Google Glass: A Lab on the End of your Nose

Google Glass: A Lab on the End of your Nose

The Space Race

Hopefully you all know that iPads and laptops are two completely different spaces. 

Although there is some significant overlap in key areas such as media consumption on the internet, e-reading, social media, and even light word processing, in most cases the two classes of devices, in my opinion, should be viewed as totally different tools designed for completely different tasks.

Although many schools are reverse-engineering tech integrations (and a few are even doing post-mortems) it sounds like some tech directors have found themselves ahead of the curve (which you are as long as you can still provide viable input into the nature and trajectory of the rollout). So I hope they take advantage of it and discuss with their teachers the potential benefits and drawbacks of all devices under consideration. But they also must read between the lines of the teachers’ wants and dreams and apply their wisdom according to their needs, not necessarily your own as the tech director.

I’m often quick to say if I could only have one technology device, it would be my 11” MacBook Air. Hands down. No questions asked. Period. End of story. But that is because a significant amount of my work involves traditional office utility applications, email., digital video and uncompromised access into State computing systems.  However, if I were to truly integrate a piece of tech into the curriculum, or across a handful of curriculums, I might find that a laptop will encourage mundane or traditional educational outcomes. Or worse, just become a redundancy that’s mobile.

The iPad, when used effectively, can cause a change in the educational outcomes; a good one if used effectively, and a negative one if the iPad is forced into a laptop role. If your heart is set on traditional I/O computing, then nothing but a traditional computer will work. But if you are considering venturing outside the world of word-processing, presentations building, spreadsheets, website construction, code writing, and desktop publishing etc. then the iPad has tremendous merit.

As far as security, it is not just schools looking to harden the devices. In fact, collectively they are rather late on the scene. Tri-letter agencies like the NSA have guidelines for many OSs including iOS. Oddly, I don’t see any of the many flavors of Android listed, and as expected, Windows makes up the bulk of the spots on the list.

http://www.nsa.gov/ia/mitigation_guidance/security_configuration_guides/operating_systems.shtml

I think enough of the dust has settled on the tablet space to make informed decisions about their role in education, all grounded in realistic expectations of performance and impact. That also means we can be frank about the device and speak ill of it when it fails to function as advertised. I tried to express these feelings in words, which ended up in an essay, that ended up in a blog contest. The content of my contest blog post is my passionate plea for the perfect tablet for education, and is presented a blog post here titled "Great Technology Melts In Your Hands."

Great Technology Melts In Your Hands

Great technology melts in your hands

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

-Arthur C. Clarke

As I watched the latest crop of tablet computers graduate from drawing board to Christmas list, I am again thrilled to have plenty of choices for use in education. But my standards are high. I expect nothing short of magic from my tablets. I expect them to become invisible. To disappear before my eyes. To melt in my hands.

You see the tablet is not important. It is what the tablet does that justifies its existence. Tablets are conduits to something else. To somewhere else. To anywhere else. The tablet is capable of doing so many things to such a small extent that if ever we successfully label a technology a tool, and really mean it, the tablet is a worthy recipient.

When a student uses a tablet to read, the experience must be immersive. No, really immersive. Like beyond the cliché. On the stage of education, the electronic device must never expect its role to be more than a supporting actor. To do its job well, the tablet must blend into the background silently serving up words while hoping desperately to be forgotten. And it must be really happy in that role. Just like when the physical book dissolves away the moment it gets good. Really good. Goosebumps good. You know what I mean.

Yet if the interface of a tablet requires hard touches, multiple swiping attempts and emits enough alerts, popups, hangs, hiccups and chirps to scare a horse, then the tablet is overshadowing the star of the show; biting the hand that feeds it content. You know the feeling. Like when a great thought is lost with the snap of pencil lead. Or when the crux of the plot is wedged between two stuck pages now holding hostage three hundred pages of priceless tension.

Watching students, and even my own kids devourer a foot-high stack of Harry Potter, I know they are different people afterwards. They have been to a place in their minds where the magic truly is real, and they want nothing more than to plow into another book, damn the big words, full speed ahead! Literacy can be a noun, but I prefer it as a verb. Literacy is an experience. A feeling of confidence. An acquired dimension that can never be taken away. 

The books, however, fare far worse; cover torn, pages bent, spine broken; the souvenir scars of a wonderful adventure that still brings a grin even when alone. But none of that matters if the book is more important than its words. And the same is true for a tablet. Neither is to be placed on a shelf and venerated as the next big thing. It is to be consumed. Used. Pushed. Threatened. Challenged. Loved.

The tablet as an e-reader is a portal to another land, another time. A beautiful place that has not gone unnoticed by non-profits who are delivering tablets by the thousands to sub-Saharan Africa where books made out of actual paper are unknown. Each pencil-thin rectangle of screen real estate is a world-class library filled with an ever-growing collective record of humanity. A record that is as much a birthright on this planet as food and water.

The perfect storm of technology and literacy empowers my students to go far beyond grade-appropriate childhood dreams. Students actually trust us to fulfill our promise of educating them better than any child before has been taught. And through technology, today they know more, they see more, they demand more. 

And at no time in human history have teachers had the tools to actually deliver on that promise.

©2012

Shiny Semantics: Why the Chromebook is not 121

I think first, we need to be on the same page with the overall topic since many 121 discussions bog down in semantics. Here are two definitions of one-to-one (121) computing. The first from the Center for Digital Education’s One-to-One Computing Handbook:

“One-to-one computing simply means "anytime, anywhere technology for every student.” http://media.centerdigitalgov.com/reg2view/K12_6_23.pdf

And the second from Wikipedia citing an Educational World article.

“One to One Computing in education refers to a computer for every student which is an initiative created by many companies such as Microsoft, Apple, Dell, HP, and Intel. One-to-one computing means that every student or teacher is given a computer, the Internet and software anytime and anywhere. The term computer is used to mean a personal computer, laptop, netbook, handheld, or tablet.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_to_one_computing

So the short explanation for my comment is that although the Chromebook provides access to an extensive array of online resources, Web2.0 tools, and digital storage/sharing solutions, it works only* with an active and fast enough internet connection, only with software tools available online, and only with peripherals whose drivers are installable on the device.

I did incorrectly profess that the Chromebook is incapable doing anything in the absence of an Internet connection. Since June, Chrome has had limited access to recently updated word-processing Google Docs, calendar, and Gmail, and quite recently, more companies are making offline apps beyond games and reading material.

Here’s what seems available thus far for offline use:

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/category/collection/offline_enabled?utm_campaign=en&utm_medium=social&utm_source=en-social-na-us-social-gplus-post

I’m sure there will be great advances in offline use as the Chrome/Google Docs interaction matures, however, at the moment the blogosphere seems undecided as to what apps actually work well offline, and what provide such limited access as to not qualify as “working” offline. Other’s still require a mandatory “downloading” or “updating” of content ahead of time to have any offline capabilities, which, of course, requires preparation and forethought. Not deal breakers, but certainly concentration breakers.

But back to the question. The spirit of a 121 as defined above does not impose limits on use or connectivity, but instead encourages the anywhere-anytime access to the technology. It is within that “anywhere-anytime” aspect that I find the Chromebook concept in its current iteration as a “substantial limitation” if applied as the one-to-one device.

Personally I am a fan of the Chromebook, and enjoy watching it evolve just as I have many other technologies. It is especially exciting to consider it as a disruptive tech that in many cases unabashedly plays by its own set of rules. But that said, I do not feel that the Chromebook should be endorsed as a true 121 solution. I do feel comfortable supporting it if the integration effort assumes the limitation of the device, and does not overrepresented or oversell the instructional capabilities of the Chromebook.

As you know from my prior writings, I might react quickly and viciously when a technology tells me what I can and cannot do. And I feel qualified as an advocate for students and teachers who want to use technology in pursuit of the best educational experience possible.

I know first-hand, as do you, the importance of an Internet connection in education as well as almost everything else.  But I also know that there is a very rich world of instructional technology that does not need a dedicated Internet connection. My fear with the Chromebooks is that through their current dependence on an active Internet connection they will begin to dictate curriculum after we have fought so hard to put the teacher back in charge of the classroom. If the only realistic solutions a teacher, administrator, curriculum director, or parent has involve an active Internet connection, then we are wildly underestimating what we can do with instructional technology.

The Chromebook is dancing a fine line between its dependency on the Internet and stand-alone apps. At the moment, the internet rules, but even within a year, there could be an effective compromise that 1) won’t open up the machine to mal-everything, 2) require an expensive “hard drive” storage platform raising the price, and 3) diminish Google’s bottom line which is completely invested in devices being tied to the internet.

Remember, all the above is strictly my opinion. It should be take with a gain of salt, or heck, perhaps the entire shaker full. But if the true spirit of a one-to-one requires anytime, anywhere, then the Chromebook, great as it is, has, in my opinion, substantial limitations.

That said, I believe the Chromebook would make an ideal platform for a school-wide integration where the strengths of the device are maximized, and its limitations are minimized. But the term one-to-one should be avoided in that case.

Of course this being tech, and especially Google, it could all be a different story tomorrow.

Two types of schools...

Where the buck stops is a good question, but ultimately, I think that there is a need for someone to be considered "the" technology leader, and in most cases, it won’t-can’t-shouldn’t be the superintendent.

I know there are many ill-conceived technology integrations across the state, as well as great ideas but implemented exactly backwards to best practices. However, there are now so many of these types of integrations that it might just be the new way of doing business. So instead of standing on the sidelines or trying to get out of the way (to avoid blame, etc.) those best positioned to understand the tech and its roll in education need to step up to the plate and provide some survival mechanisms to do the best with what the situation presents.

While I can certainly understand running from potential train wrecks, after enough crashes, one starts to wonder who is running the railroad. With all the hardware thrown at problems (whether real or perceived), the situation is begging for solutions, and solutions, as Einstein observed, will not likely come from the same minds that caused the problem in the first place.

Since it is obvious that integrations are now being launched without traditional proper planning, then we should look for the cause of this change in order to understand why it’s happening. And then look for positive solutions to make the best of the situation.

Sudden iPad integration is a country-wide phenomenon, and the push-back from instructional technologists is also a common reaction. But just as widespread is the push forward from pro-educational technology groups and organizations, let alone vendors. 

Instead of fighting or blame storming, ed tech leaders need to consolidate solutions to bring out the best in what the integration can offer regardless of its flaws. 

There are probably two types of school districts right now. Those that have had a sudden and loosely planned influx of iPads, and those that will have a sudden and loosely planned influx of iPads.

You must have followers to be a leader.

Hi All,

I think editorials such as the one under discussion are both wake-up calls, and evidence of the failure of tech leadership.

(http://online.qmags.com/TJL0912/default.aspx?pg=2&mode=1#pg2&mode1)

Two of the reasons iPads are bought en mass and distributed, often with less planning than the day’s hot lunch menu, is because the iPad is easy to understand and is sexy. Those qualities make it easy to talk about, and easy to drop-ship into classrooms.

So while it is fun to bash spontaneous iPad integrations, it should really be cause for some serious introspection from tech directors. So rather than trying to stop integrations, tech directors should be moving to the forefront of the integrations forcing the issues of teaching, learning, pedagogy, and yes, device management across the existing infrastructure.

We know that a significant amount of tech will appear regardless of the presence of district tech personnel in the decision-making. So think about this. Who, exactly, should the enthusiastic masses turn to when they want to integrate iPads? Especially when there is a donor or funding source at the ready.

Like it or not, the animosity between wide-eyed teachers and grounded tech directors is growing. And the iPad is simply a catalyst just as the Internet, the laptop and class websites have been in the past. The iPad is just more obvious.

Here is another article from THE Journal. For me, this kind of story is infinitely more helpful then an opinion piece that offers problems, but no solutions except to "Stop."

http://thejournal.com/Articles/2012/09/12/using-ipads-with-mixed-ability-students-teachers-must-give-up-some-control.aspx?=THEMOB&p=1

If "stop" is the message of tech leaders, then their days as leaders are numbered.

Pockets of Excellence

As far as "unplanned" implementations of iPads and iPods in MCPS, I don’t know of any.

However there are several planned but loosely or unrelated integrations.

 Of the ones I mentioned, you are correct in that one is in the Hellgate district, and there is an integration effort on the move at Target Range as well.

Of the MCPS ones I know about that would qualify as integrations, they include: Paxon 2nd and 5th grade 1:1 (at the bottom of this MCPS webpage) http://www.mcps.k12.mt.us/portal/paxson/ActivitiesandEvents/tabid/3238/Default.aspx 

 Franklin, Hawthorne and Lowell  (MCPS iPad training on the in-service day): http://www.kpax.com/news/missoula-teachers-train-on-ipads/ 

Lewis and Clark is using iPads in their library with great success in particular with kindergarten writing. I also understand that the Rattlesnake school PTA is moving forward on a teacher-centered use of iPads, hopefully in the fall.

And I’ve heard that there is interest in iPad use at Sentinel for movie production and/or photography, but I don’t know the status on that one.

And there are several science teachers in the district who are using them for various tasks.

 As far as unplanned, or without IT staff, I assume you are not counting the ones at Paxon (since it is a large scale integration with updated wireless in the building) and not the Franklin, Hawthorne and Lowell project since CSPD is on-board and it was scheduled during the teacher day), and not the Rattlesnake one since my contact there said that MCPS IT folks have been consulted regarding bandwidth and other issues.

 It looks like some of the changes are being implemented that were foreshadowed a while ago. This quote from an MCPS teacher in a Missoulian story about Matt Clausen might have something to do with the integrations springing up:
 “For too long, teachers have had to deal with a “technological bureaucracy,” making the implementation of new tech tools difficult at best.”
http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_2b045a0e-df2a-11df-af57-001cc4c03286.html 

 I’d guess it’s those “Pockets of Excellence” that MCPS is now calling upon.