The title is self evident, I wonder if anyone can tell me of ways or times when they or anyone else has learned from failure?

I am serious in this request, we hear a lot about learning from failure or learning from our mistakes but are these anything more than just platitudes or cliches? Is it possible to learn from failure or is failure the opposite of learning?

Please, if you know of any examples of someone learning from failure I’d be very grateful if you could add a comment to this post about what or how they learned from that failure.

E-learning is unpopular with learners, and not always popular with teachers, there can be little doubt about that but why should that be the case?

I have made quite a bold statement there and some of you may question it, that’s great and please add your view or experience in the comments. Before you do though, I’d like you to consider this question;

If you had the choice between studying a subject being taught by a teacher in the classroom or online via the internet, which would you choose?

Almost without fail, most people would opt for the first option. Why would that be? Is it because that’s what they’re used to? Is it because they feel that offers a better educational experience? Is online education perceived as a second best option?

My own experiences as a learner of e-learning has not been very good; I found the e-learning course to be very didactic and geared more towards instruction or training rather than education or study. I know that I am not alone in this experience as I have come across many others who have had similar expeiences.

Most tools for elearning appear to have been developed first for the commercial sector and were employed by companies or global organisations to train their workforce. The requirement in such instances has been more for training, instruction or presentation. These tools have since been adopted to provide elearning experiences within the education sector but here the demand would be for education and learning. It seems that the tools have not been completely adaptable for these different approaches. The result is that students find online courses restrictive and teachers find themselves limited by the technology.

Of course, this shouldn’t be the case, technology should be enhancing and enabling rather than limiting. If you were to attend a learning technologies conference, you would hear many presenters talk about new and exciting possibilities in using elearning, if you attend a learning technologies market place, however, you are likely to find that what is on offer is the same old tools. Nowhere has this been more evident to me than at the Learning technologies exhibition held in London, where there seems to be a very marked dichotomy between what is presented in conference and what is on sale in the exhibition space.

So, where are we going wrong, if we are? Is it that we are trying to take pre-packaged tools rather than design the learning experiences from scratch? Is it that we still design elearning from the point of view of a teacher or trainer rather than the learner? Is it, quite simply, that elearning is only an option when traditional teaching methods are not available? Or maybe the problem is that there’s a darn cat sat on my computer? (see pic)

Quite honestly, I’d very much welcome any views or comments on this matter, either here in the comments or via twitter.

Related articles

• eLearning Startup Opportunities (elearningtech.blogspot.com)
• Focus on the technology or not? (elearningstuff.net)
• Mark Smithers: eLearning at Universities: A Quality Assurance Free Zone? ” higher education management group (higheredcrm.wordpress.com)
• Lectora Inspire eLearning Software Wins Bersin & Associates 2011 Learning Leaders Award for Product Innovation (prweb.com)
• Traditional Learning without Frontiers! (elearningstuff.net)
• E-Learning: The Product of a Risk Is a Lesson | American Libraries Magazine (americanlibrariesmagazine.org)
• Collaborize Classroom – An Online Learning Platform (freetech4teachers.com)
• Stories as instructional design technique for e-learning (sparkyourinterest.wordpress.com)

No sooner had I posted this article than I came across this post http://bit.ly/gVyusu which in part compares traditional learning in the HE sector with online learning. It presents a quite different point of view and is well worth reading.

In the early days of the PC in schools, games were almost the only software available thanks largely to the concept of ‘edutainment’ – a mixture of ‘education’ and ‘entertainment’. These software titles, such as Magic Bus, presented a rather second rate entertainment score combined with a little education along the way. Thankfully, and due in no small measure to ELCs, software has moved on a long way since those days and the educational aspect of school software has become more dominant.

Nevertheless, it seems that the entertainment side of school software has refused to die. In fact, in recent months, it seems to have been re-emerging. Witness this article from the BBC about video games in schools and this article from San Francisco. Work in this area seems supported by research from Futurelab.

Most of the work at current, seems to revolve around commercial games in lessons. The alternative would be a game program upon which educational material could be based. This would seem to be the angle being taken at Immersive Education with their work on Mission maker. In this piece of software, pupils or teachers can create characters, scenarios and storylines to support learning.

Other links;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4134530.stm
http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2141251/schools-test-scholarly-value-pc
http://blog.core-ed.net/derek/2006/08/mission_maker.html

Let’s say ‘no’ to inappropriate use of technology in education.

I’d like you to read that again;

Let’s say ‘no’ to inappropriate use of technology in education.

The chances are that you may be misinterpreting what I am saying here. You quite possibly think I’m saying that we should stop using technology inappropriately and you quite probably think that’s a good idea.

That, however, is not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that we should say ‘no’ to the idea or the concept of inappropriate use of technology in education. As a passionate supporter, proponent and advocate of educational technology, I urge us all to reject any notion of technology being used in support of education as being, in any way, inappropriate.

I have long held the belief that technology can have positive benefits in the education of all learners and I know I’m not alone in that belief. I also know, however, that not every educational professional shares that belief as firmly as I do, in my many years of working in the field I have come across people who have been sceptical or dubious over the role of educational technology. Over the years, these people have become fewer and fewer in number and prominence as the value and proof of the benefits of edtech have become evident.

So why do I feel a need to write this article now? Well it would seem that recent developments, at least here in the UK, have given the edtech sceptics new heart and new initiative to question or attack the use of technology in education. It is in response to this that I feel the need to affirm support for technology in education.

The argument that it is not always appropriate to use technology, is not a new one. I first encountered it in the late 1980s and 1990s and it did originate from people who were reluctant or sceptical about using technology in class. Originally some teachers were saying they didn’t use technology because they did not have access to it, this was quite true particularly in the early days when a school would have just the one or a few computers whose use had to be timetabled. However, as devices became more numerous and more readily available, this argument became less valid and the reluctant users or sceptics turned to a new argument; that they hadn’t received any (or adequate) training. This, sadly, was also often true and it is well known, on reflection, that devices were put into schools without any training and, where training was provided, it was often just the basic operating instruction. However, as many ICT coordinators and CPD providers will attest, when training is offered, it is rarely the sceptic or reluctant user that attends.

To be fair, though, not all staff who started off as reluctant users have remained that way. Many professionals took advantage of the increased availability of edtech and whatever training has been offered to support it and have brought the benefits of it into their teaching. In the 1990s and beyond, however, there remained a small and dwindling number of staff who remained sceptical and their last argument was that they felt it wasn’t always appropriate to use technology.

Taking the side against the argument that we shouldn’t use technology inappropriately, is not an easy one. At first sight their argument seems sensible as anything ‘inappropriate’ should be avoided, shouldn’t it? In practice, however, the argument is not against ‘inappropriateness’ but against ‘technology’. This is the first reason why I feel all supporters of educational technology should reject the concept of ‘inappropriate use of technology’; accepting or supporting this concept gives vailidity to an argument that, at first, appears reasonable but ,beneath the surface, is not based on reason but on other factors such as fear of, opposition to or lack of confidence in using educational technology.

You will notice that the concept refers to ‘technology’ as if technology were just one thing or one tool. In reality we know that technology is not just one tool, it is a whole range of tools and resources, each having many different uses and ways of using them. To say that there are times when it is inappropriate to use technology, in such a blanket or all-encompassing, way is to deny learners the use of these tools, the different ways of using them and the learning opportunities they afford. There is no way that I can accept this as a correct approach to education.

It may be my experience in special education that leads me to view technology tools as valuable resources that can be tailored and used to fit the needs and requirements of individual learners. I am sure, though, that colleagues in mainstream education have also considered technology as important for certain learners more than for others and that technology can be used to aid differentiation in the classroom. I also feel that many learners with special needs can be aided into inclusion by the use of technology and that technology can be used to enable access to learning resources that might otherwise be unavailable to them. To deny the use of technology, through some concept of it being inappropriate, could serve as an additional and unwanted barrier to both the learning and the inclusion of pupils with special needs.

There are many camps, theories and approaches to education and it would be true to say that there is not a ‘one size fits all’ approach to education. Educational technology is a very versatile set of tools and resources which can be adopted or adapted to fit almost any educational approach. It is almost inconceivable to consider an approach that did not utilise education technology in some form. Unless, that is, one is considering a pre-1960s approach. Now that might be fine in an historical context or simulation but I don’t think any school inspector, head teacher, parent or pupil would consider a class of pupils using ink and paper to copy a teacher’s notes on a chalk board to be an effective form of education in the 21^st century. Okay, so that might be an extreme example but I do believe, in many cases, if you scratch the surface of an edtech sceptic, you will find an outdated approach to education.

When faced with the concept of inappropriate use of technology, many colleagues capitulate in the face of what seems a reasonable argument. In the past I have challenged colleagues and sceptics to give me examples of times when it would be inappropriate to use technology. They have cited P.E., R.E., meetings, swimming, driving, flying, mountaineering and playing football, (as well as certain ‘adult’ activities that I won’t mention here), as examples of times when it would be inappropriate to use technology. In each case I have been able to show, to my satisfaction, ways in which technology tools can be both appropriate and beneficial. The only one I hadn’t been able to argue against had been ‘flying’, where I believed, like many others, that the use of electrical instruments could interfere with sensitive instruments necessary for safe flight but it now seems as if airlines or aircraft manufacturers have found ways around this. As for the case of technology not being appropriate for football, just consider England’s last match in the 2010 world cup and tell me that technology might not have changed the match by clearly showing that England’s second goal was good, though I accept that substituting Peter Crouch for Wayne Rooney might have also helped change the outcome of the match!

So, to conclude, why do I believe that we should say no to inappropriate use of technology?

• It is not the reasonable argument it first seems
• It gives validity to those staff who are reluctant or opposed to using technology
• By using the blanket term ‘technology’, it fails to acknowledge the wide range of tools that constitute ‘technology’ and the numerous uses for each tool
• It fails to take cognisance of the needs of individual learners, including those with special needs
• It may be linked to outdated approaches to education.
• Its proponents have yet to give a clear and unequivocal instance of where the use of technology would be inappropriate.

I have to admit, I have pondered hard about whether to publish this article or not. I do not like being negative or critical about my professional colleagues, whom I hold in the highest regard. Indeed I am not really critical of colleagues, it is more the views some of them express or support which I fell critical of.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Let Them Ask (ictineducation.org)
• Instructional Technology: What is It? (brighthub.com)
• Technology Hurdles In Canadian Education (isteconnects.org)

In the last few weeks I have been asked 3 times by different people what do I regard as the most important aspect of successful elearning. This is quite surprising as people dont talk to me that frequently about elearning, so maybe there’s a bit of a trend or bandwagon developing somewhere. I’m sorry to say that in each of the 3 cases, I was unable to give a succinct, or glib, response (which is also somewhat unusual). In each case, I said I’d go away, think about it and get back to them later.

This post is a consequence of my thinking about it. I have thought about it and drawn from my own observations as to what makes a successful elearning session. It has not been easy to narrow it down to identifying just one aspect that seems to be key to good elearning. However, when I reflect back on those times when I feel I have observed the best examples of online learning, there does seem to be one point of commonality among them. So what I’d like to do is to take this and present it as my suggestion for a ‘golden key to successful elearning.’

If you are a teacher or a designer of elearning courses, my golden rule for you is to ask yourself; “What am I asking the learners to do?”

There are so many elearning courses in which the learner merely sits in front of a computer screen reading text or listening to a teacher’s voice.

Let me put this into perspective. If you were a school inspector or a head teacher observing an hour long lesson in which the class teacher stood at the front talking and writing on a board while all the learners do is sit, watch and maybe copy what is written on the board; you would probably mark down that lesson or that teacher as being poor.

So why is it that something that is not acceptable in a real classroom should somehow become acceptable online?

Quite simply, it isn’t. Or, should I say, that I don’t think it is for the best examples of elearning that I have observed have been when the teacher has required the learners to engage in some activity rather than being passive recipients.

I’m obviously looking at this from the perspective of a school teacher and we need to be aware that elearning is very much more in use within higher education and in industry training. What might work for school students might not necessarily work with Higher students or adults in industry. Nevertheless, if made relevant and appropriate to them, I feel that learners at all levels would become more engaged if involved in learning activities rather than passively sitting on their backsides.

Now, before online teachers and instructional designers start ganging up on me, I do have some sympathy with you. I am aware that many systems chosen to deliver elearning do not provide learners with the tools or facilities to become engaged in activities we’d like to use. I have also discovered when attending the Learning Technologies show in London that there can be a huge chasm between what is envisioned for elearning in the conference and what is being marketed as elearning in the sales exhibition. It is quite evident that what is being offered to us to support elearning seems light years away from what we want to deliver.

On the other hand, I have seen teachers use the tools that are available in new and imaginative ways to engage and present to their learners. So maybe, the first point is for teachersd and designers to use the tools, or get the learners to use the tools, which are available.

Surely, though, the time has come when we cannot allow a program to restrict and define the learning opportunities we offer to our learners. If a package cannot deliver the learning activities we want to offer, then we must consider rejecting that package and either look to other packages and systems or consider breaking away from proprietary delivery systems and make more use of individual specialised online tools which are better able to allow learners to participate in ways that promote active learning.

So, there you are, maybe I’ve ranted on a bit too much but I do believe that when delivering or designing elearning courses, it is really important to consider what you are asking the learner to do. Come to think of it, that is probably very important in all lesson planning, not just online.

Related articles

• E-learning, Why does it have such a Bad Name? (dougwoods.co.uk)
• 10 Tips for Effective eLearning (dougwoods.co.uk)
• Free eLearning for charities (raceonline2012.wordpress.com)
• Shift up a gear: work with me from September 2011! (dougbelshaw.com)
• Using teaching as inquiry to guide an eLearning action plan (freetech4teachers.com)

Are you getting a bit fed up with all this talk of 21st Century Learning, 21st Century Teaching, 21st Century Skills ….? I know I am! Quite often it just seems like people drop the term 21st Century into their articles, conversations, marketing materials just to make themselves look trendy but, quite often, I’m not sure they know what they are talking about!

What are these 21st Century skills, anyway? Often people cite skills such as creativity, collaboration, cooperation, communication, creativity, critical thinking, problem solving. Well, hang on a minute, all those skills were around in the last century, they are hardly new skills. So are we to assume that 21st Century skills are simply old skills repackaged or brought to the fore in the 21st Century?

Then what about 21st Century learning or C21st teaching, how do C21st skills impact upon them? Well, cooperation and collaboration were being used in schools in the last century only we called it something like groupwork or project work. Perhaps a difference was, though, that we were not necessarily learning together but working together for our own learning. Teachers were also teaching creativity in the last century, though with hindsight it could be argued that the coming of the National Curriculum killed off a great deal of creativity in schools. Teachers were also teaching problem solving and critical thinking back in the day.

There is, perhaps, a certain amount of arrogance in anyone assuming that the skills being taught, or needing to be taught, nowadays, will suit the whole 21st century. The world in 2050 will be different from the world today, that includes the world of education and work, we may well find other skills we need to teach in 2050 or, say, 2093 yet they are still in the 21st century.

We do live in a society and a world that is increasingly, though not exclusively, digital and technological. I have no qualms anout anyone saying that we need to learn how to live and work in such a world but let us not dress it up in pretentious jargon.

The world of education and learning is changing and needs to change more, I wholeheartedly support that but lets be open about this and not hide behind cliches and catchphrases, which might only serve to alienate others.

7 Signs of a 21st century educator. Having criticised the overuse of the phrase ’21st Century …’ , here I am using it, doh!

Related articles

• 21st Century This, 21st Century That (dougwoods.co.uk)
• Harness the Power of Technology (acyberpilgrim.org)
• The myth underpinning ’21st Century Skills’ [Future of Education] (dougbelshaw.com)
• Seven Principles for Good Teaching (elearningcentralia.wordpress.com)
• Education in the 21st Century (c24.co.uk)
• The 30 Best Books for EdTech Geeks (onlinecollege.org)

One of the best uses of Twitter that I’ve found is the ability to use it at conferences.

I have done this a few times and, I admit, made a few mistakes. So, I thought I’d share my views as to why it is a good thing and, hopefully, invite others to comment.

First of all, let me say that I do NOT think it is rude to tweet during a speaker’s presentation. In fact, I think many speakers expect it nowadays and also welcome it. After all, the speaker gets their message across a bit wider via your tweets; it is good publicity for them. Event organisers also seem to benefit from it as it publicises their event and future events; which is surely worth the cost of laying on free wifi at a venue.

I do feel, though, that the tweeter needs to be sensitive and if the speaker is presenting commercially sensitive or confidential information or if they simply ask not to be tweeted, then this should be observed and respected.

One of the frustrating aspects of conference or event tweeting is that a tweet will often contain just ‘so-and-so speaker at this event’. While it is nice to know who’s speaking, it is more useful for the follower to know what the speaker is speaking about, what they are saying (if just brief highlights), and the tweeter’s opinion or response to what is being said.

That last point is a bit controversial and I’ll come back to it later.

What I prefer to do, and I enjoy others doing it too, is being told in tweets the key points in a speaker’s presentation. As a follower, it does not give me the same experience as being actually present at the conference but it does allow me to have some insight into the content, argument or viewpoint being presented. This is far more useful than just being told that ‘mr so-and-so is speaking’ or ‘great speech by …’ or ‘inspirational speech by..’, unless that is genuinely the tweeter’s response to the speech.

As a tweeter, giving your opinion or reaction to a speaker’s presentation can be tricky. I think the key here is to respect the speaker and, if you want to give responses, respond to the argument or points presented rather than be personal. I think it is also important to remember that the speaker probably doesn’t have the capacity to respond to your tweets, at least not in real time, so your tweets could become a one-sided argument. That leads on to another point, I think it is best to avoid getting into an argument on twitter during a conference, there are always many points of view and expressing them is fine but any follower really wants to know what the conference speaker is saying … the debate can wait ’til later.

Anyone who has been to conferences will know that there will be times when delegates split into breakaway groups for different ‘seminars’ or whatever. Sometimes, I have found it is not always easy to choose which seminar to attend; often there may be two or more I’d be interested in but I have to select one. In such cases, it is great when someone else tweets from another seminar, that way, delegates can have a taste of what is being presented at each seminar.

One of the biggest snags in conference tweeting is the use of a hashtag; you would think this would be the simplest of problems to solve but often you see different people using different hashtags for the same event. This only causes confusion for a follower and it would be best if a common hashtag could be agreed. As a follower, I have sometimes asked tweeters to use a common hashtag and told them of the hashtags being used by others. If you are tweeting under one hashtag, you may not be aware of ones being used by others, so it can be useful if someone following, joins in and lets you know. Ideally, I suppose, a hashtag could be agreed in advance of the conference and I do often see tweeters asking what the hashtag is when on their journey to an event. In many cases, the conference organisers could set out the hashtag beforehand. There should be a general rule that hashtags should be as short as possible (so as not to use up too many characters) and as distinct as possible (so as not to be confused with other events).

There is also the issue of twitter being used as a backchannel, giving the speaker feedback on their presentation. Generally, I would say this is a good idea and adds another dimension to a presentation. However, where Twitter is used in this way, I believe the speaker should at least know about it and agree to it, ideally the speaker should incorporate it into their presentation. However, we have to remember that when presenting it is not always possible for a speaker to stay aware of a twitter stream or to respond in real time.

There is one final point, or gripe, that I have seen time and time again at conferences from other people tweeting. At the start of a conference, people will say tweet that they are at the event and they’ll be tweeting this or that … but then it all goes quiet. There are a number of times when I have followed conference tweets during the morning but then there’s been nothing during the afternoon. This can be really frustrating for followers, so if you do tweet at a conference, please keep tweeting (battery and wifi permitting of course) during the whole event!

In conclusion, I feel that tweeting from conferences and events can be one of the most beneficial uses of the social media tool. It is generally good to share ideas and experiences, which is why I tend to do tweet from conferences I attend. Followers need more info in your tweets than just the fact that you’re present or that so-and-so is about to speak, which is why I feel it is good to include key points or witty sayings from a speaker’s presentation. It is great to follow tweets from an event you cannot attend but please, please, please keep tweeting through the whole event!

Okay, that’s what I think about tweeting from conferences, I wonder what others think. Please leave a comment.

Update: While reading Bill’s comment below, a new use of twitter at a conference came into my mind. It’s not a use I have made and Bill doesn’t specifically mention it but, as I thought about it, it seemed a very valid and worthwhile use of twitter.

I am sure that many of us would agree that attending conferences can be good Professional Development. That’s great for those of us lucky enough to attend but what about our colleagues back at school or the office, couldn’t (shouldn’t?) they also be able to benefit from the conference for their own CPD? Of course they should and it would be great if they could all attend but, as we all know, that would be problematic, cost money and leave the school understaffed or with temporary staff.

I think you can see what I’m getting at … by tweeting from the conference, the tweeter can actually share elements of the CPD with colleagues. Not only that but Twitter is a two-way tool, so the colleagues can also interact with the Tweeter by asking questions of them or getting them to ask questions of the speaker etc..

Now, I know it is not perfect CPD but I might suggest it may be a bit better than the usual cascade approach where the attendee feedsback to colleagues upon return, relying upon any notes, handouts and memory but only being able to answer questions based upon their own interpretation of the presentation. I’ve never been a real fan of the cascade approach, finding it akin to ‘Chinese whispers’ where the message of the session gets slightly changed each time it is relayed. By using Twitter, however, the remote ‘attendees’ get a slightly better taste of the presentation/message.

Related articles

• Ten Twitter Tips for Teachers (whiteboardblog.co.uk)
• #Hashtag That (isupportdigitalmag.wordpress.com)
• We who are about to tweet: @daniel_bailey. (wewhoareabouttodie.com)
• How to Use Twitter Hashtags (lockergnome.com)
• Tips for being social at conferences (nevillehobson.com)
• It’s All About the Hash (crossroadsconsultingllc.wordpress.com)
• 9 Tips for Building a Great Twitter Hashtag (lovestats.wordpress.com)
• Micro-blogging in a mother tongue (news.bbc.co.uk)
• The Secret World of Twitter Users – Are You Missing Out? (debbiekenny.wordpress.com)
• Tweet-able Conference Talks (inklingmarkets.com)
• How to: Auto-tweet during your keynote (thenextweb.com)
• 5 Steps to Planning an Awesome Event With Inbound Marketing (hubspot.com)
• 10 Tips to Live Blog a Conference (lovestats.wordpress.com)

photo credit: elliottcable

An Introduction to Lesson Capture

Lesson capture has been around for a wile, mainly in the US and in Higher Education, where it is known not surprisingly as Lecture Capture. I can see it becoming more widespread in schools, hence the change of term to Lesson Capture. The question I want to try to address in this article is, “What is lesson capture and why might one want to use it in school?”.

It is a question I want to try to answer more from a pedagogical viewpoint than a technical one but let me start by giving a simple technical explanation. Put simply, lesson capture is the recording of lessons by the teacher/department for pupils to later view to reinforce their learning.

So, essentially, we’re talking about videoing lessons to be viewed later but why would we want to do that, aren’t the pupils just viewing a repeat of what they’ve already done? Well, yes, in a way they are but I’m sure that as teachers we all know pupils who need things repeated (more than once) before they learn them. Traditionally, this has meant going over areas you’ve already covered in a previous lesson but, with lesson capture, pupils can watch the video and get the repetition they need.

Even the most studious and attentive of pupils can sometimes find it difficult to maintain attention for a whole lesson; tiredness, weather, time of day, other pupils, etc. can all conspire against full attention. Hence, certain parts or key points of a lesson may be missed even by the most interested and academically inclined learner. Lesson capture affords all pupils an opportunity to catch parts and points they may have missed during the original lesson.

We all know that attendance is important for learning but there are times when attendance is not possible for a pupil; illness, bereavement and other family situations, can all lead to a pupil being absent from lessons for short or prolonged periods. As teachers, we know this can be frustrating but, with lesson capture, we can at least offer these pupils an improved opportunity to catch up on missed sessions.

As well as absence, we also have the issue of exclusion. Even though there may be justifiable reasons for a pupil being excluded, they still have a right to learn and, if they are on the school’s books then the school has an obligation to teach them. With lesson capture, the school has a way of presenting learning opportunities to excluded pupils, while still maintaining their exclusion. As an added benefit, when the pupil returns from exclusion, hopefully they may not have missed out on so much of their education.

So far I have spoken only of lesson capture as a way of enabling pupils to catch up on any learning they may have missed or which they need repeating. This aspect of lesson capture alone could have one important benefit for learners and their schools; increased learning. By overcoming lost learning, lesson capture could lead to better performance, test scores and exam grades for pupils. This may be particularly true for pupils with poor attention, numerous absences, or poor study skills. This is not to say that lesson capture is not also of benefit to the more capable pupil; it is, for it allows them to go over material several times as and when they feel the need, including for periods of revision.

Related articles

• You Know You’re a 21st Century Educator When … (7 signs) (dougwoods.co.uk)
• Almost 900 pupils suspended from school each day for violence (guardian.co.uk)
• Are schools putting kids off computers? (postgrad.com)

There was a post on the inaugural #ukedchat twitter debate posted by @JamesClay which read

“Before you answer how, you need to really answer and explain the why you should be using tech in education.”

Unfortunately, I was travelling home on a rather crowded train and was unable to fully follow the online debate but this post caught my attention and made me think;

“Do we really need to explain to teachers why they should be using technology in their lessons?”

I go into schools often and also meet other teachers on training sessions. I often meet teachers who do not use technology or who use it only a little. It is clear, though, that each of them know that they could and should be using technology or using it more. Quite often, these teachers will express their worries that they’re not using ICT and that they sometimes feel their class are missing out compared to pupils in a different class.

In reality, the ‘why’ teachers use educational technology is well established and accepted, even among those teachers who rarely or reluctantly use it. I don’t feel it would be very productive to continue ‘banging on’ about why teachers should use technology in their lessons; this message has already been received.

What may be lacking in some teachers is the knowledge of ‘what’ technology to use or ‘how’ it can be used. This may often be accompanied by a low level of confidence in using the technology and possibly poor experiences of trying to use it in the past. Where this is the case, we need to be able to provide training to enable the teachers to explore technology and to ‘play’ with it in order to develop their confidence and allow them to identify for themselves the ways in which they might use it in their teaching.

In terms of the ‘what’ to use, it may often be the case that teachers have had exposure to only a limited range of technology. This is sometimes the case where the technology is situated in a special room, such as a computer suite, and can only be accessed if ‘booked’ or scheduled on a timetable. This can be further compounded if the technology is seen as being the ‘property’ or domain of a particular person or department within the school.

I mentioned, in a previous paragraph, the need for training, for me, the word ‘training’ is not the best word to use. What we are talking about here is more professional skills development and peer collaboration. At least that is the way I try to approach teacher ‘training’ sessions. Training seems to imply that there is something you lack and, until you get it, you are not a full professional. This seems to be an almost negative and demoralising, maybe even patronising, approach which doesn’t really convey a positive, supportive and professional approach.

In my many years of working with teachers, I have consistently found that if you give them a piece of kit, or anything, and ask them how it could be used in a lesson, they will come up with 101 suggestions, most of which you will never even have thought of before. Let us not forget that these are teachers; they are intelligent people with lively curious minds who genuinely want to give the best for their learners.

Okay, so we have established that we no longer need to explain to teachers why they should be using technology in their lessons, it is the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ that needs to be tackled. I have also suggested that, in my opinion, changing our approach to training would be beneficial. The question still remains, though, as to ‘How can we get more teachers to use technology effectively in their teaching?’ which was the question posed at the beginning of the #ukedchat twitter debate.

a transcript of the #ukedchat twitter debate can be downloaded here

Related articles by Zemanta

• Top 100 Technology Blogs for Teachers (whiteboardblog.co.uk)
• 31 Days to Become a Better Ed Tech Leader: Are You REALLY an Ed Tech Leader (ictineducation.org)
• Outfitting 21st Century Classrooms with 21st Century Teachers (isteconnects.org)
• The Best Blogs for Tech Savvy Teachers (brighthub.com)
• Preparing Teachers for the Digital Future (microsoftontheissues.com)
• Technology Does Leave a Permanent Record (haroldshawjr.com)
• Educational Technology Quotes (slideshare.net)