Like the blog? Get the director's commentary on my podcast.

Contact

Email, iMessage or FaceTime:

fraser@speirs.org

Search
My Stuff
Navigation

Entries in theipadproject (78)

Tuesday
Oct192010

iPads, Curriculum for Excellence and the Next Generation

There's been an incredibly fertile discussion channel on Twitter since last Friday, organised around the hashtag #ediff.

I was working on a presentation about our iPad deployment when Frank Crawford (@frankcrawford) posted three tweets that chimed almost exactly with the topics I was working into my presentation.

Frank's first tweet:

Outcomes for kids - CfE - learning, being confident, contributing, participating. Where does tech contribute?

I've been developing a presentation to explain where we see our 1:1 iPad deployment in the light of Curriculum for Excellence. Inspired by Frank's tweets, I'd like to expand on some of the thinking here.

Successful Learners

The iPad will not create successful learners by itself. We are finding, however, that the increased relevance of iPad-based teaching is producing increased levels of engagement both in class and with homework and study at home. Engagement is a necessary condition for success but it is not, alone, sufficient.

We often get questions like "well, how do you know your pupils are learning when you teach with the iPad?". The answer, usually, is "the same ways we know pupils are learning when we teach with textbooks, paper, whiteboards, multiple-choice tests, art materials or newspapers".

What the iPad has allowed us to do is to bring digital resources up to the same level of availabiliy as paper resources in our teaching. It's unthinkable that pupils would only have one or two hours of access to books each week, yet that was the position with digital resources before we deployed the iPad.

Confident Individuals

When pupils learn with the iPad, they are learning in their own technological vocabulary. Personal computers - whether Windows or Mac OS X - are not most teenagers' common experience of personal computing.

We find that pupils are incredibly confident in using the iPad and that this feeds into confidence in their work. Our art teacher, Jenny Oakley, recently talked to me about the impact of iPad on her art teaching.

She told me that the iPad forms a kind of "digital safety net":

In some ways it more effectively helps pupils to develop confidence in their abilities and an enthusiasm to try than some traditional media. This is largely due to the immediacy of its set up, tidy up and effects, the security of an 'undo' button and that mark making is controlled directly by the finger itself.

Pupils do not have to overcome the hindrance of learning to manipulate another tool or implement, rather they can use the natural tool they have been developing dexterity in since birth. Once taught the basic principles of a range of art apps, pupils can achieve worthwhile results. They then begin to feel more confident and so become more willing to try – in the art classroom this is half the battle.

As a direct follow on from this pupils then do actually begin to achieve better results – their increased confidence increases their effort and enthusiasm and they feel less threatened and more relaxed. This confidence can then be extended and transferred into other art media.

We are seeing similar impacts in other areas, such as creative writing at all levels from Primary to Higher English, where digital text editing and peer evaluation are producing excellent results.

We are also focusing heavily on presentation skills using Keynote on the iPad. It is my personal belief that Word Processing - setting text on a computer in preparation for printing on paper - is a skill that will wane in value over time. Communicating your ideas to an audience is a skill that is already a clear competitive advantage for those able to do it effectively. Few skills demand the development of confidence like public presenting.

Effective Contributors

iPad is removing the friction in contributing. At its simplest, the easy flow of documents to and from the iPad has already transformed our processes of setting and submitting homework.

In class, we are seeing greater collaboration and sharing with iPad. The design of iPad directly lends itself to working together and collaborating - even without specific software support for networked collaboration. The iPad can be handed over to another pupil, turned around to show results and quickly connected to a classroom projector to share work with the entire class.

Compare this to the prior experience of trying to turn a desktop computer monitor around to share your work with someone else, or the experience of three or four pupils huddling around one computer to collaborate.

An example from Computing: we often do exercises where pupils are given a purpose and a budget for buying a computer system and they have to specify a couple of options and recommend one.

In earlier times I, in my "exam conditions" mentality, would often force this to be a solo exercise. Recently, I tried it with paired working with two iPads: one pupil worked the web to find results and the other pupil operated Numbers on their iPad to catalogue what they were finding together. They collaborated on the recommendations then, at the end, emailed me their spreadsheet and CC'ed the web-searching pupil so both had a copy of the shared work.

Each pupil made a solid contribution to the outcome and the results were effortlessly shared.

Responsible Citizens

Acting responsibly online is just one (admittedly huge) aspect of the entire citizenship agenda. As a big part of the iPad deployment, we comprehensively reworked our Acceptable Use Policy to make direct references to resources such as social networking as well as the more usual email and web publishing.

Responsible citizenship goes further. By sending iPads home with most pupils, we are giving them access to global sources of information and we're working with that in class. No longer can pupils use the "we don't get the newspaper in our house" excuse for being unaware of current events.

Here's a comment from our Modern Studies teacher, Emma Rukin:

The tasks have become more challenging and worthwhile, as the iPad allows for multi-faceted tasks to be set that combine reading, comprehension, source analysis and internet research in one. Similarly, pupils who require extra support with, for example, a written task, are much happier being emailed a writing frame than being given extra sheets in class.

The biggest difference I am noticing is that pupils are increasingly suggesting uses for the iPad themselves. In particular, after just a few weeks of iPad 1:1 deployment, pupils are asking if they can use the internet to supplement answers from textbooks, or to find out about particular things that interest or confuse them. In the upper half of secondary pupils have improved dramatically in their ability to find relevant accurate answers using the web. They are improving their ability to frame a question.

All Modern studies pupils now have access to a wide variety of news sources, meaning their knowledge of current affairs is growing, and their weekly assessments reflect this.

One of our English teachers, Rosalind Creighton, sent me this:

The S2 class have been analysing some of the articles that have been written about the implementation of iPads in the school. I emailed them a document with links to various articles and questions on each article. This made it much easier for us to read the articles as a class, and saved on photocopying.

The purpose of this unit of work is to teach children how to assess the reliability and credibility of sources; recognise bias; and understand the techniques writers will use to persuade their readers (all CfE experiences and outcomes!).

I'd particularly like to thank certain sections of the press for providing Mrs. Creighton with such a, well, broad spectrum of material to work with.

What Technology Should Be

Frank also tweeted the following desiderata for the use of technology from a learner's perspective. The tweets are here and here - I've just reformatted them in a list for this blog.

As a learner, technology should be:

  1. Everywhere, ready to use.
  2. Easy to use.
  3. Desirable to use.
  4. Challenging my skills.
  5. Sharable
  6. Collaborative
  7. It should play to my passions
  8. Used in useful contexts (from the learner's perspective)
  9. Authentic

I believe that point #1 is well placed at the top. We are convinced that the ubiquity of 1:1 deployment is the sine qua non in transforming our learning and teaching. Without 1:1, you lose the sense of personal engagement with a personal device. The pupils' sense of ownership is dramatically diminished.

I don't think I have to make a case to readers of this blog that the iPad is, by any measure, easy and desirable to use.

Making sure that iPad use challenges the skills of a learner is a big question that we are all on a learning curve with right now. I think the whole school staff are only just starting to understand how far we can really push pupils equipped with their own iPad. As readers of this blog can probably tell from the changed tone of my posts over the last few weeks, this is precisely where my thinking is going right now.

I've already discussed the capabilities of the iPad in sharing and collaboration, but one more story: last week, I was accosted in the corridor by two pupil reporters wanting to interview me about iPads for the school newsletter. I was running around fixing wifi base stations and quite busy. Instead of taking me to a classroom where they could formally interview me and type my answers into a computer, we found a couple of seats in the hallway. They pulled out their iPads and we did the interview questions and they took notes on my answers right there and then.

Instant, frictionless, collaboration and sharing using high technology transparently with a strong focus on the actual task of "doing the interview" rather than "doing the interview and recording the answers on the laptops that we have booked for this one afternoon of the week".

We have only given one directive to our teachers for using the iPad: it should be used everywhere it's useful and nowhere that it's not. We did not dictate many specific uses for the device, preferring to leave it to classroom teachers to identify the places where the device will be useful for each subject's unique requirements.

The only specific use we dictated was that everyone should use the Calendar app to record homework. That's a useful context for learners and we're seeing dramatic improvements in homework return rates.

Frank appended a "(yuk)" to the last idea of authenticity but I think there is a point to be made here. I personally believe that pupils - particularly early secondary pupils - crave relevance and authenticity in their learning. I can teach about mainframes and disk drives and everyone's bored. When I facilitate a discussion about why Apple switched from hard drives in the iPod Classic to flash memory in the iPhone, everyone wants to talk about it.

By deploying the iPad in the school and using real-world commercial software instead of "education-specific" clones of real software, we are delivering an authentic experience in school that mirrors and is relevant to the experience of technology that pupils have outside the school and bring to school with them.

Sunday
Oct102010

Run What Ya Brung

Go to any technology-in-education conference these days and you will eventually hear someone make the following claim:

In the future, we will teach using the mobile phones the kids bring to school with them.

The idea seems like a good one at face value. Here's how it goes: Schools have invested heavily in ICT and they're still miles behind the state of the art. Kids always have the latest stuff and we can't stop them bringing it to school. Let's use their mobiles as classroom ICT equipment!

It sounds great, right? It hits so many spots:

  • Kids love their mobile phones, so they'll love whatever we teach with them!
  • We are facing tighter financial times, so it'll save us tons of money!
  • We can't be blocked by the IT guy!

Unfortunately, this is technodeterminist fantasy-land. This idea is both wrong in principle and unworkable in practice and it needs to be opposed.

I say this as someone who, at some point each week, fulfils the role of IT director, policy writer, classroom teacher, software developer, systems administrator and front-line tech support.

Here's why the "run what ya brung" movement is dangerously wrong: it purports to save money while hiding massive costs elsewhere. It also relies on a number of assumptions that are difficult or impossible to justify, except by framing the argument in an indefinite "future" time-frame.

It assumes that every pupil has a mobile phone.

This is probably the least-worst of all the embedded assumptions. Most pupils will have a mobile phone. It's interesting to me, though, to receive criticism of my iPad deployment as "widening the digital divide" while hearing other people say, in effect, "let's base our lessons on some huge assumptions about the economic status of our pupils' parents".

It assumes that every pupil's mobile phone has a certain baseline capability.

It's easy for someone not familiar with technology to wave a hand and say "even the worst mobile phone can do XYZ". When it comes to actually delivering a lesson using those mobile phones, I hope you're not assuming too much.

How do you deliver one lesson that is equally as good on a three year old BlackBerry as it is on the latest iPhone 4? What about the kid with the Sony Ericsson W910i? What about the kid who dropped his phone and two buttons don't work? What about the kid without a data plan? What about the kid with the GPRS-only phone? What about the kid with the HTC EVO 4G whose battery can't last a day on standby, far less a morning of continuous use?

Even if this were tractable, which it isn't, who's happy teaching to the lowest common denominator? Who's happy that this is being advocated as the cutting edge of educational technology?

It assumes that every pupil's phone has internet access.

I would be willing to bet that there are pupils with web-capable phones whose parents aren't paying for anything more than a voice contract. I guarantee you there are pupils who don't have web-capable phones at all.

Only a small proportion of all phones have Wi-Fi. Even if you manage to get a class where everyone has a Wi-Fi capable phone, do you think your sysadmin is going to let them connect to the same network where your school MIS lives? I doubt it.

It assumes that pupils will be happy to have their mobiles used in this way.

Are you happy to hand your iPhone over to a stranger? I know that I'm certainly not. If you're 15, there's probably some quite compromising material on those devices. Some flirty texts? A little sexting? Drunken photos? Web history? Your Twitter and Facebook apps with stored passwords, such that anyone getting your mobile can access your account?

If the Run What Ya Brung movement ever gets off the ground, I'm pretty sure you'll start to see kids adopting "burner" phones, Stringer Bell-style, just to use in class.

It betrays a lack of confidence in technology

Many people are now recognising that many schools spent incoherently and in many cases overspent during the Labour bubble years. I suspect many educational technologists might be a little afraid to go back to their funding sources and ask for another chance in the current climate.

There has been a scatter-gun approach to technology in schools. Many schools have bits and pieces of tech lying around without a consistent idea of how to apply them to education. There are Nintendo DSes, Wiis, Xboxes, Windows PCs, laptops, iPaqs, Alphasmarts, interactive whiteboards and classroom voting systems. Each corresponds to an era of technological fashion in education and, crucially, none has produced lasting change in our education system.

It assumes that teachers will be aware of the differences between devices and able and willing to plan around or overcome them.

This, for me, is the stumbling block that kills the entire idea stone dead as a practical approach to learning and teaching.

The dark underside of Run What Ya Brung is that it tries to bury the cost of ICT in the cost of general staff time and effort.

The source is offline now but developer Bob Ippolito once wrote:

"If you put enough "almost works" things together in a particular way then you end up with something that approaches "works" as effort goes towards infinity."

Software developers and sysadmins know this. They have the scars to show for it. Many teachers and educational technologists, I can only assume, have never managed a heterogeneous hardware environment.

I assume this because nobody in their right mind would advocate it if they had to be personally responsible for delivering a working education system out of an unknown and constantly changing bag of components that they don't own, don't control and can't test on.

If you think I'm kidding, go and watch this video by Tim Bray which shows the "showcase" at the recent Google I/O conference of the latest Android phones. Good luck figuring out something that works on all of those phones, never mind on other mobile platforms too.

I consider myself to be one of the more technologically capable teachers in Scotland and there is no way that I would ever accept the responsibility of delivering learning under such a system.

Does anyone believe that the teachers who have hitherto refused to adopt educational technology will accept this kind of additional burden? Even if they were technically capable of doing so which, in the main, they simply are not, it is wrong for technologists to abrogate their responsibilities in this way.

We have come too far to retreat to a position where individual teachers are responsible for figuring out how to deliver relevant lessons using technology appropriately. We cannot now walk away and tell pupils and parents that it's their problem to provide ICT to schools.

Tuesday
Oct052010

iPad Apps for Secondary

As promised, here is our unedited list of the apps we have deployed to the Secondary department:

Friday
Oct012010

iPad Apps for Primary

Everyone's been desperate to hear about the apps we're using. I present the current list for our primary department, with iTunes links. All prices are for the UK App Store.

As I said in my last post, I simply cannot at this point contemplate the effort of capturing for you how every one of these apps are being used in all the classes and stages that they're being used in. I'm no longer the expert. Unlike previous generations of school technology, it's no longer the computing teacher driving technology adoption. It's the subject teachers themselves - what a refreshing change!

Over time, I hope to develop a few case studies of particularly broadly used apps but I hope this is useful to some of you.

Just look at the length of that list. That's a revolution in itself.

Also, we decided that we didn't think it fair to wait for the Volume Purchase Program to arrive in the UK. Now that I have this list together, we're going to figure out a process of paying for more copies of these apps to give the developers a fair deal.

That probably looks like setting up a number of additional accounts and gifting ourselves additional copies of the apps. A lot of boring clicking around but we are trying to do the right thing where we possibly can. It's going to take some time.

In the meantime, I'd like to thank all my fellow developers who worked on these great apps for bearing with me while we figure all this out. It's all very new.

Wednesday
Sep292010

The Invisible Computing Teacher

There was a time when The Computing Teacher in a secondary school was the acknowledged expert in computing. That's why he (usually, he) had all the computers. There were only a few computers in the school anyway and he was the guy to deal with them.

In primary schools, there were basically no computers so nobody cared. Then, later, there was one computer on a trolley and it lived in the classroom of whichever teacher cared enough to stay after hours to make it work and keep it working.

Later still, and this is the situation today, the local authorities got their act together and locked everything down. Now, nobody cares because it's impossible to get anyone to do anything without vogonesque bureaucracy. I've heard tales of teachers going out of school to McDonalds in their free periods because the school network is so restricted that the free WiFi in McDonalds is much more conducive to actually getting their work done. I can't imagine how many contraband MiFis and 3G dongles are used in schools each day just to get something working.

Anyway, the point is that the Computing Teacher was the expert. That technical role is being diminished by centralised control from local authorities but, in principle, the computing teacher is still the expert in educating with computers.

There was a time (last year) when a big part of my role was to teach children skills which could then be of use in other subjects. This was partly because I knew the various apps a lot better than any other teacher and partly because the other teachers didn't have time to spend three weeks teaching an app before they could teach their lesson.

I don't know how much longer this role will exist. Already, I'm no longer in control of the set of software that we teach with. Yes, I know what we're using and I get it installed, but there's no way that I have used or somehow approved all these apps. There are several apps on our iPads that I have never used.

I'm no longer the expert and that's great. The individual subject teacher is now the expert in teaching digitally in their class. I don't roll in and tell them which apps we're going to use any more.

Why has this happened? I don't fully know but I suspect there are a number of reasons. The first reason is that software has gone mainstream, except that we call software "Apps" now.

The idea of acquiring additional software for your computing device has become so straightforward and non-threatening to normal computer users that instead of pushing new software into the school, I'm now trying to hold back the demand for software to keep it manageable.

Another reason is something that I'm trying to correctly articulate and I haven't yet found the best words. The thing is that, when you use an app on an iPad, the iPad becomes that thing. Maps makes the iPad a map. iBooks turns it into a book. Brushes turns it into a sketch pad. I feel that teachers aren't looking for "new software that I can run on this computing device", rather that they're asking "can I make this iPad into something else useful for my teaching?".

It's worth pausing for a moment to fully realise what a sea-change this is in educational technology.

So, what's left for the Computing Teacher? I really don't know. Do we move away from skills and towards more of the Hard Computer Science content? Maybe, but I don't yet know how you keep that interesting for the four years from S1-S4 until they sit an exam in Computing Studies. I particularly don't know how you keep that interesting at the current rates of curriculum review.

Do we even have "Computing" classes any more?

Perhaps, the future role of a 'computing teacher' is to act as a consultant or team-teacher with other subjects. I would much rather teach about Wikipedia's structure, history and reverting alongside an English teacher who's teaching about sourcing and bias in writing than in some dry, contrived example lesson of my own.

I'd love to teach about universal computer accessibility alongside the drama teacher who's teaching about how disabled people experience the world.

I'd rather teach about spreadsheets alongside a science teacher who's trying to explain how to capture data from experiments than in some "let's pretend we're running a shop" Computing lesson.

We need to differentiate between "learning about Computing" and "learning how to use computers". The status quo ante of treating those different experiences as two aspects of one subject is hopelessly broken in a world where digital tools are as commonplace as paper and pencil.