If Someone Made an Improved Shovel, Would Everyone Go Out and Dig Holes?

Netbooks, Smartboards and Professional Development

I’m a mountain biker. I love to ride uphill for hours, pushing myself to the limits so that I can race downhill, two wheels occasionally on the ground. I have a great bike. It is silly how much it costs and I will never be good enough to justify buying it. I have a family and would like them to mountain bike, to enjoy the challenge, to learn the skills and to understand the spiritual nature of back country biking. If I show them my fancy new bike and show them what I can do on it, will that necessarily improve the chances that they will have a thirst to learn about mountain biking? Will it have any effect on them? Might it decrease the chance of them choosing mountain biking as their passion?

Smart boards are like my big, expensive, flashy bike. Netbooks are like the bikes I want my kids to ride. Of course I want a great bike and I want a Smartboard. If I have to choose, I'd take netbooks over Smartboards. Smartboards are like an entertaining whiteboard. The teacher is still the center of attention and the children are not the producers, they are still basically “setting and getting”. Go for a ride instead!

This morning, I was reading one of my regular blogs by Michael Staton , entitled, "Why Smart boards are a Dumb Initiative". As suggested by the title, the author makes his case for netbooks over Smartboards. Among his reasons, he states:

1) Smartboards don’t change the model that’s broken. They just make that model way more expensive.

2) Smartboards are an administrative cop out. Administrators like Smartboards because when they spend money on technology they need to spend a lot of it and it needs to be on things they can point to and count.

Investing in either technology does not guarantee transformative changes in classrooms. In the book “Disrupting Class”, (Christensen) the author reports that "in the U.S., spending on computers has increased dramatically since 1995. The average public school in the U.S. had 72 computers, by 2003 the average nearly doubled to 136. In 1998 there were and average of 12 students for every computer with internet access, by 2003 that number was down to nearly 4. If the addition of technology to classrooms was a cure for American classrooms, surely there would be evidence of it now. There is not. Test scores have barely budged." The Alberta Teachers' Association report on technology in schools has reported similar findings.

Smartboards can have a positive effect on teaching effectiveness and atmosphere in a classroom. More computers can connect students to the world and assist them to be critical thinkers, creative and collaborative. Neither will result in transformative changes in the classroom without urgent, ongoing and effective professional development. In the book "Transforming Classroom Practice, Professional Development Strategies in Educational Technology" (Borthwick and Pierson), they quote a study by Harris (2007) on the components of successful professional development. Successful PD should:

1. be conducted in school settings


2. be linked to school wide efforts


3. be teacher planned and assisted


4. be based on constructivist/differentiated learning


5. include teacher chosen activities


6. follow a demonstration/trial/feedback cycle


7. be concrete


8. be ongoing


9. provide assistance and support for teacher learning

They say successful technology PD will increase student acheivement by improving teacher content knowledge, changing teachers' attitudes about content areas and expanding their repertoires of technological practices.

Clay Shirky wrote in his book "Here Comes Everybody", "If someone made a new improved shovel, would everyone go out and dig holes?" Would they even know how to use it? Yes, we have to know how to use the shovel, but more importantly, we have to know why digging holes is important. Give me effective PD for 21st century schools and computers and I can change my classroom. Give me a Smartboard and I will have fun doing it.

Using Technology to Support Real Learning First in Alberta Schools

I have just read Joe Bower's blog that summarizes a document (Using Technology to Support Real Learning First In Alberta Schools) by the Alberta Teachers' Association. It states that

"since the early 80's, the Alberta government has spent $1.5 billion on information and communication technology (ICT). Spending on professional development and collaborative inquiry to help educators take advantage of these technologies has been paltry by comparison."

When I started teaching in the 80's, we had Apple IIg's (I think) and we used floppy discs from the Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium to play math blaster and reader rabbit. I still see teachers using technology as "drill and practice" or as an electronic encyclopedia for research. The Alberta report states that

"technology has been used to supplemenent traditional teaching rather than transform the pedagogical process"

they go on to say that

"in other fields, digital technology has transformed the relationship between the provider and the end user, driven by the need for greater productivity and efficiency"

Many of us have felt the need for greater efficiency and productivity in our schools for a long time. The report also says that the effective use of technology in the classroom is more efficient than reducing class size or increasing preparation time for teachers.

In Alberta, technology is not being used as well as it should. Indeed, 50-60% of teachers feel comfortable with using technology in their classrooms. Social studies, science and language arts teachers are more likely to be comfortable using technology. There is not enough professional development, technology is expensive and teachers are not willing to take the risk of changing the way they have done things for years. Lower income and aboriginal Albertans have less access to technology in classrooms.

Coordination of efforts to use technology effectively in Alberta schools has been a problem.

"Too often, Altberta's efforts to integrate technology in the classroom have been fragmented, sporadic and backward-looking rather than comprehensive, strategic and transformative"

In my school and my school division, I often feel like there is no sense of urgency, no comprehensive, strategic and transformative plan.

In summary, there are many reasons technology is not being used optimally in Alberta.

1. schools are not organized to support transformative changes
2. teachers do not have the skills to use technology as a tool for transformative learning
3. access to technology varies greatly
4.money spent on technology and not professional development, innovation and transformative change
5. teachers moderately confident about using technology
6. so many learning outcomes that teachers rely on time tested methods instead of risk taking change
7. culture of compliance in schools that inhibits innovation
8. little recognition for teachers who use technology innovatively

The report goes on to say that 21st century schools should:

1. focus on meaningful learning tasks that challenge students to achieve results that are meaningful to an authentic audience
2. take a project-based approach to curriculum delivery
3. provide equitable access to learning resources and tools
4. focus on teamwork, collaborative learning and networks
5. encourage students to participate, both face to face and on-line, in the local and wider global community
6. provide students with ready access to a wide range of digital resources
7. encourage teachers to participate in communities of interest and to pursue professional development
8. restructure the day from several short periods to one to three long ones
9. engage students in the process of learning but also in the design of learning

This report helps us all to focus on the task at hand, to use technology to transform our schools and the way people learn. Thanks Joe and the Alberta Teachers' Association.