1:1 isn't enough to level the playing field

We often discuss technology, and specifically 1:1 initiatives, as ways to level the playing field between under-resourced students and their more affluent classmates. Certainly, wealthier students are more likely to have access to connected devices at home. But numerous studies have actually found that providing the devices is not enough to conquer the 'digital divide,' the disparities between the social classes related to technology. Studies have shown that a computer in the hands of a disadvantaged student is often used much differently than computers provided to students of privilege. Poorer students were more likely to play games and seek out entertainment online. Students of greater means spent more time reading and using the devices for homework. An interesting piece summarizing some of these findings is linked at the end of this post.

So what can be concluded from this information? Should we ignore access as an issue of educational opportunity? Absolutely not. Instead, schools should continue to strive to provide greater access to digital devices. But the true difference will happen as a result of how students are taught to use the devices. All students need to have opportunities and practice using technology for learning purposes. Students should create online, develop a positive digital footprint, write for broader audiences, connect globally, and so on. Technology will only level the playing field as students are instructed in using the devices productively.


Educational technology isn't leveling the playing field - The Hechinger Report photo credit: zappowbang via photopin cc

Is 1:1 really worth the cost?

If your school starts down a path toward 1:1, it's likely you will encounter some negative response. At the very least, there will be lots of questions since a 1:1 program has inherent risks and a number of challenges. Is it worth the cost? Won't the technology be a distraction? Will students have fewer opportunities to develop interpersonal skills? What about student privacy? Is there any evidence 1:1 will increase student achievement?

It's not hard to find reports online of schools that have struggled with their 1:1 implementation. And while the research has conflicting reports, 1:1 is no guarantee that student learning will increase.

But nearly everything worthwhile has it's challenges. If you want to grow or want your school to grow, you have to do hard stuff. All of the possible concerns with 1:1 have been overcome with proper planning and a team effort. It can be done.

We are still in the planning stages in our school and striving to move our project forward. 

Technology is a tool and will not replace the classroom teacher. In fact, for the technology to be successful a quality teacher is required.

Technology is awesome in the classroom where there is also an awesome teacher. #edtech #edchat
— David Geurin (@DavidGeurin) November 26, 2014

The cost is an investment in the future of students and opens up a whole world of possibilities for learning.

We send students home with textbooks costing hundreds but then question the value and cost associated with 1:1? #edtech #edtechchat
— David Geurin (@DavidGeurin) November 24, 2014

Pedagogy will always trump technology. Teachers must design effective learning environments. When that learning environment has technology available it creates a more authentic experience. Technology is an important way work gets done, and should be one way learning gets done.

Classrooms don’t need tech geeks who can teach; we need teaching geeks who can use tech. #edchat #edtech
— David Geurin (@DavidGeurin) November 26, 2014

Instead of fearing that a device may be a distraction, we need to embrace teaching digital citizenship and help students learn to use online tools for learning.

When students use technology for entertainment and socializing, but not for productivity and learning, that’s a problem. #EdTech #edchat
— David Geurin (@DavidGeurin) November 21, 2014

In spite of some of the challenges, I don't know of any schools in our region who have implemented 1:1 and then regretted it. In fact, the messages I've received from my PLN is enthusiastic, "We don't know how we did it before 1:1!"

How does a growth mindset fit with standards based grading?

#200404130-008 / gettyimages.com

How can we ensure standards-based grading works together with what we know about growth mindset and the work of Carol Dweck? It seems most SBL/SBG proponents contend that classrooms should measure achievement against uniform standards of learning described in proficiency scales or some rubric that describes levels of performance. To meet the needs of diverse learners, best practice is for teachers to differentiate instruction but hold true to the same standards, or learning targets, for all learners. Regardless of where the learner is in the process, performance against the standard is still the way achievement is reported.

But growth mindset research finds that it's all about the process, that the process of effort, risk taking, accepting challenges, and achieving personal best is how we stay motivated and willing to learn. By focusing on the process, we can increase intelligence and actually grow our brains. It's amazing stuff. And incredibly effective.

But how will students respond if they have little chance of achieving the standard? For those who are below grade level and unlikely to reach the uniform target, the standard may seem unreachable and may reinforce the 'fixed' mindset. Students may view themselves as just not smart, "I'm not good at school." School becomes a constant reminder of my deficiencies. Why should I try? These students hate school and will do everything possible to avoid engaging in the process.

I like to use the example of a PE student in a weight lifting unit. An arbitrary standard might be that every student will be able to bench press the equivalent of his/her body weight and parallel squat twice his/her body weight. This is a reasonable goal for the student who comes into class with background in athletics or weight training. But for many students, this would be unreachable even with months of training and practice. Wouldn't it make more sense to have some type of growth goal that is individualized for each learner based on his/her own background, talents, and skill level?

I had a conversation about these issues with a colleague who has considerable knowledge of SBL/SBG. I explained some of my thoughts about flexible learning targets and how that might seem more congruent with growth mindset. If the teacher and student work together to set a challenging but achievable goal, wouldn't that motivate growth more than consistently scoring at the bottom level of a 4-point SBG scale? How is that really different than a D on the report card, or even an F?

I explained, "In this type of system, most students would be able, with great effort, to meet learning targets and goals and would be reinforced for their effort and progress."

"But who is going to make the decision about lessening the student expectations from the standard?" my colleague replied. I get the point. It can be a slippery slope. We've heard the concerns about the "soft bigotry of low expectations" that can happen in schools.

My ideas about flexible learning targets assume great faith in the judgment of teachers to hold students to appropriately challenging targets. I think we owe it to teachers to respect their professional judgment. Sure, implementation is more convenient when everyone is assessed against uniform standards. But it's even more convenient to grade on a 100-point scale, and we know the pitfalls inherent in this traditional system.

All the way back in 2006, when hearing Rick Stiggins speak on Assessment for Learning, he explained that most students should earn A's or B's if they are given appropriate and individualized learning goals along with timely, descriptive feedback. Since then, many schools have successfully replaced letter grades with performance levels. But have these schools created a system where growth is celebrated and reinforced?

So how do you ensure that students are held to high standards but are also rewarded for their effort and growth mindset?

Build your PLN with more followers on Twitter

Since October is approaching and that means Connected Educator Month, I thought it would be a good time to share a few of my thoughts on building a PLN, or personal learning network. First of all, you may think it's self-absorbed or narcissistic to be concerned about how many followers you have on Twitter. And I guess that's possible if the reason you are building your network is simply for the sake of more followers or to compare yourself to others, or to get a sense of self-importance from your follower stats.

But I believe there are honorable reasons to build your following. Through my connections on Twitter, I have learned more and grown more as an educator than from just about any other learning experience. Earning my doctorate was also an incredible experience, but it was very different from the highly customized and globally connected opportunities Twitter offers.

Why grow a following on Twitter? 

1. More followers means more connections. As my PLN grows I have learned where I can go to get help with topics that matter to me.
2. More followers means greater voice. We want our students to speak out and make a positive difference, and we should look to speak out and create positive impact for our profession as well.
3. The best leaders are not just concerned about the issues facing their individual classrooms and schools but are working to influence the broader field of education.
4. Since I believe in Twitter, I want to model successful use of the platform and have a wide audience to promote how it can transform professional learning and connectedness.

10 tips for more followers

1. Post frequently. When people see your posts regularly they begin to trust your presence and content. Scheduling tweets is really the only practical way to ensure you are consistently offering content. I tweet about once every hour. By the way, it is okay to periodically recycle previous tweets. Great ideas deserve to be revisited.
2. Retweet other people's content. You generate value in the community by furthering the reach of quality posts by retweeting them.
3. Be relevant. If you are using Twitter as the vehicle of your PLN, then most of your posts should be education related. It's okay to post personal interests occasionally, but if you rarely post an education comment, then don't expect educators to follow.
4. Follow other educators. This may be the most powerful tip on the list. Look for the top educators on Twitter and follow the people who follow them. Or, follow the people who retweet them. This tip will help more people know about you.
5. Share articles, quotes, and pictures. Tweets that include helpful resources, inspiring quotes, or motivating pictures often get retweeted thus growing your value in the community.
6. Make your bio compelling. Use your bio to build your relevance and passion as an educator. Potential followers may decide to follow you or not simply from your bio.
7. Include a picture or avatar and background photo. Quality images can help others identify with you and connect with your content.
8. Participate in Twitter chats. There are many, many Twitter chats where you can connect with other educators and likely gain new followers, even more so if you reach out and follow others first. I would love to see new faces in #MOedchat. We chat Thursday nights at 9PM CST.
9. Use hashtags. Hashtags allow content to be sorted on Twitter. As users search these hashtags, your content that includes the hashtag is more likely to be noticed than if you don't use any hashtags. But be careful, more than two or three hashtags in a single Tweet may be distracting or make people think you are spamming.
10. Start blogging. Sometimes Twitter's 140 characters just aren't enough. Your blog allows you to expand on your ideas and reflect and grow even more. You can even promote your blog posts with your Tweets. Blogging is another great way to build value for your ideas in the PLN community.

If you commit to follow these tips, I promise you will begin to increase your following and get more out of your experience on Twitter. You will connect with people and ideas that will help you grow. Educators are an increasingly powerful force on Twitter, and I'm proud to see how many teachers are engaging professionally 24/7/365!

Thoughts on follow backs

Generally, I follow back anyone who is an educator and follows me. However, there are a couple of exceptions. I rarely follow anyone who has not replaced the Twitter "egg" with some type of image. I also don't typically follow users who lock their accounts and require approval before accepting a follower. I totally respect a person's right to set up their account this way, but it doesn't seem like they are that interested in connecting.

The reason I feel it's important to follow back is because I believe that is in line with my reasons for building a PLN in the first place. I am not trying to get more followers than the next person or self-promote. My goals are to learn more, share more, and ultimately make a greater impact as an educator. These goals lead me to believe that it's my responsibility to not just increase my network but also help others increase their value in the PLN community as well. I want everyone to have more followers, more connections, and more value to self, others, and the profession.

How grades fail to send the right message

#108208845 / gettyimages.com

In Curriclum21, Heidi Hayes Jacobs shares the story of Mabry Middle School in Georgia. The school surveyed students to learn more about their attitudes toward learning. On the survey, students reported that they rarely did their best on academic work, but they did enough to earn a grade that would please their teachers or their parents. As you can imagine, this information was very concerning to the teachers of Mabry. They wanted more for their students than a culture where students did just enough to get the grades.

So I recently had a spirited conversation about grading with @audhilly on Twitter. I think we actually agreed for the most part, but there were some differences. In examining the shortcomings of traditional grading, @audhilly indicated that the problem with traditional grades is not what they do but what they fail to do.

@DavidGeurin A shift worth making advocates for itself. It's not what a "trad" grade does. It's about what it doesn't do #sblchat
— audhilly (@audhilly) September 2, 2014

I completely agree traditional grades do not effectively communicate what has been learned. Instead, old fashioned grades simply lump all assignments together without providing information on specific learning targets. In the end, the grade is determined by averaging all of these varied assignments together to arrive at a grade that reflects a general, but imprecise, assessment of learning. So traditional grades do not communicate precisely toward progress on learning goals.

But I also believe grades do harm beyond this basic failure. They condition students to expect a grade for every assignment they do. Students begin to think if there isn't a grade attached, it must not be that important. Instead of drawing on passion, curiosity, and empowerment for motivation, students work the system to earn enough points (a grade) to satisfy the demands of the important people in their life (teachers and parents). Students become passive participants where they follow directions, comply, and ultimately remember enough to get the grade.

So grades fail on multiple levels. Foremost, they do not communicate precisely the progress toward learning goals so students can understand how to grow and improve. And, grades cause motivation to become increasingly dependent on external factors rather than encouraging students to strive for personal best.

When Mabry Middle School was faced with the realization of how passive students had become in the learning process, they developed strategies to make learning more engaging for students. Students were encouraged to bring personal passions and creativity into the learning process. Student work was celebrated and showcased to various audiences. These changes helped students see ways the time and effort of learning was meaningful beyond simply getting a grade.

A vision statement for transforming learning

At our last 1:1 committee meeting, we worked on creating a vision or results statement for this project. We all agree the point of 1:1 is ultimately not a connected device in the hands of every student. That's not the endgame. The power of the device is dependent on the effective transformation of teaching and learning to meet the demands of our ever changing world. If the devices help us meet this goal it will only be with a clear vision, a full understanding by everyone in the building, and leadership on the part of admin, teachers, and even students.

Here is the current draft of the statement we developed:

In ____ years, we want anyone who walks into our classrooms to see:

• Students participating in global conversations that extend beyond the walls of our classrooms.
• Students doing work that prepares them for the real-world work they'll do beyond graduation.
• Students demonstrating their learning as producers of content.
• Learning environments that recognize each student as a unique individual, allowing for self-pacing and utilizing differentiation strategies. 
• Students participating in digital learning as responsible, ethical, productive digital citizens. 

Thoughts from 1:1 planning meeting

#166420606 / gettyimages.com

We held the first meeting of our 1:1 committee to collaborate about what our school's vision will be for the use of digital devices to enhance learning. Our team consisted of district administration, high school principals, and several teachers along with an instructional coach. The agenda for the first meeting involved the following topics: the role of the committee in this process, what is our 'why' for looking at 1:1, review of survey results on student access, what are obstacles for us, where are teachers in their readiness, and where do we go next?

Here are several of my reflections looking back on our meeting:

1. This purpose of the planning process is to get all the voices in the conversation to make the best decision possible. I plan to get student input, and at some point we need to engage parents. Our superintendent is going to invite a board member to join our committee going forward.

2. To move forward, we need 100% understanding and 80% buy-in. 100% must understand the direction and the 'why.' If we have 80% who are bought-in, the initiative will succeed.

3. 1:1 will be a way to level the playing field for so many of our students who are under-resourced. A learning device provides a significant advantage when used for connecting and learning. We want all our students to have the best opportunities to learn.

3. The device that is selected is not as important as how it is used to enhance instruction. However, the committee recognizes that many stakeholders will have strong feelings about what device is best and will have that question from the beginning. As the process unfolds, it will be important to make a good decision about the device that fits our situation best.

4. We discussed how important it is for students to learn to use technology for learning. They are very competent with Facebook, YouTube, games, etc. Until digital tools are used regularly throughout the school, students will be hard-pressed to develop habits of using technology for learning.

5. Teachers will need professional development. However, we will never be able to move everyone to the same level. Teachers will need to take ownership of their learning and have a growth mindset. Students can also be enlisted as resources to support teachers and other students.

6. The expectation will be for teachers to increase the utilization of technology in learning. There will be times when the devices will be set aside and that's okay. We will respect that all teachers are at different places in their digital journey. We will be looking for growth.

7. We acknowledged that introducing 825 devices into our building also presents more opportunities for distraction and non-learning behaviors. We will need to learn from other schools and make digital citizenship a priority.

8. Our network will need enhancements to be ready for 1:1. We don't currently have enough wireless access points to effectively handle the number of devices. Bandwidth may also be an issue.

9. We briefly discussed how the devices might be supported in the building. Having effective support will be a top concern of teachers. If something goes wrong, how can I get help?

10. Our survey results indicated there will be a significant number of students who don't have internet at home. As teachers make instructional decisions, they will need to remember students may not be able to readily connect outside the school day. However, the building does have extended hours so students can arrive early or stay late to use the school's wi-fi.

It was noted at the meeting that there are many recent examples in our school of teachers increasing the use of digital tools in the classroom, but until we get devices in the hands of students, many of the great ideas teachers have will never be fully realized.

Our superintendent reminded the committee to look at the big picture and not get caught in too many details. We need to cast a vision, and then work on the specifics of implementation when it's time.