract, every agreement, every meeting---requires it to expend some limited resource: time, attention, or money. Because of these transaction coasts, some sources of value are too costly to take advantage of. As a result, no institution can put all its energies into pursuing its mission; it must expend considerable effort on maintaining discipline and structure, simply to keep itself viable. ---pp. 28 - 30

So, what do businesses and schools do in order to minimize these costs? We create an organizational hierarchy so that every person does not have to know every other person in order to make the group function. The problem with this is that as schools continue to get bigger, they need more managers to help organize things...and this costs more money.

Shirky proposes another option. As social networking tools continue to become mainstream, they will change the activities we engage in because costs will decrease. In other words, you don't have to find people to serve on a committee, pay them to meet, arrange meeting space/snacks/etc. How many times have you sat in a staff meeting wondering "How much is this costing taxpayers?" in light of teacher time, benefits, and so forth. It gets mighty expensive in a hurry. Instead, if there's an issue within the school, social networking tools would easily allow those who have an interest in the topic (including all stakeholders) to find one another and have a (digital) place to communicate and collaborate---all without spending a dime. A group who uses a shared on-line meeting space, such as Google Docs or a wiki, and can tweet or IM others who might be interested, is all that's needed to get the ball rolling. And no more sitting in a staff meeting listening to the same person drone on about the tardy policy.

I would think that this is going to be a very frightening proposition for most school districts. In a world where control of information is diminished, so is the prestige of central office. Makes me wonder a bit about the network filters we have. Are we protecting kids? Or are we really protecting administration by limiting the workforce's ability to self-organize?

Okay, so you're thinking that the graphic above doesn't adequately explain what happens in a school district. Fair enough. Unless you're a one room schoolhouse sort of a place, I can't think of any district where every staff member has a personal connection with every other staff member. We really look more like this, don't we?


Each of the smaller clusters might represent your department or school. Some people within your base of operations tend to stick within the group. Other members, however, have connections with other groups. In this way, you can also make connections with everyone, but not everyone has to be personally involved with everyone else. When I look at this, I see myself as someone who would be at one of the five points connected to form a star in the middle. I have always been someone who likes to float---and also someone who can facilitate connections between a lot of different groups. Tell me what you need and I can tell you who should ask. Within those connections, I can think of several people who do not do this. The circles they move in are very small and they're quite happy with that.

If you're looking at this and wondering what is so different about it from a traditional hierarchy (because people can get information either way), I think the primary difference is choice. In a typical organization, there are layers of control concerning what groups you can belong to and what information flows down. In Shirky's depiction, members make a choice to participate and be part of the group. You connect due to your common interests and needs. Social networking platforms provide cheap and efficient ways to make that happen.

So what does this mean for schools? First of all, it means that we can work toward solutions in very different---and likely more cost and time efficient ways. It also means that instead of people who have the information controlling what does and does not occur, this ever-flattening world means that those who use the tools will be part of the conversation. Those teachers, parents, and students who are technologically illiterate are going to be left behind. And because most districts block social networking tools, only those people who learn about them outside of the school day are going to have the greatest voice. We're talking about a small, but powerful, minority here. Central office had better be scared. Unions had better take note, too. Teachers are far less than six degrees away (more like three) from being able to organize and manage the schools they want and that kids need.

Labels: technology

Teacher Magazine recently declared that Technology-Rich Classrooms Render Textbooks Useless. The article describes two fourth-grade classrooms in Kansas where "lessons are delivered through different media that are more interactive and, teachers say, more engaging." Media, in this case, includes computers, Smartboards, and internet access.

"We rarely use books," said Mary Hamlin, who teaches fourth-grade science, math and social studies.

Instead, she relies on Web sites like eHarcourt, affiliated with the school's math book company. Students can get their homework straight from the site and do it right there on the screen, or print it out if they don't have Internet access at home.

The Internet is used, too, for research, like when members of Kristy Zeller's fourth-grade class each did a project on a famous explorer, or for fourth-graders' current topic of researching famous Kansans.

The technology also allows teachers to create what Hamlin called "tracks" — a series of Web sites all related to a certain topic of study, so students can move from one site to the next as they complete an assignment.

"We use the computers every day — sites that reinforce what we're learning in the classroom," Zeller said.

That's much more fun than exploring topics with books and taking notes with pencil and paper, according to several members of Zeller's and Hamlin's classes.

"It's exciting, because you sometimes go to new places on the Internet," Rafael Diaz said.

One of his favorite things to do in class is to go online, but technology use at Gertrude Walker, however, extends beyond Internet exploration.

Teachers said they also use the hardware to engage students in lessons, like having them edit grammar sentences on the SMART Board, and to have them present information to the class. Hamlin said her class is especially skilled at creating Power Point slide shows, like those they're currently making about their famous Kansans.

Okay, I applaud the efforts at increasing student engagement. I also think the skills students are developing in using hardware and basic software will be ones that will serve them well throughout their lifetimes. But are they learning any content? This particular factor is curiously absent from the article.

I mentioned recently that technology is not just stuff. Right now, I feel like this article is highlighting two examples of teachers who are teaching the same as in the past, only using a Smartboard instead of an LCD projector. How is using the computer to research a report on famous Kansans any different from getting books from the library with similar information? Where are the opportunities for students to be collaborators? Creators of content?

Labels: technology

My school district blocks wikis of all creeds and colours---including wikipedia---because it considers them to be equivalent to blogs. And we can't have kids engaged in meaningful reading/writing through social networking, now can we? The horror of it all.

I admit that I have often looked askance at wikipedia. What I've come to realize over the years, however, is that the quality of information is really not all that different from previous incarnations of the encyclopedia (Who wrote "World Book," fer cryin' out loud?). This means that students just need to remember to treat what's written there as they would any secondary source. After finishing Here Comes Everybody, I have acquired another layer of understanding about wikipedia. It's a kind of social contract (or "bargain" as Clay Shirky calls it) in that while anyone can edit pages in wikipedia, you are more likely to find reliable information than not. This is because it may take a lot of effort to come up with poor entries, but only a moment to delete them and replace with higher quality items.

I had been thinking about how nice it would be to use this in the classroom. What a great tool to be able to use with students---give them an article from wikipedia, have them verify what they can, and perhaps even improve the writing and information. Alas, my district will never see it that way...but other campuses do. From Deborah Jones' recent article for AFP:

Wikipedia the upstart Internet encyclopedia that most universities forbid students to use, has suddenly become a teaching tool for professors. Recently, university teachers have swapped student term papers for assignments to write entries for the free online encyclopedia.

Writing for Wikipedia "seems like a much larger stage, more of a challenge," than a term paper, said professor Jon Beasley-Murray, who teaches Latin American literature at the University of British Columbia.

"The vast majority of Wikipedia entries aren't very good," said Beasley-Murray, but said the site aims to be academically sound.

To reach its goal of academic standards, said Wikipedia's web site, it set up an assessment scale on its English-language site. The best encyclopedia entries are ranked as "Featured Articles," and run each day on the home page at www.wikipedia.com.

To be ranked as a "Featured Article," Wikipedia said an entry must "provide thorough, well-written coverage of their topic, supported by many references to peer-reviewed publications."

Of more than 10 million articles in 253 languages, only about 2,000 have reached "Featured Article" status, it said.

As an experiment, last January Beasley-Murray promised his students a rare A+ grade if they got their projects for his literature course, called "Murder, Madness and Mayhem," accepted as a Wikipedia "Featured Article."

In May, three entries created by nine students in the course became the first student works to reach Wikipedia's top rank.

Beasley-Murray said the projects took the students four months, and one entry was revised 1,000 times.

Typically, thousands or millions of people visit a Wikipedia entry, and each visitor is able to edit entries, or even flag an article considered unworthy to have it removed.

Working online with anyone watching or editing "was really hard to get into," said Eva Shiu, a third-year student who worked on the Marquez entry. "But it was really exciting, and I feel like I've accomplished something," she told AFP.

"I got addicted to it ... I was up nights until three or four a.m. in the morning working on it."

Monica Freudenreich, who worked on the Asturias entry, said she liked the fact her contribution will survive online. Usually term papers "end up in a binder than eventually sits under my bed," she wrote on Wikipedia.

The University of British Columbia entries are among some 70 academic projects now registered at Wikipedia, by institutions from Yale University to the University of Tartu, Estonia.

Wikipedia itself invites professors "to use Wikipedia in your class to demonstrate how an open content website works (or doesn't)."

But the experiment has had controversies, including student work that was instantly deleted as not "notable."

"Sometimes it's a disaster," said Beasley-Murray. "But in some ways it's good news ... this was a great learning experience for students."

Too bad it can't be the same for the kids in my classroom.

Labels: articles, student learning, technology

You can click on the image above to enlarge it, or better yet, head on over to the Institute for the Future and download a copy for yourself. This is the Future of Making map.

Two future forces, one mostly social, one mostly technological, are intersecting to transform how goods, services, and experiences—the “stuff” of our world—will be designed, manufactured, and distributed over the next decade. An emerging do-it-yourself culture of “makers” is boldly voiding warranties to tweak, hack, and customize the products they buy. And what they can’t purchase, they build from scratch. Meanwhile, flexible manufacturing technologies on the horizon will change fabrication from massive and centralized to lightweight and ad hoc. These trends sit atop a platform of grassroots economics—new market structures developing online that embody a shift from stores and sales to communities and connections.

In other words, social networking isn't just for the digital environment. It's going to change our physical world, too. There have always been creative and intelligent forces at work in the world, but platforms like blogs, twitter, flickr, and others makes it simpler (and cheaper) for people with similar interests and ideas to find one another---and then share with the rest of us.

Speaking of the future, the Globe and Mail recently published an overview of web 3.0 apps, referring to this as Creating a Global Brain. Like the Future of Making, the idea here is that new technology will enable people to move from simply connecting to share information to new forms of collaboration and the ability to "mash-up" various kinds of data. Some of those will likely be introduced via The Idea Shower, a launchpad for new ideas on the web. I'm diggin' it.

It all makes me wonder what learning will look like in 3 - 5 years. Will my classroom be different in terms of how students use and create information?

Labels: technology

The more I read and reflect on the idea of "educational technology," the more I've come to realize that it's not just "stuff." It isn't comprised simply of hardware: LCD projectors, document cameras, laptops, smartboards, clickers, etc. You'd think that as an edublogger, I would have already understood that these things are just conduits to much broader tools such as blogs, social networking venues, digital storytelling, and more. It's not about the stuff. It's about what you do with it.

I get it now (finally). This leads me to the next point along the way: When will the "Department of Information Services" get it?

For as long as I've worked in this district, it's been about the stuff of technology. They tout the upgrades to the memory of computers that have been installed. They describe the new wireless access points (which are so secure, even the building admins have trouble logging on). They describe the sets of student response systems they've purchased for each building (and then sit gathering dust). They have a server just for internal filesharing through SharePoint software---and most of the sites created there have not been updated in months. They also block wikipedia from student access. And sites like MySpace and Facebook and Blogger. For everyone, there is no YouTube or anything which has streaming content. You can use Moodle, but no one is allowed to use a wiki which exists outside the network.

So much for the whole "information services" thing, eh?

I understand that there are some unsavory things happening on-line, but as Sandy at Techlearning points out in Social Networking: What Are We Afraid Of?, nearly all of cyberbullying, child predation, and pornographic spam are happening to students while they are away from school. However, "as educational leaders, our sole responsibility is to do the best we can to create learners. In order to do that we must learn what tools our students are using. They are learning without us, often without guidance, using tools we not only don't understand, but also often block. If we want them to learn in an environment where they can receive guidance, make mistakes safely, and be prepared to learn long after they leave us, we need to be exploring the tools they will use to communicate."

It is absurd that the divide which already exists between the technology we use in the classroom and the technology students use away from school to connect and educate themselves is turning into more and more of a chasm each day. I am sorely tempted to chuck the rest of my curriculum this year and spend time with students in the computer lab teaching them how to use "their" tools to learn in our environment. I want them to storm the DIS Bastille and demand better access to instruction. I want them to tell their parents "Don't you dare vote for a technology levy until the schools allow us to be creators of learning. We deserve more than just 'stuff.'"

Labels: technology

I have a couple more posts in the queue to publish, but in the meantime, I'm thinking ahead a bit. The week has been full of thoughts and treats to share. A few of the ideas below are only half-formed at this point. I hope to put some flesh on them and share them later in the week. Feel free to suggest accessories in the meantime.

As one of my schools begins its improvement planning for next year, we're working on some vision statements and doing some other foundation work. It is obvious from this that "not everything that can be counted counts...and not everything that counts can be counted," as Einstein suggested. In other words, what is often most important to teachers are things like healthy kids who love learning---not necessarily kids who do better on the WASL (or other measures). And yet, I can't think of a single School Improvement Plan (SIP) I've ever seen which included values other than test, attendance, or referral data. SIPs rely solely on quantitative measures. But what if we included something qualitative? Hmmm...

It's Teacher Appreciation Week at Barnes and Noble (and there was an awesome sale at Macy's where I got new dishes...Squee!), so I used my 25% off treat to pick up Here Comes Everybody, the book which is creating so much buzz at the moment. I am enjoying it, but am finding that it is a book that I can read only in small bites. There are some dense ideas to digest even though the writing is very accessible. I think it's a case of having the right book at the right time for me. The book is not education-related, but there are plenty of possible connections. I want to think more about the concept of self-organization for groups might be used to revolutionize the way we solve problems within schools. Will "mass amateurization" also change schools---making teaching less of a profession? I'm only 65 pages or so into this, so I expect a lot of post fodder. Go get your own copy. We'll have a "What It's Like on the Inside" book club for May!

And here are some treats you should have make time for:

• Go visit For You and see what makes you smile and dream.
• See the 50 (Really) Stunning Pictures and Photos put together by The Best Article Every Day
• Read Chris Lehmann's post on What I Want to Talk About; Scott's concerns on Low Ability Teachers, Low Ability Students; This, I Believe at Chalkdust 101; and Becoming a Better Teacher over on Drape's Takes.

I've also been working on Ye Olde Blogroll. I've added a few edtech blogs (e.g. Look What I Found!), a new early childhood blog (Elbows, Knees, Dreams), and Motivation Matters from ASCD. Happy browsing!

P.S. If anyone cares, here are the new dishes (dinner plate, salad plate, bowl):

Labels: blogging, technology

You know that moment right before you understand something...when you have all of the puzzle pieces in front of you, but the clarity isn't quite there yet? I'm having one of those fuzzy times, perched on the edge of being able to say "I get it." Bear with me here, as I'm not going to be very articulate about all of this, but perhaps by sharing my thinking at this point, some gentle comments from the edusphere at large can help me finally put it all together.

What I want to talk about here is the whole idea of Classroom 2.0 (and by extension, Web 2.0). I think that I haven't been sure what this would "look like" within a school setting. It's not because I don't understand the value of a Personal Learning Network, but because the physical environment I work within doesn't match the virtual environment I have. I can blog, text, tweet, ning, wiki, and more to my heart's content as a teacher. I cannot, however, share those things with my students because we are set up to take away their cell phones and block their internet access.

Here are some pieces of seen as of late which seem significant:

• Stephanie over at Change Agency blogged about Shift Happens---Now What? The post is about how buying more hardware for classrooms isn't the answer. We have to help the adults within our schools reach their own "A-ha" moments with the power of social networking first.
  
• As Tracy points out over on LeaderTalk, the answer is not Blackboard or Moodle. They are filter friendly, which makes the Mordacs of the world happy, but they are nothing more than glorified word processing programs. They are islands cut off from interaction with the rest of the on-line world...no different or better than a physical classroom. In using those programs, we are fooling ourselves by using 21st century tools via 20th century methods. (Stephanie also chimes in with an I Read Blocked Blogs idea.)
  
• It is not only the way we communicate with text that is changing...but with data, too. Flowing Data had a great post on rolling out your own on-line maps and data visualization while Bioephemera shared Is this a better graph? What a mind-blowing way to deal with data. It is interactive and animated. Information about location, size, time, and more are all neatly contained.

• And the coup de grace was this speech on Gin, Television, and Social Surplus found at Here Comes Everybody. Whoa. It's not a short read, but I can't be encouraging enough that you make the time to do so. The idea here is that we are emerging from a media hangover where we have been consumers for a long time (primarily through tv) and we are now discovering that we are also able to be media producers. What will happen with the "surplus" of hours that were spent consuming...and now may be focused on producing?

Did you ever see that episode of Gilligan's Island where they almost get off the island and then Gilligan messes up and then they don't? I saw that one. I saw that one a lot when I was growing up. And every half-hour that I watched that was a half an hour I wasn't posting at my blog or editing Wikipedia or contributing to a mailing list. Now I had an ironclad excuse for not doing those things, which is none of those things existed then. I was forced into the channel of media the way it was because it was the only option. Now it's not, and that's the big surprise. However lousy it is to sit in your basement and pretend to be an elf, I can tell you from personal experience it's worse to sit in your basement and try to figure if Ginger or Mary Ann is cuter.

And I'm willing to raise that to a general principle. It's better to do something than to do nothing. Even lolcats, even cute pictures of kittens made even cuter with the addition of cute captions, hold out an invitation to participation. When you see a lolcat, one of the things it says to the viewer is, "If you have some fancy sans-serif fonts on your computer, you can play this game, too." And that's message--I can do that, too--is a big change.

This is something that people in the media world don't understand. Media in the 20th century was run as a single race--consumption. How much can we produce? How much can you consume? Can we produce more and you'll consume more? And the answer to that question has generally been yes. But media is actually a triathlon, it 's three different events. People like to consume, but they also like to produce, and they like to share.

And what's astonished people who were committed to the structure of the previous society, prior to trying to take this surplus and do something interesting, is that they're discovering that when you offer people the opportunity to produce and to share, they'll take you up on that offer. It doesn't mean that we'll never sit around mindlessly watching Scrubs on the couch. It just means we'll do it less.

And this is the other thing about the size of the cognitive surplus we're talking about. It's so large that even a small change could have huge ramifications. Let's say that everything stays 99 percent the same, that people watch 99 percent as much television as they used to, but 1 percent of that is carved out for producing and for sharing. The Internet-connected population watches roughly a trillion hours of TV a year. That's about five times the size of the annual U.S. consumption. One per cent of that is 10,000 Wikipedia projects per year worth of participation.

I think that's going to be a big deal. Don't you?

Yes, I'm starting to realize that it is going to be a very big deal. I'm thinking that the critical mass needed to overcome filtering and harness the power within 2.0 is just around the corner. John Dvorak said that "In all large corporations, there is a pervasive fear that someone, somewhere is having fun with a computer on company time. Networks help alleviate that fear." Maybe it isn't "fun" that corporations (or schools) are afraid of. Maybe they are afraid of the creative power that will be present.

I saw this message the other day: I'm struggling with finding a balance between action/learning by doing/creation and deep thought/innovation/reflection- craving time to think. I understand that. The possibilities to learn, to do, to create, and to think are truly limitless these days. At the moment, I'm in think mode about these things...but it shouldn't be too long before I'm ready to do and create more. Whoa.

Labels: personal, technology

Between Google Reader feeds, Twitter tweets, and other sundry sources, I am amassing a variety of tech sites that look like they may be useful in the future. I have to say that living in a digital world satisfies my inner packrat nature. In the real world, I am not interested in accumulating stuff. But in virtual space? Hey, why not. So in the spirit of sharing, here are a few links that you might find interesting, too:

• First up is Weebly, where you can make a simple website. You might also have a look at Sprout. Perhaps this might be a way for me to establish a consluting, er, consulting presence.
• Have you seen Docstoc? Here you can find all manner of forms and documents (education, legal, business...) for free. Let the uploading of lesson plans begin!
• If you're using Photostory or other software with kids to make digital storybooks, then perhaps you might like to add some sound effects? Try FindSounds to easily search the web for just the clips you need. If it's a word you're after, Forvo has "all the words in the world pronounced" with over 180 languages represented.
  
• Florida has developed a technology integration matrix to help teachers and schools evaluate their implementation of classroom technology. There are even videos embedded so you can see what things should look like.
  
• Tom at Random, Etc. has a great collection of links to Data Visualization blogs. While I don't use these in my working life (yet), I find the ideas very interesting. I would like to see how to apply this with students and teachers. In the meantime, The Evil Tutor has some hilarious ideas to share about how not to display data....while Dipity gives you a way to make interactive timelines.
  
• Searchme is a new visual search eng