1:1 Readiness Survey

CASTLE is partnering with Educational Collaborators to present a 1:1 readiness survey.  This survey helps districts thinking about implementing a 1:1 initiative determine their readiness for an implementation.  The assessment took me about 30 minutes to complete (they recommend 45), and it targets the following factors:

• Goals and Objectives
• Financial Planning
• Device Procurement & Deployment
• End User Support
• Curriculum Integration
• Marketing & Communication
• Faculty Development
• Infrastructure Development

 Educational Collaborators also offers a post-survey consultation based on the results, something that AEAs offer as well.  Educational Collaborators values this instrument as $600, so it being free is a good deal for interested districts.

Reflection on Eric Scheninger's Visit

Eric Scheninger (@NMHS_Principal), a frequent colleague and collaborator of Van Meter High School principal Deron Durflinger (and many others in Iowa), recently made a visit to Iowa State's CASTLE program and several central Iowa schools.  He liked what he saw.  Here's his reflection from his visit.  Definitely worth a read, since it gives us a view from outside of the work that is happening in the state.

A few of my thoughts:
• Eric is a proponent of constructivist education steeped in technology integration, so the benefits he saw are not surprising.  Still, it is reinforcing for Van Meter, South Hamilton, and United to hear that it is obvious to outside observers the enthusiasm and enjoyment with the learning process that their students have.

• The "parental-acceptance-curve" is a poignant observation that future Iowa 1:1 schools will grapple with... parents being a bit leery before roll-out.

• Obviously, Eric's visit was limited in time.  While it is one thing to observe creativity on display in student reactions and enthusiasm, it is another to quantify it against other schools.  The big question that remains is how students are achieving in 1:1 schools.  Are students actually learning more?  Is the constructivist theory of education bringing about higher gains, or is it a bunch of sound and fury?  If I'm a school weighing this decision, this question has to be at the center of my decision, and we need that data.  The data on higher attendance and fewer referrals are steps in the right direction.

• Eric hit the nail on the head with his observation about needing more professional development.  The AEAs were a bit blindsided by the explosion in 1:1 environments and are scrambling to catch up.  Most distressing to me: Over a majority of the AEA Ed Tech consultants who are training Iowa 1:1 teachers have never actually taught in a 1:1 classroom.  Good news, though.  The INTEL Elements courses will help provide system professional development in this area.

• One concern for me is that Eric highlighted certain student work--creating original music for their presentations, developing Wordles, putting in slide transitions, and using Paintbrush.  At first glance, I don't see how any of these actually lead to mastery of objectives.  They are the equivalence of making your posterboard look really pretty.  And undoubtedly, they are time-consuming, taking time away from student analysis, conversation, and direct focus on the end outcomes.  This is a chief criticism of technology integration by critics such as Dan Willingham, Robert Pondiscio or Jay Matthews, and something that our 1:1 schools need to be conscious of.

• One other bright spot in this reflection is Eric sees most teachers thriving in this type of teaching environment.  From my conversations with Deron and Van Meter superintendent John Carver, this is not always easy.  While it can appear schools like these 3 are fully embracing the mantle of change, there is a lot of background working with staff and community to help them with this second-order change.  Not every teacher was originally excited about the move to 1:1, so this shows the work that school leaders have put in.

Learning Online in a K-12 Setting

My presentation from the Iowa 1:1 Institute

Learning Online in K-12 Schools

View more presentations from Evan Abbey.

Learning Online in a K-12 Setting
Iowa 1:1 Institute - 4/07/10
Evan Abbey - AEA Project Manager for Online Learning

This presentation is aimed to build advocacy in school leaders for online learning, giving leaders discussion points and resources to have conversations in their home district.

Urgency: In his book Disrupting Class, Clayton Christensen boldly predicts that 50% of 9-12 courses will be online by 2019. And colleges are seeing unprecedented growth in online course enrollments. Never before have students had the economic market-based power over their education that they do now. They are not limited by geography or time restraints. And, the monopoly educators had over determining the format for learning in the school is coming to an end.

In the past, the "online learning" discussion in schools has revolved around whether online learning is as effective as face-to-face learning. Despite research affirming the effectiveness of online learning, the debate has slowed action to a standstill, both at the local and at the statewide level. The time for debate has passed. Students are taking online courses regardless of a person's viewpoint of their effectiveness. We must now look instead at the most effective way to teach online, and rapidly prepare our schools for this change.

Roadblocks:
1. Cost - Both in teacher time and in compensation
2. Misunderstanding of what online learning can be - Thinking online learning is like an NWEA test where you read a passage and take a multiple choice quiz repeatedly. Online learning is so much more, including forums, online collaboration, social networking, online portfolios, synchronous virtual classrooms, simulations, and even interactive gaming.
3. Iowa's Tradition - Iowa has a deep history of educational excellence. That is a good thing. But it also makes embracing change, especially in non-traditional formats, very difficult. Iowa's tradition has slowed down efforts and killed urgency more than anything else.
4. Resolve - To be fully honest, online learning can happen, regardless of the perceived roadblocks. This is the one that can kill it, however. If there isn't the resolve from a group of school leaders who are dedicated to seeing it happen, it will always be passed by more "pressing" issues of the day.

What You Need to Know:
1. There are several districts in Iowa that are currently developing online courses or are in plans to develop courses. Your efforts would not be alone in the state.
2. To help prepare the districts for teaching online, the AEAs have developed a module on Online Instructional Design. This module is designed to be a 45-hour (3-credit) course, facilitated locally in a district, where teachers collaborate face-to-face in learning teams, online in online communities, and individually as they build an online course. The topics in the module include
• Guiding Principles to Online Education
• Online Course Orientation, Policies, and Structure
• Objectives
• Assessment
• Instructional Strategies
• Resources, Teachnologies, and Copyright
• Online Facilitation
• Putting it all Together
3. The AEAs and several Urban school districts have teamed together to write an ARRA grant for online learning. This grant will provide funds for online content, courses, and professional development, all of which will build the capacity in the state to teach online. The efforts of the grant will work to build a statewide system of courses, shared between districts, available for 9-12 students.
4. There are other professional development offerings available right now. Here are 3 online license renewal/graduate credit courses in online pedagogy:
• Technology for Online Instruction: Moodle (2 credits - May 3-June 6)
• Technology for Online Instruction: Adobe Connect Pro (2 credits - June 21-July 26)
• Online Learning Instructional Design (2 credits - July 5-Aug 8)

Where to Start:
1. Become an Advocate. If you the school leader do not vouch for the importance of online learning, it will not happen
2. Have Conversations. Just like with starting a 1:1 initiative, moving a school to teach online takes many informal conversations before you can have formal ones. Visit with your most influential teachers, your technology personnel, your curriculum director.
3. Get connected. See Arlan & Evan's contact info below.
4. Get your early adopters going. The schools that are the most successful identify those 1-2 teachers who are willing to learn on their own and try something brand new. Get those teachers inspired and then get everything else out of the way. Piloting a successful course not only gives other teachers an example of how it can be done, it allows you to look for the logistical issues to offering online courses and it begins your marketing of your courses before you have large numbers.
5. Get informed. Many resources to read about effectiveness in online learning. It is not the same as face-to-face learning. Below are resources to get started.
6. Plug in. Have teachers take a course online to get a feel for how it works and see the benefits of learning in that manner. Connect with other schools and school leaders looking to use online learning. And start selling your vision to your local community, touting the benefits it will bring your community.
7. And now... Plan. Now its time to start looking at technical hardware and the logistics of setting up courses.

Resources and Information:
• Evan Abbey - AEA Project Manager for Online Learning - eabbey@aea11.k12.ia.us
• Arlan Thorson - School Liaison for Iowa Learning Online - athorson@iowalearningonline.org
• Power Point presentation
• Sloan Consortium 2008 Report on K-12 Online Learning
• Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies by U.S. Department of Education (2009)
• National Primer on K-12 Online Learning by North American Council for Online Learning (NACOL) (2007)
• Keeping Pace - an annual review of state-level policy and practice (2008)
• Changing Face of Education in Iowa - Evan's blog

Online Learning at the Iowa 1:1 Conference

This Wednesday, I will be presenting at the Iowa 1:1 conference from 1:30-2:30 on online learning. Here's the info:

Title: Teaching Online in a K-12 Setting
Description: For districts looking to incorporate online learning in their curriculum. Will overview current online learning initiatives in the state and information on planning, professional development, and technology support.

The session is geared for both administrators and would-be online instructors. We will discuss the Iowa ARRA grant which will provide resources and training for schools on online learning--something every administrator should know about. We will also look at how schools are using online learning in Iowa currently and at a plan to get your district started.

I will see you there!

Implementation & Technical Logistics for 1:1, part 2

As we looked at yesterday, there are several considerations for technology leadership when planning for a 1:1. Here are more thoughts from Pamela Livingston's 1:1 Learning - Laptop Programs That Work:

THE LEADER'S ROLE
Many leaders of 1:1 initiatives take a hands-off approach when it comes to technology. Bad idea. Yes, you might never know the ins and outs of technical maintenance, but you still play a major role in its success. It is important to set expectations.

For example, you will need to address the issue of the home internet connection. If students are taking school laptops home (and they should be for optimal learning), school boards and parents want reassurance that they will not be able to access inappropriate sites there either. Laptops can be set up with a proxy, which is a policy that routes all their internet traffic back through your filter.

Another expectation is the physical safety of the machines. Livingston mentioned that at Peck, they spent the money to purchase briefcase-like cases for protection. We used soft cases at Howard-Winneshiek, and while we never had any accidents with the machines going home, I was always nervous about it. An orientation on how to carry your computer and lock it up is also a must-do strategy, best done in the roll-out orientation (which we'll look at in a later post).

Which leads us to insurance. There are several different approaches to how to pay for damages, and damages will happen. You will want to visit with your insurance company right away. This could be the first they have ever dealt with a school 1:1 program. Several Iowa schools set up insurance policies that parents would pay somewhere between $25-50 for the year, and then pay a $100 deductible if the machines were damaged. This minimized expenses for the district. Some other districts had the plan be voluntary (parents could opt to cover this under their own insurance).

Insurance is important not only for damage, but also for theft. Just like with damage, all machines should have preventative physical measures like identification tags and safe storage locations, as well as proactive human measures, like the aforementioned walk-throughs and spot checks.

EXPECTATIONS FOR TECHNOLOGY STAFF
If leaders do not have expectations for technology staff, there will be problems. That's not to say that technology staff won't have their own, even higher expectations for their work. In many cases they will. But good district leaders will be proactive here as well.

One general expectation is the access vs. security continuum. When it comes to school IT staff, they will fall somewhere in the spectrum of "as much possible access for teachers and students to technology for learning" to "as controlled of an environment as possible so that students, staff, equipment, and the district are safe". And, these butt heads all the time. Do you block Youtube? Do you allow teachers to install their own programs? Do you require a network password for visitors, and who gets to know the password?

There are pros and cons to both sides of the spectrum from a technology standpoint. But from an administrative or curricular standpoint, I was firmly in the "access" side. I wanted teachers to have the ability to find and use new resources and tools without feeling like they had to jump through hoops and wait for me. For technology staff that have never been in the classroom, they do not realize how spontaneous and changing classroom choices are, and nothing is more discouraging to a teacher than spending many late hours planning a great lesson only to find out the next day that the site is blocked and it is a 2-week process to get it unblocked.

Livingston's school took the same, anti-lockdown approach. And, this was second-order change for the tech staff. But that change in philosophy happened at the earliest of stages, before serious conversations with the staff at large and the community were taking place.

Another expectation is no down-time, as we mentioned yesterday. Again, talk with technology staff about the importance for students to have access to the computers and the internet. Determine what the expectation would be for different scenarios. At Howard-Winneshiek, my expectation was that I would have the teacher or student a working computer within 24 hours, whether fixed or loaner. With more help staff, that number could be cut down to 2 hours. Now, I will admit there were occasions when I missed the expectation (and there will be that in your district as well), but I communicated with the teacher/student beforehand so that they knew. Having that expectation made sure no-one was left in the dark, and also allowed for objective evaluation of my work.

Have an expectation for login time as well. If it takes more than 2 minutes from when a person pushed the on button to when they are ready to work on the computer, that is lost instructional time. Other items, like minor technical support (the computer is working, but a program has a glitch) or instructional support (how do I...?) are areas to discuss as well. This is a chance for technical staff to voice their thoughts and have an important say.

WHAT ABOUT HOME INTERNET ACCESS?
One last item mentioned in Livingston's book that is a huge fear for would-be districts, what about students without home internet access?

Internet access outside of school hours is a non-negotiable; students will have to have it. But this issue should be one you can plan for. Here is how I tackle this conversation.

First, what does your data tell you? How many have access at home? Don't just say "we have 31% free-reduced lunch...". That number is not the same as who has home internet access. Many times, the answer is... we don't know. Surveying your home families, be it through conferences or registration, is valuable data collection. Many districts found that they had over 85% with home access, which meant that they were targeting less than 15% of the population.

Next, find alternatives. You might have some common areas where students can stay after school, be it near the gym or by the office. Also, the community library is an option.

Then, ask students what they would do. Jeff Dicks at Newell-Fonda said when asked about this question by other superintendents, "To be honest, it hasn't been an issue. Our students were resourceful enough to find the hotspots if they needed them. We've had students who have sat in the parking lot to access files on a Sunday, and it hasn't been a problem for them." And, this is in Newell, Iowa, where Panera's and Starbucks have not yet arrived. Not promoting illegal hotspot squatting, but students can find appropriate places to get on the internet in many cases.

Implementation & Technical Logistics for 1:1

More from Livingston's 1:1 Learning - Laptop Programs That Work:

Schools tend to have a disproportionate anxiety about the technical aspect of going 1:1. That is to say, they tend to overemphasize the technical side in their planning (in most cases), or completely underemphasize it. It is important to not concentrate all your thoughts on the machines when professional development, community involvement, and changing pedagogy are all equally important. But if you are a district that thinks going 1:1 is not a big deal, Livingston says "think again."

Before looking at some of the logistics mentioned by Pamela Livingston, I'll point out 2 critical steps leaders do in this area.

1. They involve technology leadership, even hesitant technology leadership, from the very beginning, and network them to technology leadership from other successful 1:1 schools. Their advocacy for the initiative is paramount.
2. They communicate early and often that there will be technological glitches during roll-out... and that's okay. We will deal with the setbacks and learn from our mistakes and be better for it. The earlier this is communicated, the less pressure there is on everyone involved. This is, after all, new learning for everyone involved, and new learning doesn't always thrive in a high-stakes environment.

THINGS TO CONSIDER
As we mentioned in past posts, the platform (i.e. whether Mac or PC) is only a small piece of the technological considerations. The best way to make an informed decision about the platform without consuming all your time is to talk to some current 1:1 districts, ask them how they chose their platform, how it is working, and whether they would choose it again.

In addition to the platform, here are the other critical technological considerations:

• Bandwidth - the demand for access to the internet will jump with ubiquitous computing and different pedagogy. It is very important to get this right. With e-rate being a large factor, you will need to consider this first, since the e-rate calendar starts in December.
• Network Storage - Ubiquitous computing will need more storage space on the server. One question is whether computers will have a home directory, which is when a person's files (and maybe even applications) reside on the server. If so, the setup of the authentication and home directories is a major undertaking for the technical staff. Best to develop that system before the laptops arrive.
• Backup - Even if you choose not to use a home directory, you will still need server space in the form of a backup. But given the recent disasters and flooding, backup off site is essential as well. Consider that with ubiquitous computing, most of your learning is digitized, and therefore, protect your learning accordingly. If you do not have a backup & disaster recovery plan in place, do so before the purchasing of equipment.
• Protection - Laptops bring about more computer usage, so a consideration is the right firewall and virus protection. Firewalls have gotten much more sophisticated in recent years, which can setup an "allow but monitor" policy with categories that are more grey. Some 1:1 districts have used that, and given parents access to see what sites their students are browsing to. Another item to consider is a remote monitoring feature that allows the technological administrator to see what students are doing on computers at any particular time. I've used Apple's Remote Desktop for years, and it works very well. The knowledge that I have it keeps most students honest, and even better, it allows me to fix student technology problems without driving over to their classroom.
• Automation - Thinking systemically, having that many computers will dictate needing automatic processes. Imaging your laptops is a must (most 1:1 schools re-image them each summer). Also consider the policy for updating computers throughout the year.
• Email - Student email was once a necessity in a 1:1 setup for a variety of different reasons. It still is important today, but with many districts looking to setup Google Docs accounts for every student, they use gmail domains for the email setup.
• Charging - Laptops "should" make it the day without needing to be re-charged. That is dependent on 1) students remembering to charge the computers before they arrived, and 2) the battery capacity maintaining itself. Don't count on either of these. Think about how to handle charging in a classroom, be it charging stations, extra outlets, or a table on the side.
  

With all of these considerations, don't hesitate to ask for help. You should ask both your computer provider and your AEA on these to compare answers (many providers are very honest, but there have been schools buying too many wireless access points because they didn't get a 2nd opinion). And, surveying other 1:1 schools is well worth the effort.

PECK'S TIMELINE
At Livingston's school, they followed this general timeline:

• April/May - Order new computers, take care of warranty issues, hire any part-time summer staff for imaging/updating work
• June - Collect computers, order replacement computers, order new cases
• July/Aug - Re-image the computers (& image new computers), take care of updates, create network accounts for new students and staff, assign machines, prepare for fall pickup and orientation.
• Year-round - Remind students of appropriate care, including the acceptable use policy. This was done through many walk-throughs and classroom visits by technology staff, as well as other proactive measures. Some schools have had "laptop patrol", where the technician hands out rewards for spotted appropriate use between classes or in common areas. This can be part of the school's Positive Behavior Supports initiative.

One tip that Livingston said repeatedly, have loaners and spare parts available. In 1:1 more so than in a regular school, down-time is not tolerated. Laptops literally are students' access to the curriculum.

There are many more features of technology leadership that are important, of course. Fitting a wide-spread initiative like 1:1 into an existing framework is not an easy task. Plus there will be specific application support that a district will want. But, technology leadership is only part of the equation. District leadership is just as important in terms of technical logistics, even if the principal is not a computer expert. We'll examine how this is so tomorrow.

Professional Development for a 1:1 Implementation

More thoughts and insights about Pamela Livingston's book

Professional development is, just as with anything, an absolute necessity for success. Livingston states it must be "iterative, sustained, and understood by all to be a priority." Livingston's phrase "understood by all" cannot be understated here. Some leaders go into a 1:1 initiative with a good sense of the professional development needs of the staff, but fail to communicate and reassure those needs to the staff.

This professional development needs to be in many layers, and these layers vary in terms of formality and timeliness. There must be a formal "boot camp" layer of training prior to the start of implementation on how to design instructions and assessment, utilizing digital tools in a 1:1 environment. That should continue throughout each year's implementation, as with the whole staff, you look at how to implement digital tools.

Informally, sessions like "Tech Tuesdays", where teachers are allowed to show up to discuss a technique, tool, or a "how do you teach this...?", lets teachers receive hands-on training. A similar informal session could be teacher poster sessions, where they showcase some of the things they are doing in their classroom. This could be enhanced by creating some virtual communities. Some schools in Iowa have done this through collaborative Nings, which focus inwards and build strong communities of learners. Some have used Twitter to tap into the larger world-wide community. Summarizing it succinctly, professional development should spend most of its time in the stage of "coaching and feedback".

Professional development should also include the leaders as well. Livingston recommends the building principal going beyond an open-door policy to setting up a table outside the teacher's lounge to make herself available to other teachers. Technology coordinators have informal drop-ins to see teaching in action. These will give leaders a much better ideas of the actual things that teachers need help with.

STARTING QUESTIONS:
There are some critical questions a district should ask itself regarding professional development:

1. How do we build buy-in for intensive professional development?
2. When, how, and how often do we conduct professional development?
3. Who leads... early adopters, outside consultants?
4. Who evaluates effectiveness and fidelity of teachers' implementation?
5. What is the cost, and the funding for professional development (including compensation and substitutes)
6. How and when is follow-up completed?

OTHER TIPS:
These questions are a good place to start. For schools starting out, Livingston recommend several other tips:

• Give laptops to teachers before students. A full year has worked well in many districts. Spending 1 semester creating common goals with the staff and then the next semester individualizing around how to integrate 1:1 in a teacher's classroom is a typical time length.

• One idea that has worked well for reducing teacher anxiety is to create a tech-savvy student cadre. This group of students can work with teachers individually during that year of preparation easier than a few tech experts in a school can.

• Keep in mind that classroom management in a 1:1 world will provide as much anxiety as tech issues. What happens when students access iTunes? How do you keep them from plagiarizing? Gather a list of concerns and then allow a panel of experts to respond to those questions.

• Teacher-led professional development sessions, especially poster-board sessions, can be recorded and shared with the community as well.

• Be sure to provide teachers with meaningful examples. Being too theoretical in technology integration, or even saying "you could do this, this, and this with this tool" isn't going to get the job done. Find actual examples of how teachers are using technology, in your school or elsewhere. And, avoid too much correspondence with paper and emails. A page of "good links" might be a good intention, but it will not be used.

• Make sure you respect the adult learning curve. Not every teacher will become a master technology user. Be sure to reach out to those not on board right away and listen to their concerns. Use those concerns for planning. Keep in mind that adult learners 1) are self-directed, 2) want to know the objectives up front, 3) need time to reflect, 4) need relevancy, and 5) need time to collaborate with others, for they have a wealth of knowledge to share with others, and sharing their knowledge with others makes them feel more comfortable and competent in areas of new learning.

• And, be sure to collect good data on the effectiveness of implementation. Teacher attitude surveys should be repeated periodically to keep a pulse on how things are going. Just like student achievement data, be sure to do assessment for several years, as there often is a honeymoon period with implementation.

OTHER POSTS RELATED TO 1:1 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Technology Professional Development: Do this, not this
Determining the Purpose before Integrating Technology
5 Frequent Problems with Technology Professional Development
Things my Ed Tech Consultant forgot to tell me

Professional Development Opportunity: Drawing Your Network
Professional Development Opportunity: Exploring Wikis
Professional Development Opportunity: Subscribing to Blogs

Planning for a 1:1 Initiative

More from Livingston's 1:1 Learning - Laptop Programs That Work:

Planning for a 1:1 initiative is obviously critical, but it is complex as well. Livingston uses the phrase "not driven by nuts and bolts, but a vision of what to accomplish." Which is well said. Often schools become too focused on which type of computer and applications instead of the reason why you are going 1:1 in the first place.

Planning starts with a committee, and the committee must have a strong leader. The leader is one who is passionate about the move, dedicated to see it work effectively even if that means she will be doing the heavy lifting herself, and most importantly have the trust of the teachers. In the schools Livingston highlights in the book, that leader has always had one foot in education and one foot in technology. The lack of a strong leader (at least one dedicated to a 1:1 initiative) will be what keeps most schools from making the leap.

Next, the committee should be determined. Many schools make the mistake of putting only the tech-savvy go-getters on this committee. The committee should see representation from all viewpoints, with the possible exception of outright naysayers. One school included a teacher near retirement on the committee. She wasn't objecting to the movement, but she did raise concerns, such as "You're asking teachers to have students save their work on the server. I don't know how to do that." Having that voice on the committee allowed the committee to make sure it addressed those concerns, and it gained a lot more credence during conversations with the whole staff. And in addition to teachers, the committee should have representation from parents, community members, and most importantly, students as well. Whatever the committee is, it should not be the old tech committee.

Livingston mentions the committee will meet "to provide vision, formulate, decide, detail, market, implement, oversee, and assess." Everything the committee plans or discusses should be documented.

After the committee is created and starts their discussion, the next critical step is to survey other 1:1 schools. Livingston recommended one way of defusing the anxiety over which computer to choose is to ask current 1:1 districts a) why they chose their platform, and b) would they do it again.

Livingston's book goes into good detail about each of the next steps in planning, which we'll look at more in future posts:

• Professional Development
• Implementation Logistics
• Pedagogical Theory
• Classroom Management & Policies
• Communication with the Public

Some other items for the committee to consider:

• Keep in mind the educational age and SES of the students who will receive the laptops. One of the most common questions is whether students would have internet access outside of school, a must to fully tap the potential of a 1:1 environment.
• Think about how technology integration has worked or not worked in the past. Those mistakes will be magnified when every student has a laptop.
• Consider how other change initiatives were addressed, and why they were successful or not.

Two Good Reasons to Go 1:1

From the introduction of Livingston's 1:1 Learning - Laptop Programs That Work:

Because we've long known that students need to work at their own pace and in their own way, both school and at home, no one expects students to stand in line or adhere to a schedule for using technologies such as books, pencils, or calculators. However, that's precisely what we've asking them to do with computers."
- Mark Weiser

How effective is a classroom set of textbooks, that students couldn't take home or to study hall to read? That had to remain in the room so that the next class could use the same resources? It isn't, other than to save money. It interrupts the learning process so much, we can't call it a learning process anymore. Leaving the books behind would be a workflow.

We have no problem making sure we are 1:1 with textbooks (in all subject areas, nonetheless), but isn't it just as absurd to leave the access to computers behind?

We need to get past the fear factor that is associated with the web, and I'm not just talking about the safety issue. We're scared of bad information and that children will plagiarize and cheat and that people will lead them astray, and so our reaction is to block it all. That doesn't protect them. It makes them less safe and more ignorant."
- Will Richardson.

Our world in now open to our students; through the portal of the internet, they can connect to people around the globe to learn from and share with. Never before have we had this learning potential before. And yet, we use fear of the world as a reason to shield them from technology. What favors are we doing them? If we don't give them ubiquitous access--if by denying them access, we deny them the opportunity to learn--then we aren't doing everything we can to help them.

1:1 Learning - Laptop Programs That Work

I mentioned one of the best resources we have on 1:1 computing is a book in our professional library by Pamela Livingston. Pamela Livingston, who has served in many technology roles both in schools and the private sector, was the technology coordinator of the Peck School in Morristown, NJ, one of the first school districts to roll out a 1:1 initiative.

Livingston puts together not only her experience, but also the existing research and experiences of other pioneering schools, and statewide initiatives. I'll highlight some of my favorite sections of the book in some upcoming posts.

AN OVERVIEW OF THE BOOK
Section 1 gives a narrative of the process Peck used to roll it out, from idea, to common vision, to logistics and budgeting, to implementation, and then to evaluation. She also compares it to the work in San Francisco's Urban school, St. Louis' Whitfield school, Denver School of Science and Technology, Henrico County (VA)'s initiative, and the statewide middle school initiative in Maine.

Section 2 gives more details on the aspects of leadership. Specifically, it shows what worked and what did not with planning, professional development, and implementation logistics.

And section 3 delves into the teaching pedagogical differences that ubiquitous computing affords a school. Livingston does a nice job of touching on the differences in learning theory and some important aspects to remember about use of web 2.0 tools. She also provides a model lesson and classroom management advice.

Finally, there are excellent resources in the appendices, including Peck's sample policies, a collection of FAQs from students, current research and resources, as well as a scenario-starter for how you would implement different technologies into language arts, math, science, and social studies classes.

By the way, Livingston also guest blogs on the 1:1 blog run by CASTLE.

Heartland AEA 1:1 Resources

I am at the Heartland area superintendents' monthly meeting this morning, where there will be a large focus on 1:1 schools and the process involved. Van Meter's superintendent John Carver and high school principal Deron Durflinger will be presenting about their district's initiative, and later Jeff Dicks, superintendent from Newell-Fonda, will be discussing some of the growing pains involved with a district going 1:1.

For those in the Heartland area, or in Iowa for that matter, here is a quick look at the best resources we offer for schools looking to go 1:1.

• 1to1schools.org is a blog coordinated by Scott McLeod, director of Iowa State's CASTLE institute
• CASTLE is partnering with the AEAs to put a wiki of information on the 1:1 process
• On that wiki, there is a listing of other 1:1 schools in Iowa with contact information
• Also on that wiki is some information about the upcoming spring conference for Iowa 1:1 schools
• The Digital Curriculum (pdf) is a framework for how to teach with ubiquitous access
• From our professional library, Pamela Livingston's 1-to-1 Learning: Laptop Programs that Work (2nd edition) is a must read, detailing not only the necessary steps for schools, but also highlighting some of the pioneers in 1:1 use.
• SAI is in its second year of offering leadership training in transitioning schools to the 21st century. Heartland also offers leadership training in the form of an online course/community on how to lead schools in a 21st century tech-infused school.
  

Those interested in knowing more about 1:1 implementation, access and integration are encouraged to visit with either me or one of Heartland's educational technology consultants, Denise Krefting, Toy Waterman, Steve Linduska, or Wade Andersen.

Google Chrome OS

Google has announced that it plans to release an open source operating system over the course of the next year (and would be available for people to install on their netbooks in the second half of 2010).

This is significant for Iowa educators for several reasons, not the least of which being that with the Google Data Center coming to Council Bluffs, there is potential for greater partnerships and grants for Iowa schools. First, it further signifies Google's desire to be the computing solution for everything. Forward-thinking would be for Iowa schools to look beyond Microsoft products to Google as "software students need to know for the workplace".

Even more important, open source technology has been the mythical answer to the problem of high costs. Schools that have been reluctant to purchase computers that have a $1000+ price tag wouldn't be as resistant if the price was $200. But while advances in netbook technology get us very close to that reality, there is a lot of resistance to venturing into open source software. To install free linux on your school's netbooks would save the district substantial money, but it takes quite a bit of expertise in linux to overcome the lack of software support.

That perhaps changes with Google. It remains to be seen how much support Google would offer in terms of automatic updates and security patches and such, but this will get more than one technology coordinator in the state to rethink the possibilities of open source.

And finally, there is Google's message that all applications on the OS will be web-based, thus running on every possible platform out there. We've seen the movement to web-based software, be it blogging or wikis or Google Docs for some time now, but while I'm not sure everyone will be switching over to Chrome OS in the next 5 years, this can't help but accelerate the movement to web-based software.

The end result? Software could get cheaper for schools. Drastically. And soon.

One more reason to stoke the 1:1 conversations.

Burning Questions a School Board Has About 1:1

I've had the opportunity to visit with a handful of board members from several school districts thinking about going to a 1:1 environment. Very similar questions that they have. Here's the list of what I've experienced, often in the order they come:

• Let me see it work
• How do we pay for it?
• Why do we need 1:1 instead of just "a lot of computers"?
• What type of additional staffing would we need?
• What is the pros and cons of the different equipment out there (Macs, Windows, Netbooks, etc.)?
• Show me what some lessons would look like for my own kids
• How do we insure the computers?
• How do we keep kids safe (even away from school)?
• What type of training are our teachers going to need to use this effectively?
• What free software is out there?
• Network me with other districts doing this so that I can learn what they would have done differently

As a potential 1:1 school, this is where the lead team needs to be planning, not just for the sake of "getting it past the board", but because these are the questions the community will have. Some are obvious. But there are several things that stand out to me. They want to see it in action, and if they see it, they become believers (especially if it is with their own children). So, administrators that take board members with them to visits of other 1:1 districts are much more successful of moving forward from their own initiative.

Insurance is a critical step to cover, as are policies (which doesn't get asked about as much). But very poignant, each member I talked to asked the safety question. In fact, it was a potential deal-breaker for one district. There had to be a way to filter the internet, even at home, on the school computers. Luckily for the district, the computers were set up with two internet settings, one that worked in school, and one that worked outside of school with a proxy setting, which routed all internet requests through the school's filter before going out to the internet.

Laptops as School Supplies

With several schools in Iowa looking at going 1:1, many are encountering the question of expense. Jim Klein poses an excellent question, when do laptops become school supplies?

Think about this for a second. In many schools, we require students to have TI-## graphing calculators, notebooks, dictionaries, and many other supplies that can add up in cost. How about purchasing a $300-$400 netbook that can easily last 3-4 years? In some families, the kids already have laptops, and for others, they would be able to rent from the school for a reduced price.

With the learning power that comes with the computer, it is far more instrumental a tool than all the other school supplies a student could purchase, to be dynamically used in all curricular areas, transforming their education. Where else could you get that potential of a difference for $100 a year?

And with primary cost out of the hands of the school, now the only thing that stands in its way is the school's willingness to handle a multi-platform environment. Which, shouldn't stand in the way of a school taking their curriculum into the 21st century.

Klein comments on the feasibility of this:

The trick, of course, will be achieving critical mass of parent supplied netbooks. 60% probably isn't enough, unless the district has the wherewithal to provide enough backup equipment to accommodate the other 40%. But, if the parents provide 70-80%, and those who don't are provided with equipment to use at school and all the software for use at home, have we achieved our goal? When do the laptops become school supplies? If we no longer have to teach students how to use the laptops themselves, no longer have the burden of providing significant support for them or training on how to use them, and we make sure all of the tools are free and easily accessible no matter what device the student uses, does the laptop suddenly become like a calculator? One of many means to an end?

Interesting food for thought.

Program Evaluation of 1:1 Environments

More food for thought from the day at Newell-Fonda...

At a couple different times during the day, one member asked a good question: what is the impact of the 1:1 on student achievement. The Newell-Fonda district, of course can't answer that quantitatively, being that they just started implementation at the beginning of the year. And while teachers indicated they saw improvement in student's performance in their own courses, critics could counter by arguing that's subjective data from a partial source.

Leaving Newell, I had a conversation with Steve Linduska, a colleague of mine at Heartland. One of the things we discussed is the interesting dynamic of a 1:1. You have an empassioned district (and in this case, partnering with an empassioned vendor, Apple). And at this district, the superintendent is also the high school principal, and probably has half a dozen other hats, like curriculum, public relations, school finance, and running the scoreboard at athletic events. Simply put, you don't have someone who can take an objective look at whether it is working, because they are too involved.

But as Steve pointed out, that's just half the dynamic. The other half is how this would be measured, which in Iowa, has been resoundedly via ITEDs. But, the benefits of a 1:1 do not appear solely (or I'd suggest even primarily) in ITEDs. What about visual literacy? Creativity? Synthesization? Presentational skills? Adaptability and problem solving? Not bubble friendly.

Mark Pullen put this well:

I think one of the biggest unspoken messages that No Child Left Behind has sent to teachers and students across the country is this: If something can’t be easily benchmarked, it isn’t worth teaching or learning.

The trouble is that most of the things that really matter in education (and life) aren’t benchmarkable.

Jeff Dicks, the Newell Superintendent, hit on that as well, as he replied that a junior in his school had suddenly taken a career interest in information technology, which doesn't appear in a bubble sheet.

Yet, it is essential that we do evaluate our programs to know if they are working, and do so objectively, authentically. I'd edit Pullen's last statement to say "The trouble is most of the things that really matter in education aren't easily benchmarkable". They still must be measured. What are assessments we can create that measure this reliably? This is more than just Newell-Fonda's task, it is Iowa's (and the nation's).

Newell-Fonda - 1:1

Today, I had the chance to visit Newell-Fonda High School in Newell, Iowa. Superintendent Jeff Dicks and Technology Director Tim Limbert were very generous in showing a group of educators their 1:1 initiative in action.

Newell-Fonda is a small, class-A school with a graduating class of 34 this year. The building itself is typical of what you would see in small rural districts, an older construction with many asymmetrical expansions.

But, their classroom instruction is anything but typical. With each high school student possessing a Macbook, they have several features of a digital curriculum taking place.

The interesting part of the story is the speed of adoption. Dicks mentioned it started with a call from Apple last January, and within 3 months, the superintendent, the tech team, the teachers, and the school board all got on board. In addition to adding Limbert's position, they agreed to a $64,000/year lease, which is quite a considerable investment for a small district.

Yet, you cannot deny it has transformed the school. There wasn't a student I visited with who didn't think that the program a) made them like school more, and b) had a positive impact on their learning. Classes were using a variety of instructional strategies, be it digital storytelling with the iLife suite, Geogebra and spreadsheets in math, Sketchup for computer-aided design, or an eBoard for posting assignments.

Several points made by Dicks and Limbert during the presentation jumped out at me:

• They held deployment (=handing the computers to the students) a week before school started to familiarize students with them. One parent had to attend the deployment.

• In many households, this was the family computer.

• On several occasions, they mentioned that students played games, and that was okay. As advice, Dicks said a district would have to reconcile themselves with that fact before they should go ahead with a 1:1.

• The key, they mentioned, was four days of Apple training that the staff had. Of course, Alan Hansen from Apple countered by saying that the key was the strong leadership the school had.

• They worked with a local insurance agency to develop a plan where families would pay $35 voluntarily and then have a $100 deductible on any damage (which was important because they had some broken screens the first week).

• Discipline referrals had been cut almost in half from the previous year.

• Students were not only allowed, but encouraged to use iTunes. When students built their own music libraries on the computer, they built a sense of ownership of the machine, which mant they took better care of it.

• Limbert had organized a "student tech team" to help troubleshoot computer issues... a first-line of defense.

Now, they still have some room for improvement, but the amount/depth of integration I saw today was way ahead of where I'd expect teachers 5 months into the adoption to be. They, like Central City, have the advantage of being a small district, which makes deployment easier. And, they have a very supportive board who sees the changing needs the 21st century brings.

My favorite part of the day had more to do with the issue of technology leadership than it did with a 1:1. Limbert shared this story (twice) with the group. When he was hired, Dicks said to him that his top priority was not to make sure the computers were fixed or the network was working. It was instead to make sure the teachers weren't frustrated. Words every superintendent should share with their technology coordinators, and every technology coordinator should live by.

Cloud Computing and the G-Drive

If you are a district thinking about 1:1 computer usage and are considering netbooks, then you will quickly become familiar with the term cloud computing. In brief, it means having files and resources shared over the network, allowing more capabilities and requiring less of the user's workstation.

The way things are changing, hard drives in computers may become obsolete, if not severely less important. Fast internet connections make online storage retrieval as quick as hard drive storage retrieval. Web 2.0 technologies have made it possible for files to be saved on other servers already. Now, Google is planning on releasing a G-drive, which would be a large amount of online storage capable of holding more than your entire hard drive (think: huge media files such as movies and music). And in keeping with Google's past history of innovation, the G-drive might have new functions that greatly enhance your productivity, just as Google Reader, Google Docs, and GMail have done.

What is the impact? If districts take into consideration this when planning, they can take the money saved from purchasing netbooks over notebooks and invest that into a faster connection for more users. As technology advances, the district will have invested wisely, looking towards the future.

New Technology High Schools

For those who are involved with their district's Iowa Core leadership teams, you are familiar with the New Technology High Schools, if not by name, then by sight. They are the high schools that are featured in the video clips that illustrate the pedagogy favored in the Iowa Core. Those who attended the High School Summit not only saw several clips during the 21st Century Skills session, but also heard first-hand accounts from Judy Jeffrey, as she visited a school in Texas that made an impact on her.

The schools may have several advantages that districts in Iowa can't afford. They have access to state-of-the-art technology, they maintain small class sizes, and they have the ability to refuse registration. Talk to your local principal if you think these are small details.

Still, the teaching that exists in the video clips is different than teaching in Iowa. A lot different. And it is easy to see why there is buzz amongst progressives and change agents in Iowa, myself included. You can see learning happen, you can see students wanting to be there and learning in an authentic environment.

On one of the handouts from Napa New Technology High School's website, they structure this difference in 5 areas:

SMALL LEARNING COMMUNITY vs. LARGE FACTORY MODEL
By keeping class sizes small, the school not only can personalize education so much easier, but they can make cross-curricular integration not only the rule instead of the exception, but invisible as well. There is no surprise to find out that you will be working on a project with the math teacher and English teacher together.

Many of our schools are relegated to the factory model, somewhat because of limited resources, but probably more so out of tradition. Curriculum is standardized and tracked.

PERSONALIZED ENVIRONMENT vs. ORDER THROUGH DISCIPLINE
No bells or hall passes at the New Technology High Schools. As a principal, I cannot say how much fruitless time I spent hunting down students because they were in the hallways, not fitting in to our model of how they should regulate themselves (no urinating unless it is in this 2-minute window). The key concept here is that the New Technology High School empowers the student to learn self-management.

AUTHENTIC LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT vs. MEMORIZATION OF FACTS
Surprise! I like this too.

These schools have made the jump away from "compartmentalized, unrelated, short-term experiences". And scantrons.

LEADERSHIP EMPOWERMENT vs. TEACHER LED LESSONS
Speaking about empowerment, through the use of project-based learning, the New Technology High Schools put the students in charge of their learning. But, they do it well. I've seen several projects in our schools which have become exercises in tri-fold poster displays... these do not develop any worthwhile long-lasting skill, let alone leadership. The NHTS schools have much more thoroughly crafted projects for students to tackle.

Just a quick example. In one of the videos, students are creating presentations that they will share with the community, and will face the working world's scrutiny. That in itself is an authentic project for an authentic audience. But what's more, students were not given a lesson on how to properly make footnotes and citations, even though they were expected to do so. A student had to request a "work session" where they would ask questions of the instructor and the instructor would answer them. This work session was optional... about half the class attended the one I viewed. Students who already knew the material didn't have to attend (and be bored from pointless review).

Who determines what the student needs to know but doesn't know? The student. That's empowerment.

COLLABORATION, COMMUNICATION and INTEGRATION vs. REMEDIATION and INSTRUCTION
You might be wondering where the "technology" comes into their name. Key for them is a 1:1 setup, giving "access to workplace tools". But, it isn't the tools themselves. It is the fact that the tools give them the ability to do meaningful learning. Collaborative learning. Learning that gets away from some simple "web research, typing reports, and solving basic math equations", which you might see considered as "integration" in other schools.

I do see the smaller schools as important to the flexibility needed for this type of school to flourish. Ironically, with our current budget situation, we'll have fresh calls for more consolidations. Perhaps we need to look at schools within school models to make these smaller learning communities.

Mac netbook in the works?

Rumors are swirling about a Mac netbook being available. Netbooks, slimmed down laptops ideal for 1:1 projects that emphasize web 2.0 technology and cloud computing, can cost about half the price of regular laptops. At this point, it is all speculation, but some are suggesting a Mac netbook could hit the market for $599.

For districts who are married to Apple products, you should proceed cautiously. The $600 price tag might be tempting. However, these won't be full-featured Macs running iLife like we are used to. In fact, they might not be any different than the serviceable netbooks that are already out there from Dell and other brands that can cost around $400.

On the other hand, Apple is innovative with everything it does... look at what it did with cell phones. There's no telling what other features could come with it.

If Apple indeed is introducing a netbook (and I'm highly skeptical), one prediction I have is it will suddenly draw the interest of many school districts into 1:1 initiatives. The timing would be ideal for Iowa to look at a comprehensive movement to help districts teach effectively in that environment.

2020 Vision

We have 12 short years to the year 2020, a year that serves as more than a play on words with a future vision. In 2020, our current first graders, including my son, will be we graduating. We will be starting to see a new generation to enter our schools (post-"Net Generation"). We will be far enough removed from the end of NCLB to look back and fully assess its worth. And given the rate at which information and technology is expanding, a personal computer will begin to have the knowledge capacity of a human brain.

There are some things we can safely predict about the year 2020 in Iowa. Higher percentages of our students will be living in the Urban 8, meaning we'll likely have fewer total districts, requiring more distance learning opportunities. Quite a few of the top jobs in demand in that year don't exist today. And, those jobs will rely on the blending of technological advances with the advances in other seemingly limitless fields, like genetics or nuclear physics.

It goes without saying that the needs of students are changing; contrary to what you see in your local classroom, we aren't preparing students for the industrial age anymore. There are no longer set answers, set skills to master in order to be employable, like there was in work places of the past. Set patterns, answers, and skills can be learned by computers who can perform more and more of those tasks. Replacing it are those things that are not set, the solving of unclear problems and the mastery of soft skills, of consensus-building and relationship forming, and most importantly of teamwork and leadership. These are the mysterious "21st century skills" that the Iowa Core is emphasizing, in addition to math, reading, science, and social studies.

THE IOWA CORE: PART OF THE SOLUTION

There is still much work to be done on the state's vision of what those 21st century skills look like, how they are best implemented in the classroom. The Iowa Core is, after all, a curriculum, a system of standards, benchmarks, and indicators to be achieved. It is not a pedagogy of instruction, and although Iowa Core training for district leadership teams right now are emphasizing work such as Balanced Leadership and Instructional Decision Making, there is still a lot left open to individual districts, which is both good and bad.

I am very encouraged by the work on the Iowa Core and its call to ramp up the instruction, but a new set of standards and more push for the bevy of instructional initiatives alone won't get us there. In spite of where we are heading right now, we need more. We need more if we are going to meet our vision of providing a world-class education to all of our students so they can compete in the global economy.

THE PLAN WE NEED:

Enter Scott McLeod's plan for the 21st century learning system. I've included the graphic below:
Scott identifies 6 categories in order to create an educational world that mimics the world students will be competing in, not in the industrial age, but in the network age.

• Curriculum that supports 21st century skills- Which, is the attempt of the Iowa Core. Iowa is in a unique situation. Great change will be coming through state legislative mandate, and it will have an effect, just as NCLB did. Hopefully, the effect will be a positive one on instruction. But, I will judge the value of the Iowa Core Curriculum by its ability to bring about the Digital Curriculum.

• P-20 coordination and articulation- Because while the world has shifted to make college a necessity to compete, the educational system hasn't shifted nearly as much. There is still a communication divide between K-12 and 13-20.

• A computerized device in every student's hand- You know how I feel about this.

• Robust statewide online learning infrastructure- Ditto

• Broadband access for all those computers- Or else, the computerized device is a glorified graphing calculator.

• Preservice and inservice training for teachers- And ultimately, this is where we will succeed or fail, how tangible and meaningful can we make our training on 21st century skills be for teachers?

We have to get there. This is the "more" that we need. Having these things in place, there will be no mistake about it; we are not just setting ourselves up for another initiative that will go away, another binder that will soon collect dust on the shelf. We will have given students and teachers the actual tools (both technology and training). All will take notice.

HOW WE GET THERE

Scott identifies three important supports to get there: Legislative policy and funding, ongoing monitoring and evaluation, and a mindset shift. And, there is both hope and despair here. Legislative policy in Iowa hasn't moved at all here (which can best be shown by what NACOL had to say about Iowa's online developments), and this is a bleak time to look for funding. But in this bleakness, our businesses have an opportunity to build the shining star educational system in this post-Lehman Brothers economy, where an opportunity exists for new players (read: Iowa companies) in the national scene. Despite what the closed secrecy of the Iowa Core's development would suggest, those businesses need a place at the planning table, as well as a piece of the financial responsibility to bring about this plan.

Monitoring and evaluation might seem the most formidable to seasoned veterans, but this is one area where Iowa has truly made progress in recent years. Administrators and district leadership teams alike regularly use data in their decision-making process now; developing a quality monitoring and evaluation process for this vision is not nearly as formidable as it was 10 years ago.

It is perhaps the mindset shift that is the most daunting to me. We need more than lip service to the reality that we need to change to meet the changing times. We need the sense of urgency with the hope of possibility. We can do this and we must. How do we make believers out of educators, lawmakers, and community members? This is our task.

MY ROLE

And so, I get to my role in bringing about the vision. I know my limitations; I don't have the levers to move lawmakers for legislation or for funding from businesses. But I'm not helpless, either. It is my goal to do the following:

• Lead a statewide partnership of agencies and school districts to create quality online education for students. This is the heart and soul of what my job is. I'm heading up several groups in the state to bring about that very task.

• Help shape the Iowa Core Curriculum to make sure 21st century skills represent the Digital Curriculum. My role in statewide Iowa Core development committees will hopefully drive that.

• Train educational leaders in the 21st century skills- The opportunities I have now to work with districts is just a start.

• Provide a working example of the Digital Curriculum- My top task is to work with some districts who, at a local level, can provide the items above in Scott's plan. I can provide the training and support, as well as the vision on the curriculum to make it happen.

What is your role?