Turning the Supertanker

The most common word used in the various conference sessions today was ’subvert.’ It seems that there is an impatience for change, that we can see change is happening or is about to occur, but it is not happening quickly enough. And much of the day was spent exploring just what the impediments to change might be and how we can facilitate the change, hence the guerilla tactics of subversion.

Many themes appeared again and again. Learning experiences need to be authentic and that students need to have a range of tools to choose from in order to do a set task and in addition they should know which tool is the most appropriate for the task. We have to resist the temptation or pressure to use an expensive ICT tool simply because it is an expensive ICT tool. With regard to pedagogies we discussed a lot about how ICT’s are often imposed onto an existing or traditional pedagogy, with the end result being a bit of a Prince Charles (”Carbunkle on the face of an old friend.”) We also discussed what an ICT pedagogy should look like, but the debate around this ranged around the argument that there is not a pencil pedagogy an OHP pedagogy, rather the environment of learning changes as a result of new technology and therefore the pedagogy that subsequently evolves is not specifically an ICT one.

One of the impediments to effective delivery was the whole permissions issue for users of networks. The managers of networks were likened as “network Nazis” Networks can become so locked down that any creativity is stiffled because of the draconian network security policies. There is a tension between network administrators and their users, there is an adage that goes, ‘this network would run just fine if it were not for those damned users.’ Security on a a network equates to stablility and minimised work load for administrators, but equates to inertia and disenfranchisement for the users. If we want innovation, we have to review the fortress mentality of our networks. I for one have recently gone down this road on our network and have yet to gain the benefits.

The final keynote of the day was a presentation of some research into the effectiveness of IWBs in classrooms. It was a UK government funded project and the findings are really interesting. It was found that in schools where the entire school was equipped with IWBs there was a technology critical mass that encouraged collaborative support amongst colleagues and was a very motivational addition to each classroom, even the teachers who were predicted not to be adopters of the technology found that they became enthusiastic about them in a very short time.

The study followed students in several schools over two years and it was found that the middle to high achieving students made significant progress in their numeracy and literacy attainment compared to students who had not been taught in classes without IWB’s in them. The bottom 20% of students made progress but not at the same rate as the others. It was discussed whether the IWB was actually an impediment to their attainment and the conclusion that has been postulated but has yet to be researched is that these children do not thrive in whole class situations and that it is the learning style and not the technology that is the issue.

With regard to teachers using IWB’s and student attainment, there was a clear relationship. When the board is first installed there is an innovation dip as the teacher gets to grips with using the technology and how to implement the new tool into their classroom practice. What happens is a clear three step process:

• Teachers fit the new technology into their existing pedagogy
• Collaborative exploration of new opportunities offered by the new technology
• Embedding of the technologies into transformed pedagogic practices

It was made clear that it takes a long time up to two years for the full benefits of the IWB and student attainment to be gained as indicated by the results of the research. The conference has been a wonderfully affirming event, we have made some new friends met some really interesting people who are very interested in what Helen and I are doing. It looks as though we will get further follow up as a result of our presentation. The effort of putting a paper together, and of actually getting here has now been completely worth it.

Today was meant to be split into two.  The morning was to be spent visiting two Czech schools and in the afternoon doing some cultural stuff visiting the local silver mines and the town hall.  At the end of the day yesterday we were informed that the schools would welcome us but the children would be on school trips, in other words we would be visiting empty classes!  I elected to give that a miss and take the opportunity to see a little bit of Prague.  

By all accounts history has been kind to Prague in terms of architectural loss due to conflict.  When you consider that cities like Plymouth, Dresden and London were heavily affected by the conflict of WWII Prague survived that, it seems to me, intact.  The Soviet invasion might also have been a stimulus for the removal of decadent architecture in the name of comrade Stalin, a cleansing process as it were.  I am glad to say that neither incident seems to have scarred the cities architecture, I am sure the populace would take a different view of the scars caused by invasion and occupation.  In short Prague is a delight, a fondant icing extravaganza, a city of embelishments and ornamentation.  Quite simply it is fantastic eye candy.  The winding streets of the old city, the mix of Gothic, Baroque and the European C17th and C18th styles make for an intoxicating mix.

We have walked through the winding streets, taken the trams and have got a real feel for the city.  We spent most of today up at the castle.  The following slide show is a representation of where we have been today.

Today was the day that we were to present our paper.  The first keynote presentation of the conference was given, it had been delayed 24 hours due to Easy Jet losing one of our speakers.  In fairness I think that the flight had been cancelled due to technical issues and so the speaker could not get to us yesterday.

The keynote meant that Helen and I finally we got to sit through a presentation that was not based around the interpretation of statistical analysis culled from some University funded research and got to listen to something that we could actually apply to our classes.  I will post about this later as it needs some research into websites and gps modules on PDAs but looks very exciting.

As the time drew nearer to our time slot, Helen grew progressively more anxious about the whole affair.  I was more sanguine although the butterflies were swarming somewhat by the time of the tea break.  We had one moment of stress when the flash video embedded into our second slide would not play.  Despite having triple checked everything before leaving New Zealand this one thing decided not to play ball today.  It was doubly difficult as I then had to try and troubleshoot the error using a computer that had been set up for Czech users and therefore all the menus were all in Czech.  Time ran out and we just had to run the slide without the animation, a shame really as it was a video made from Google Earth that flew from Woodford school to Meadowbank and back several times, visually illustrating the link and the distance over which our partnership has been created.

The presentation went really well and we infact ran out of time.  When it came to questions we were asked a lot of questions and the buzz in the room indicated that we had struck a chord with our audience, all the seats had been taken for our session and many were standing at the back too.  Not that we can claim the entire audience as there were two other presentations that followed us.  The questioning and congratulations continued as the other presenters set up for their session.  We felt very pleased at how the presentation had been received, the general buzz and the questioning.

At the end of the whole session we broke for lunch and were promptly joined by three others who wanted to continue discussing what we had presented, it was a very affirming moment.  At lunch we were questioned more closely about what we had done and how we had done it.  I also expanded on my ‘dial an expert’ initiative and they were interested in my links with Sandi in New York and remote music teaching.  We also discussed Second Life as a vehicle for learning, it was a really excellent lunch and passed far too quickly. As a result I have been asked to speak to a conference of Primary Head teachers in England later in the year.  At this stage it might be via a Skype connection or there was even talk of me being flown up to London to present next year.  This is all very affirming stuff and I have said yes to the offers too.

The rest of the day continued in a similar vein, the afternoon was dedicated to seeing how ICT has been implemented in schools from a Czech perspective, there were two particularly excellent presentations from students.  The first one was a whole bunch of interactive whiteboard activities that the sudents have created, they demonstrated the whole ‘interactive’ element of the whiteboards with them being the teachers and controlling the board.  There has been lots of disucssion over the last two days about effective whiteboard use and the concensus is that best practice comes when the teacher ceases to be the ‘controller of the board.’  There was an excellent presentation by a 19 year old student who designs and builds his own line following robots.  He has only been doing this for a year and already he has built a robot that fits inside a matchbox!

At the end of the day there is a always a reflection session.  Today Helen and I and our presentation was the focus of discussion for half of that entire block of time.  What we have done has made a significant section of the delegates sit up and think about the possibilities of an online collaborative learning environment to engage students in their learning.  We have certainly made the most audible buzz of the entire conference so far.

At one point one of the academics stated that  what we were doing and us in particular are not special,  there was an audible intake of breath from a lot of the other delegates, there was a feeling that this was a bit much!  But this particular person had earlier complimented us on what we had achieved and done.  It was a bit of a slap in the face at the time, but I do not think that is what she intended and on reflection I feel that what she was trying to say in a rather inelegant and clumsy way was this:  What Helen and I have achieved is the result of a mash up /a combination of readily available and  free technologies on the web.  We have subverted their use to our own ends and have put a lot of effort into getting our tohatoha community to work and it now has its own momentum.  

I still think, despite what she said, that this has taken vision on my behalf to marry up these technologies.  It has taken tremendous effort from both of us to sustain the community.  We will continue to explore new and varied ways to improve the methods of communication between students and between teachers and students.  

For me the bigger question and I think the implied criticism from this particular academic was; if these tools are so readily available, why are there not more of these communities doing exactly what we have created?  Discuss:

Taken from: Prague Picures

Last year an e-mail arrived in my in box from the ICTRN Becta list serv out of the UK. I dip into and out of links and mail that arrives and follow the threads and discussions as my whim takes me. I often contribute but the traffic seems decidedly one way. Still it is a good way of keeping track of trends in ICT in Europe. The specific mail in question was a request for papers for a conference to be held in Prague in June 2008. I followed the link and the conference focus intrigued me.  I was particularly fascinated by the focus because the tohatoha blog was really gathering momentum and Helen and I were planning to do something for International Education week later on in the year.

As I cycled home that evening I began thinking.

I cherish my time on the bike, I am able to get clear headed thinking time as I cycle and some of my most adventurous, innovative and some would say hairbrained ideas for ICT have been hatched whilst grinding the gears on my Avanti Hurricane over the years. I reasoned that Helen and I had a story to tell about the success of our collaboration, which was and still is, going from strength to strength. What especially fascinated me was the strength of our virtual relationship. The fact that we have never met, yet have created something very successful and work very well together is so full of oxymorons, that on paper the partnership between schools and colleagues was almost bound to fail from the start, yet it has not. I pondered:

Why has the partnership succeeded?

What are the ingredients of this collaboration, with no common grounds and a completely randomly created partnership, that have ensured success?

How have the students regarded being taught by virtual teachers?

Just what do the students gain from virtual collaboration?

What are the benefits/pitfalls for students accessing specific skills and talents from a global network of teachers?

What might be the potential impact for educational delivery if students could access JIT skills/training/information that this model implies is possible?

It seemed to me perfect that we share our findings. Later that evening I suggested to Helen that we had a story to tell and that we should put a proposal together to speak in Prague based on the success of our blog collaboration. We wrote a proposal over some days, again via Skype and Word’s track changes facility to come up with a proposal entitled:

Collaborative Triumphs and Planning Tensions: Using a blog to enable classes separated by time zones and hemispheres to work together, the Tohatoha story.

This morning I received a mail from the organisers and our proposal has been successful. I am over the moon! Now the reality hits. This trip needs funding the paper needs to be written Helen is approaching the British Council in the UK and is fairly confident that she can get funding. I too now have to find the cash. There is a delicious irony in the fact that the first time that we shall meet will be in a city that neither of us have ever been to, talking about a project that has been conceived, hatched and executed entirely through the virtual medium of the Internet. June can not arrive fast enough.