The Invisible Technology of School

I am currently reading Kevin Kelly's new book, What Technology Wants and am finding it a fascinating read. One interesting thing he talks about is how technology was here before we knew it existed. Meaning, before we had a name for technology or even recognized that there was this category of what we do or what exists out there that we now call technology it was there and coexisting with us. It was an invisible force. People sharpened flint into knives, made spears, built shelters, harnessed fire, domesticated animals and farmland, sew clothing, made fish hooks, and developed language all without having a name for this embodiment of human ideas. In the early stages of the evolution of technology it was invisible to us even though it made itself present all around us. And, every time a new technology was developed it completely changed the human environment.

Trying to define technology is hard. Two years ago I sat on an interview committee hiring a technology teacher. The principal asked if there were any questions I would like to add to the list before we began the interviews. I told him I had only one, "What is technology?" He had a strange reaction to my request but this proved to be one of the more decisive questions in our search. We interviewed three candidates that day and got three very different definitions. The teacher we hired took the broad definition and said that technology was the term used to describe how people manipulate their environment to achieve something they couldn't otherwise achieve. The other two candidates gave the narrow definition which unfortunately is also currently the common definition that technology was anything that used electricity.

If you take the narrow definition of technology then it is very easy to disregard the ecological effect introducing a new technology will bring. If you take the broad definition these considerations are unavoidable and obvious. Problem is, I think most people only consider the narrow definition and in so doing render all non-electronic technologies invisible.

One definitive characteristic of technology is it is constantly in a state of evolution and change. Rendering a technology invisible blinds us to this key attribute and locks us into a mindset about it. This is how sacred cows are born. This is how we become rigid and this is how we become irrelevant.

When a new technology is introduced into an ecology everything changes or becomes irrelevant. According to the broad definition language is a technology. Our languages are in a constant state of evolution as evident by the annual list of new words added to the dictionary each year. Language changes to adjust to the introduction of new technologies. If it didn't change how would we even be able to discuss things like wikis, friending, m-commerce, or tweeting? This is one major problem with content standards for schools. Content standards take something fluid like language and treat it like its constant. What would happen if we used content standards from a time in our distant past to drive all curriculum and assessment in our schools? And, just like language, schooling is a technology rendered invisible by the narrow definition.

Failing to see schools and all their trappings (grade systems, standardized tests, bell schedules, etc.) as a form of technology sets any technology initiative up for failure. Introduce laptops or iPads into a classroom and still run everything else the same way and one or both of two things will happen: 1) The devices will prove to be nothing but a distraction and get in the way of schooling causing people to claim the program was a flop; or 2) The technology will take over many of the purposes the school was originally designed to serve, making students view the school as irrelevant. The school whose teachers and administrators embrace the broad view will see schooling as a technology and understand that the introduction of another technology will require changes to curriculum, teaching strategies, room design, schedules, assessment, and teacher evaluation metrics.

When you start to view schooling as a technology you start to question its purpose. You start to question how it has changed the ecology it was introduced into. You start to question how it might evolve into something else. You start to wonder if or when it will become obsolete.

Technologies always have pros and cons. Early industrial technologies laid waste to our environment in exchange for cheap goods. When you start to consider school as a technology you start to see what school lays waste to and you start to see its biases.

New Additions to "Purpose of School" Mini-Interview Project and an Invitation to Participate #ties11

The TIES Conference afforded me the opportunity to add a couple new interviews in my "Purpose of School" collection. This project has been a real slow process and I don't expect to be anywhere near done with it in the near future. It may never be done. I had hoped to have the opportunity to interview Joel Rose and Gov. Mark Dayton, both of whom were at the conference, but I was not able to catch either one of them. I did, however, get a chance to interview both Chris Dede and Bernajean Porter at this conference. Here is how they responded to the question, "What is the purpose of school?":

See how others have responded to this question:

• Bernie Dodge
• Sylvia Martinez
• Christian Long
• Luna Frank-Fischer (SLA Student)
• Chris Lehmann
• Bud Hunt
• Steven W. Anderson
• Tom Whitby
• David Jakes
• George Couros
• Dean Shareski
• Scott Mcleod
• David Warlick
• Doug Johnson
• Sir Ken Robinson
• Wes Fryer

If you are interested in adding yourself to this collection send me a recording of yourself answering this simple question, "What is the purpose of school?" You can upload it to YouTube, Vimeo, Blip.tv, or whatever your favorite video sharing site is and post a link in the comment section below. Or, you can email me at anderscj@yahoo.com if you prefer (do not attach a video file directly, use a third party like filedropper instead). I would love to hear how you respond. When I feel I have reached a critical mass I will create a special site devoted to addressing this question where all responses will be showcased. At that point I will also begin aggregating these responses into categories and constructing some way of analyzing and comparing responses in the effort to reach some kind of conclusion. And, in case you are wondering, the purpose of asking this question is to draw attention to the diversity of responses and to show how varied responses produce very different outcomes in schools.

Our Brave New World

Inspired by the countless references by Neil Postman and others I have decided to read Huxley's (1932) Brave New World. I've actually become quite obsessed with it these past few days and have gone so far as to watch both movie versions of the book. The older one, which I believe was originally a 1980 mini series, is probably closer to the book although neither stays completely true to Huxley's text. One scene from the film struck me as quite powerful, more so than it did in the text:

"Recent implies past. Improvement implies progress. And if the present is perfect then there cannot be any progress."

"Of Course."

"And even the word why--why, that's the most dangerous of all. It raises the whole question of purpose."

Does this sound familiar? Prescribed training sessions? Scripted lessons? Society which holds consumption up as the ultimate virtue? This is indeed where we are headed in this country if we let our current education policies run their course. In the book, the future "Other Place" is a place which has eradicated art, history, family, and emotion and replaced it with standardized people who serve one purpose, to drive the economy through consumption; and in so doing endlessly indulge themselves in an orgy of shallow pleasures. Isn't this the kind of values and ethic portrayed to us on television, in the movies, and on billboard advertisements. Have you watched much television lately? To what purpose is this reality TV but to condition people into thinking there is a different norm to which they ought to aspire to?

It is good to buy things:



It is bad to keep them:



So, it is better to just clean house and throw it away:



And it is cool to be promiscuous, uneducated, and just endlessly party:



I mean, don't those kids look happy? And to boot, they are all famous. They didn't get an education, what a waste of time. No, they are revered because they are good consumers and completely self-indulgent.

Besides, education will only bring you misery. Just look at how teachers are treated. Teachers have education and they don't get paid very much and are continuously being degraded. And besides, the news tells us that most teachers are ineffective and grossly overpaid for their work. No one likes that. Nope, you are better off trying to become famous like Snookie or the Situation and spend all your time having fun.

As for being original and creative, that's overrated and unnecessary because now we have talent shows and karaoke. Places where original work is not valued (skip to 0 min 47 sec):



or to put it more elaborately:



I think Huxley had us pegged.

In the book, the character Bernard Marx makes this statement, "what would it be like if I could, if I were free—not enslaved by my conditioning."

We should ask that of ourselves as well. First, we must become aware of our own conditioning (not an easy feat). Then, we must have the capacity to imagine life differently. But then, if we reject our conditioning we risk banishment, don't we?

Any ideas on how to do this?

Bernie Dodge on the Purpose of School

I didn't have a whole lot of time today at the ISTE conference to continue with my Purpose of School project but I did manage to get this one last mini interview with Bernie Dodge.



Other posts in this series:

• Purpose of School (with: Bud Hunt, Chris Lehmann, Christian Long, Luna Frank-Fischer, Sylvia Martinez, Steven W. Anderson, Tom Whitby, George Couros, Dean Shareski, Scott McLeod, David Jakes)
  

• Purpose of School - David Warlick

• Wes Fryer on Digital Storytelling & The Purpose of School

• Sir Ken Robinson on the Purpose of School #TIES10

• Doug Johnson on the Purpose of School

• 
  

Purpose of School

Today at the ISTE Conference, aside from sleeping past my initial planned start time, I continued with my "Purpose of School" project. In a future post I promise I will let you know where I am going with this. For now, lets just say that the question is extremely important and one that many researchers and sociologists studying the culture of school, Seymour Sarason and John Goodlad to name a few, note the peculiarity of the lack of ongoing dialog on this question. It is my hopes in asking this somewhat annoying question that I might spark more dialog not only in the edublogosphere but also in our schools.

So far I have only interviewed people deeply involved in the world of education technology. It is my intention to continue with this inquiry with other groups of people. For one, I hope to attend a kindergarten roundup and ask the question to parents, I also hope to ask the question with politicians, high school seniors, and high school drop-outs. I don't know when this project will end or if it ever will really end. Perhaps it would be best if it never ends. Also, sometime in the next few weeks I will setup a YouTube channel where people can submit their own responses to the question, "What is the purpose of school?"

Here are today's collected interviews:

Purpose of School - David Warlick

I am planning on collecting a good share of video responses this week at ISTE11 to the question "What is the Purpose of School," reviving the ongoing project I started last fall. So far in this project I have answers to this question from the http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.giffollowing educators:

Wes Fryer
Sir Ken Robinson
Doug Johnson

Today I had just enough time to attend one session at ISTE since my plane didn't arrive until 2:30 pm this afternoon. I was able to add David Warlick's response to this question here:



I plan on spending a good portion of my morning tomorrow collecting video responses to this question. I will station myself, for the most part, in and near the Blogger's Cafe. If you are interested in contributing let me know.

Twitter Book Club: @alfiekohn (2004) What Does It Mean To Be Well Educated? - Three:9

Three: Grading and Evaluating

9. From Degrading to De-Grading

"You can tell a lot about a teacher's values and personality just by asking how he or she feels about giving grades." Kohnless than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

"A B in English says nothing about what a student can do, what she understands, where she needs help. Moreover, the... http://tl.gd/9pcje1less than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

"Grades waste a lot of time that could be spent on learning, Add up all the hours that teachers spend fussing with ... http://tl.gd/9pcmivless than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

"Grades waste a lot of time that could be spent on learning, Add up all the hours that teachers spend fussing with their grade books. Then factor in the (mostly unpleasant) conversations they have with students and their parents about grades. It's tempting to just roll our eyes when confronted with whining or wheedling but the real problem rests with the practice of grading itself." Kohn

Teachers always seem to get defensive whenever I ask them about whether their grading time is wasted time. Two years ago I taught a Media Arts class at a fairly conservative and traditional high school. First day of class I asked the students to give themselves a grade for the course and write me a two paragraph essay describing what they did to deserve this grade. This, I told them would remain as their course grade as long as they lived up to what they said they would do in their essays. This really pissed off some of the teachers at this school. They said it went against the grading policy. They said it devalued grades they gave in their courses. They said I was being negligent in doing this. Funny thing was, each of those kids lived up to the high expectations they set for themselves, I did not waste my time on trivial matters of subjective grading, and I focused all my energy on learning. It was great. Besides, this was an elective class studying film, television, video games, and other media, subjects students were already interested in. I wasn't about to sully their interest in these topics by introducing an arbitrary rewards and punishment system where it really did not belong in the first place.


All this makes me wonder if people seeing teachers protests like this "grade-in" should come away with the impression the teachers want them to. The stated purpose of these "grade-ins" is to bring awareness of how much work teachers do. It is all in response to the recent demonetization of the profession. But, maybe the appropriate impression people should come away with is, "Boy, these teachers sure have to waste a lot of time and effort on something that is ultimately meaningless," or "If these teachers devoted as much time to learning as they do on grades maybe our kids would learn more at school. After-all, when was the last time your grades in school got you anywhere? When was the last time they opened any real doors for you?

"Wise educators realize that it doesn't matter how motivated students are; what matters is how they are motivated." Kohnless than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

"we need to engage them in a discussion about whether this is a legitimate goal, and whether school exists for the ... http://tl.gd/9pd17oless than a minute ago via Twittelator Favorite Retweet Replyanderscj
anderscj

The #Edreform Paradox

I write a lot on this blog. I thought it would be beneficial to me to summarize some of the key issues I have been wrestling with. Here is what I have come up with:

• Schooling and education are not the same thing and are often at odds with each other.
• Instruction does not necessarily beget learning but it did for most of those who instruct.
• Technology has changed what it is learners need schools for.
• Policies are shaped largely by those who needed schools to provide something different for them in the past than they are needed for learners now.
• Policies shape what schools do and provide and dictate how we measure their success.
• How we measure a school's success determines what gets taught and what gets cut.
  
• What schools do and how they are assessed often lead to a confusion between what makes for good instruction and what makes for good learning and policy mandates this condition.
• Therefore, the actual purpose of school and the purpose most people believe it is for are not the same.
• This disconnect leads many to misuse technology in schools, turning them primarily into instruments of instruction and control rather than aides to learning.
• Those who enter into the business of schooling will likely come from the ranks who were rewarded under this system and thus perpetuate the cycle driving the wedge further between schooling and education.
• Is there any way to break this cycle?
  

So, what am I missing from this list? Does this line of thought hold water? Or, am I way out in left field here?

Doug Johnson on the Purpose of School

After Doug's presentation at the TIES Conference I sat down to discuss, among other things, the purpose of school. So here is the third mini-interview in my ongoing series on this topic:

Sir Ken Robinson on the Purpose of School #TIES10

Photo by TheHomeworkDog

I had the pleasure of getting a mini interview with Sir Ken Robinson today after his Q&A session at the TIES Conference. This interview marks the second in a series exploring the question, "What is the Purpose of School." (The first was last month when I sat down with Wes Fryer to discuss this issue). I truly believe that this is the sticky issue for education reform today. It is amazing how varied responses you get from people to this simple question. I have also found that most people are a bit surprised to find how others don't really share the same answer to this fundamental question. How are we to construct the schools of the future if we don't speak the same language of reform?

Sir Ken Robinson on the Purpose of School from Carl Anderson on Vimeo.

I plan on collecting many more responses to this question from people tomorrow at the TIES conference and throughout the year. Eventually I will collect all these responses into a website where others can contribute their own responses to this same question. In the meantime, if you would like to contribute to this project, submit your own response to this question by adding a comment to this blog post.

Recommended tools for constructing your response:

• - If you can type, you can make movies. Text-to-Movie
• - make still pictures talk with comical moving mouths.
• Add subtitles to foreign language films (like Chinese Movie Creator).
• - Generates videos of your Google Searches to tell a story.
• - Free online audio recorder and audio publishing
• - convert text to speech (spoken by a cartoon avatar)
• - upload your photo, record your voice, share with friends
• - Innovative online presentation program that nicely integrates multimedia from other sources.
• - Prezi.com - The zooming presentation editor
• - Turn your document files into an online books & magazines
• - Collaborative storytelling for families and friends (perfect for creative writing)
• - Make still portraits talk with comical moving mouths.
• - Oddcast makes fun and interesting multimedia generator widgets
• - Video publishing that allows for files up to 500mb. Great video playback quality.
• - Video publishing with great video playback quality.
• - Free video hosting for schools. (like YouTube but specifically for student projects.)
• - User generated video content. Upload and share your videos.

Wes Fryer on Digital Storytelling & The Purpose of School

In St. Paul, MN on Friday at the Collaboration Convention & unConference 2010 I had an opportunity to sit down with Wes Fryer, executive director of Story Chasers, Inc. and author of Moving at the Speed of Creativity, and discuss digital storytelling, school reform, the purpose of school and what we want school to be for our own children. The following are some clips from our talk:

Wes Fryer on Digital Storytelling in the Math Classroom:



I plan on using this clip in a future Weekly Tech Tip I am working on but thought I should should also share it now.

Wes Fryer on the Purpose of School:



Thank you Wes for helping me kick off this side project I have been wanting to do for some time. For some months now I have been wanting to start a video interview project collecting different responses to the same question, "What is the purpose of school." I can't think of a better person to kick off what essentially is a digital storytelling project.

Then, Wes turned his camera on me and essentially asked me the same question:



Wow did I blink a lot. It was the end of the day after an exhausting two-days of co-facilitating this conference and I was beat. I imagine Wes must have been too but he sure didn't show it.

Twitter Book Club: Alfred North Whitehead (1917-1929) The Aims of Education - Chapter 1

The Aims of Education

I have to admit, I am a bit embarrassed that I have gone this far in my career without ever hearing of this author. I suspect it has a lot to do with American nationalism within education curriculum. Whitehead was British and advocating for many of the same things as John Dewey but from the other side of the Atlantic. In my teacher education I heard a great deal about Dewey but never Whitehead. I wonder if that would have been different if I receive my formal schooling elsewhere abroad.

This book is a collection of essays and speeches Whitehead gave over the course of twelve years. I am unsure what the dates are for each of the essays. This first essay on The Aims of Education is a fascinating read. Being a math teacher, Whitehead doesn't exactly demonstrate the poetic skill of some of the other authors I have read for Twitter Book Club but his ideas are definitely engaging. I find it awe inspiring to read someone who was advocating for things like interdisciplinary learning, discovery learning, specialized study, and caution against standardization from a time and place where the British School dominated the education landscape. Today we look at these ideas as new and revolutionary.

I am reading Whitehead's Aims of Education on recommendation from John I Goodlad....less than a minute ago via Twitterrificanderscj
anderscj

...last time I did this was when I read Ivan Illich's Deschooling Society b/c of reference to it by Seymour Papert.less than a minute ago via Twitterrificanderscj
anderscj

"A merely well-informed man is the most useless bore on God's earth. What we should aim at producing is men (cont) http://tl.gd/6i2h9tless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"Every intellectual revolution which has ever stirred humanity into greatness has been a passionate protest against inert ideas." Whiteheadless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"From the very beginning of his education, the child should experience the joy of discovery." Whiteheadless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"Education is the acquisition of the art of the utilization of knowledge." Whiteheadless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"In education, as elsewhere, the broad primrose path leads to a nasty place." Whiteheadless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

Whitehead does have his poetic moments. I love this quote. Makes me think of Robert Frost. It also makes me think of all the times we have heard this product or that solution as making teaching or learning "easy." Is easy always better? Is the easy path ever all that educative?

"no educational system is possible unless every question directly asked of a pupil at any examination is (cont) http://tl.gd/6i2o8sless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

Whitehead makes a strong case against standardized testing here. Yesterday I sat in on a staff development session on assessing NWEA data. Came to realize that in our MYP programme we are giving each student a test in both reading and math each quarter plus they take the state tests in reading, math, and science twice in their time with us. Thats 2 NWEA tests times 4 quarters times 5 years plus 3 MAP tests times 2 times = 46 externally created tests our kids get in their time with us. Now, each time one of these tests is administered (except for two of the MAP tests) it takes up one week of building-wide computer lab access. Thats 42 tests times 5 days = 210 days students and teachers do not have access to our school's computers for use in learning. Since we have fewer than 200 student contact days in a school year that is one full year of a student's MYP program where our schools computers are unavailable. Since we are nowhere near close to having a 1:1 ratio (more like 1:4) our kids only realistically have available access to computers in school for 1 year of their 5 year MYP programme. During that time that they are available I have observe that those machines sit idle and unused about 1/2 to 2/3 of the time. That means that the average student only has in-school access to a computer for learning for 1/3 to 1/2 of a year over the course of their 5 years in our school. If computers do help facilitate and accelerate learning then I think I have a data-driven argument against the use of computers for this kind of testing.

"The solution which I am urging, is to eradicate the fatal disconnection of subjects which kills the (cont) http://tl.gd/6i2rggless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"I am certain that in education wherever you exclude specialism you destroy life." Whiteheadless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"The machinery of our secondary education is rigid where it should be yielding, and lax where it should be rigid." Whiteheadless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"I suggest that no system of external tests which aims primarily at examining individual scholars can (cont) http://tl.gd/6i34qpless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"the first requisite for educational reform is the school as a unit, with its approved curriculum based on (cont) http://tl.gd/6i361mless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

Wow, between 1917 and 1929 Whitehead was calling for interdisciplinary Educ., differentiated instruction, & against standardized tests.less than a minute ago via Twitterrificanderscj
anderscj

@anderscj link? :O)less than a minute ago via Seesmic twhirlDarcy Moore
Darcy1968

@Darcy1968 book http://is.gd/g7Kl2less than a minute ago via TwitterBaranderscj
anderscj

@anderscj TY - very interesting to me :O)less than a minute ago via Seesmic twhirlDarcy Moore
Darcy1968

@Darcy1968 I wonder if I had receive my ed credentials on the other side of the pond if I wld have been as familiar with Whitehead as Dewey.less than a minute ago via webanderscj
anderscj

@anderscj Thanks - "It's not what they are at 18, it is what they become afterwards that matters." I like that thought. Read on!less than a minute ago via webMarge Runkle
mrunkle

@mrunkle I thnk he contradicts himself with that one. What of students who don't live to see 18? Do their lives not matter?less than a minute ago via Mobile Webanderscj
anderscj

@mrunkle He goes to great length to explain that the present is the only time that matters.less than a minute ago via Mobile Webanderscj
anderscj

Additionally, the following were sent to me via DM:

ChrisVacek

Following your Whitehead quotes. My favorite from his Metaphysics book, "Appearance sheds it's note of derivation." So few read anymore...

ChrisVacek

Once a thing is what it becomes, the process of how it got to be that way is lost. When we appreciate an oak tree, we don't think, "acorn".

I am not sure why Chris sent these to me as a DM and not an @reply and I am not in the habit of sharing what I get via DM but I don't think either of these message constitute any need for privacy or confidentiality.