Nov 18 2009
Well, just exactly do we want?
NSW DER is finalising the ambitious wireless 2009 netbook rollout involving some 65,000 Lenevo netbooks to Year 9 students and teachers.
Important yes, but sorry to sound underwhelmed, it is only one step towards the learning revolution needed. A Pantene Moment if ever there was one.
Separating and recognising the enormity of the procurement, rollout and install is important. By and large contractual obligations have been met, well. As laconic Jack Gibson was wont to say, ”Played hard, done good” Big Tick, so far.
Now we have our little boxes of digi goodness, just exactly do we want?
Despite what political leaders say, a 1:1 environment is far from revolutionary for learning. Unless we broach the next and far more problematical step.
Federal/State targets to improve learning via ICT’s a decade into the 21st century and some 30 years since ICT first appeared in school systems is welcomed. I question though, if it is such a big deal, why not earlier?
The techn0logy has long been available, its political where withall that’s been lacking.
As we are yet to hear to the contrary, lets also trust future government “digital revolution” funding is sustainable.
If it’s not, or if real expenditure is reduced as GFC debts are repaid, why have Rudd and Rees et al bothered?
Future edu digital policy should prioritise open source, and remove the current duplicity. We have Curls, BlogEd, CLi, Tale,
Our K-2 kids should not be made to endure a lengthy transition to digitisation as we enter the fourth decade of ICT’s in schools. It’s not new and we need to stop excusing those who think it is.
For some, the soon to conclude 2009 rollout of 1000 plus laptops per week will be a time to reflect on any supply or technical issues. It has been a steep learning curve and, from afar, seemingly an effort all involved should be proud of.
2009 sowed the “21st century” learning seeds; L4L,CCP,wireless, commisioning, TSO’s, procurement, installations. The DER blur has happened at a frantic state wide pace. 2010 will reap the learning crop, maybe, we trust, hope and wish.
For other technocrats, they’ll discuss high end ICT questions concerning software,virtual, online,F2F, hardware, open source, filters, Win7OS, BlogEd, Adobe CS4 or MS Office. Great, I just lost myself with that sentence.
These experts, the providers, the framework decision makers, in this way maintain status quo control over those working within. By providing what they want, not what may be needed, results in a safe and predictable balance for systemic governance. It’s the way it has always been done, but I question if it’s correct with rapid devolution and accountability to nodes not hubs.
These too are valid discussions but often beyond the classroom teacher’s comprehension, scope or sequence. Probably also beyond our need to know.
Most of these discussions are beyond an individual’s ability to influence or change. I disagree vehemently with a minority of L4L, ICT, CCP,IWB,filter,intranet,PD decisions but that is by definition systemic education. It matters not whether nodes disagree with the hub, the hub dominates, at present. But I question for how much longer?
You do as you’re told within what is provided (whole new post that one) We educate our DETNSW learners within that silo, albeit a rather massive one. I wonder why our learners have been served the nannified, safely sanitised, lite version of the full fat smorgasbord on offer to the rest of the world. It may not be apparent, yet, but our NSW learners are at a distinct disadvantage when compared to best global practice, despite the infrastructure spend.
However, engaged students, collaborating, using appropriate tools and exploring new ways with ICT is certainly high on my 2010 personal learning expectation list. I’ll ask stage 5 teachers, especially, to think about the following;
As a classroom teacher of years 9 and 10, now with laptop equipped learners, what exactly do we want in 2010?
How may our learning be improved ?
What can we do differently compared to 2009 that will result in learning improvements?
How might our netbooks make our learning more engaging, challenging, fun or productive?
I see wasted opportunities if we simply layer technology to do the same as before. Or worse, use IT sparingly for fear of mistakes or failures.
Learners need to consider carefully what it is they expect from or with their 1:1 boxes.
I trust the following questions will not gain dominance in political or administrative circles.
How will netbooks improve Schoool Certificate data ?
How will netbooks help rank schools?
How will government’s substantial financial investment be politically leveraged?
How will governments, current and future, evaluate their return on expenditure to either sustain, increase or decrease real dollar commitments to future digital learning? If they get no political bang for their buck, why would they continue?
Are our politicians and educrats expecting a learning panacea, a magical wand to add further value added data to 2010 School Certificate results?
A while back now I posted 4 essential questions for learning, especially within the context of web2.0 educational hype.
I’m happy to report these questions remain, and probably always will.
However, what has changed in the preceeding 16 months is the addition of an important new question.
Now that NSW year 9 DET students have been issued wireless netbooks and will use them daily throughout the School Certificate 2010, I’m interested in your answers to this newest question.
Well just exactly DO we want?
In a little over 12 months, our netbook equipped 2010 Year 10 students will be required to sit the same 5 standardised exams in Maths, English, Science, HSIE and ICT.
Will netbooks improve the summative data? Does your school expect to see value added above the norm?
Quandry number 1.
Do staff pursue the olden golden goose of improving value added data and receive the summative ‘head pat hat tip’ in January 2011?
“Good work faculties, look at the school’s excellent data. Some real learning took place, the figures tell us”
Or do learners actually integrate the netbooks to change learning so it aligns with the digital world we now live in.
I suspect most faculties will find these conflicting demands challenging.
Unfortunatley the reality is this quandry will also provide convenient excuses for teachers to NOT integrate laptops. “We have a public exam on which school data is collated, my teaching is assessed and these results posted on the new MySchool website.
Yet we also have shiny new toys they want us to learn with on the job?”
DETs own assessment support site states;
we need to transform the structure and delivery of current assessment processes and consider the possibilities which the laptop program affords.
I wonder how quickly this may occur? What difference will/should netbooks make?
On the one hand teachers are being asked to “consider the assessment possibilities” and yet concurrently we are accountable for school data results using superceded standardised exams that no other State retains.
Yes a major quandry IF learning is to seriously become the core focus within DER.
Well just exactly DO we want?
My 15 & 16 year olds will be offered DET NSW’s BlogEd, an apache blog platform within DET’s intranet bubble. I know why the decision to keep blogging in house was made but I still question the authenticity of future learning experiences. If we continue to exist in a cloister will learners ever be prepared for the real world?
Well just exactly DO we want?
My Stage 5 compulsory attendees, now netbook equipped, will be told the School Certificate test matters (for state data collation), “put that away, we have real work today”. Who does the antiquated SC really matter for?
The School Certificate is not a pre-requisite to continue with their now compulsory “learning” attendance until age 17. These standarised tests, that every other state has abandoned, are today rarely used as qualification once higher certification is reached.
Well just exactly DO we want?
If the new National Curriculum does not integrate K-12 digital citizenship and embedd future Federal/state DER investment accountability, then really what are our newest, possibly one hit, shiny baubles good for? Hopefully not what Edwin Starr’s seminal song asks, What is it good for?
Well just exactly DO we want?
Talk about raising learning expectaions and setting the bar higher will remain just that. Leaders at all levels, including the classroom, need to consider and articulate their answers on this newest question.
Well what exactly do YOU want?
Now government largesse has landed, how will this change learning?
