Friday, 23 May 2014

12 big technologies on the education horizon

12 big technologies on the education horizon

12 big technologies on the education horizon
1 year or less:
1. BYOD
2. Cloud computing
3. Mobile apps
4. Tablet computing
2-3 years:
5. 3D printing
6. Games and gamification
7. Learning analytics
8. Makerspaces
4-5 years:
9. Flexible displays
10. The Internet of Things
11. Virtual and remote laboratories
12. Wearable technologies
“The future is already here,” Johnson said. “We just need to look for the good models, where people are getting traction, and follow what they’ve done.”
“Understanding the changing K-12 landscape is critically important for all of us, as we try to design learning experiences to help students succeed,” said Jim Vanides, global education program manager for HP, which supports the report research.
The report includes some slightly new approaches this year, focusing on fast, mid-range, and long-range trends, as well as examining varying degrees of education challenges.
Fast trends approaching in 1-2 years include:
  • Digital delivery is increasingly the norm
  • Evolving expectations for teachers
  • Growing ubuquity of social media
  • Shift to real-world learning
Mid-range trends, 3-4 years away, include:
  • Growing importance of teaching ikids to code
  • Focus on open content
  • Integrations of hybrid learning designs
  • Rising preference fo rpersonal tech
Long-range trends, 5 years or more away, include:
  • The changing physical layout of furniture and classrooms
Challenges are examined with a two-dimensional framework, focusing on whether the challenges is solvable, and whether it is understandable. These challenges all have implications for policy, leadership, and practice.
Solvable challenges:
  • Authentic learning
  • Blending formal and informal learning
  • Low digital fluency of teachers
  • Personalizing learning
Difficult challenges:
  • Complex thinking and communication
  • Increased public concern about privacy
  • Scaling teaching innovations
  • School infrastructures are under-resources
“Wicked” challenges:
  • Balancing our connected and unconnected lives
  • Keeping education relevant
To compare this year’s report with last year’s, watch this three-part CoSN Google Hangout series on the 2013 Horizon Report K-12 Edition:


Thursday, 15 May 2014

Keeping your school’s ICT strategy in the air


Date: 15th May 2014
Theme: ICTLeadership
Tags: ICTManaging ICTTechnology

To start with technology and ignore the learning landscape is to invite disaster. Alistair Smith looks at some key aspects to consider to ensure that your ICT strategy is future-proof.

General-Aeroplane.gif
In the world of aviation the, acronym CFIT stands for Controlled Flight Into Terrain. In the last 20 years some 25 per cent of aviation accidents have involved a crew flying a perfectly serviceable aircraft into the ground.
Of the contributory factors, a loss of situational awareness seems common to all. Pilots became fixated with the technology immediately in front of them and lost sight of the changing landscape beyond.
As the pressures to find a successful solution increase, the chances of doing so diminish. In this situation, the perils of poor decision-making are catastrophic.
If there is an education parallel, it occurs when a school fixates on technologywithout first attending to the learning landscape.
It may be apocryphal, but at the NAACE conference in April I heard of a large secondary which, tight to budget deadline, had recently bought 500 iPads and had the teachers configure them over a weekend, only to discover on the Monday morning that no-one had ever used them in a classroom and they did not have enough broadband capacity or any wi-fi. 
To start with the technology is to keep your head in the cockpit. To avoid educational CFIT, there are some simple principles and things to consider.
First, it is not really about devices, it is about connectivity, so first secure reliable fast broadband access with wi-fi in each learning space.
Second, it is about ease of sharing and collaboration. For example, the sort offered by the use of simple tools such as Google Docs or Apps such as Socrative. 
Finally, it is about shifting the relationship of teaching and learning so that it fits your school context – for some this means flipped classrooms, Skype conferences or YouTube channels, but for others it is much more basic – perhaps more support resources in the pupil portal on your virtual learning environment (VLE). Here are some more things to consider.

Focus on learning and learners

Ask of any technology – will it help deliver our core purpose? Core purpose is about transforming the learning experiences of all of your students for the better. 
For the technology to enhance learning there needs to be an informed understanding of what great learning looks and feels like. It is this understanding which guides the design of learning activities, shapes the choice of platform or the selection of apps. 
Work to ensure you have a robust and informed approach to learning before seeking to add technology. Cramlington Learning Village in the North East of England, for example, has had an innovative VLE for many years based around an easy to understand learning cycle.

Own your own solution

It seems a simple point, but the technologies which are successfully used by other schools may be so because they best meet that school’s needs. However, what works in one context may be ruinous in another. 
For example, Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) might mean bring any device. Students at The George Spencer Academy in Nottingham bring “SmartPhones, tablets, mini-tablets, e-book readers, netbooks, laptops”. For this to be effective requires a high level of responsible independence in students developed in school over time, a confident staff and a viable wireless network. 
In other schools, BYOD might be much more prescribed using, say, the one device the school has leased for each student. Effective leadership is sometimes described as “situational”, the same can be said of effective use of technology.

Principles before platforms 

We would all like to future-proof our solutions. It can’t be done. What can be done is to future-proof the principles of learning and engagement which shape your core purpose. This makes decisions about technology and its classroom application so much easier. 
One teacher recently interviewed for a study on the use of tablets described how they allowed “the ability to flip learning, rapid access to resources, differentiation, instant Assessment for Learning, peer collaboration, modelling and getting far more interaction and engagement”. What is being described are learning methodologies. 

A broad definition of technology

Smart wristbands which measure skin conductivity, eye-glasses which respond to words and movement and 3D printers are what most of us assume when we talk of the technology of the future. They’re already here. But so are other more affordable technologies.
Smart Wall Paint allows you to create a large shared writing surface. At The Lampton School in Hounslow, glass-top tables allow the use of window pens. Flip tables provide vertical or horizontal surfaces. 
At Cramlington a ceiling-mounted unit is linked to Google Earth and projects down onto the floor. At UCL Academy in Swiss Cottage, soft furniture can be built into a lecture theatre shape to create a “super-studio”. 
Kindles and eBook readers are cheap, robust and flexible. Small video cameras can capture learning in the moment. Iris Connect has taken a simple concept of a camera in the classroom and created a staff development tool used by hundreds of UK schools.

Begin with the endpoint in mind

Be ruthless in self-evaluation. Is your school well positioned to benefit from the introduction of new technology? Define where you are, where you would like to be and ask if the technology will help you to get there. While there are many useful “readiness” guidelines available and public events which “showcase” good practice, both are often populated with advice and exemplars drawn from the ideal.
An alternative is to try to profile the qualities of the secondary learner throughout their school years with you. How might your chosen technology or combination of technologies help develop the knowledge, attributes, skills and experiences you wish your learner to leave with? 
Recent NAACE research suggests that a learner’s relationship withtechnology evolves over time. The learner becomes more sophisticated moving from Consumer to Creator to Collaborator. Will your technologysupport this process? You must scan the environment to find out what’s best for your context as it changes over time. 

Disable the dangerous

In some schools debates rage endlessly about the funding of staff biscuits while a decision to commit two per cent of the budget on a technology solution is often made by an individual overnight. In schools, never leave the choice of a new technology in the hands of an individual. Here’s my Dangerous Deputy Rule: “If there’s only one bloke who uses it, understands it or advocates it, then best forget it.” 
To avoid a dangerous and hasty decision – use a consultative group comprising staff, digital champions and parents. When you introduce a digital device it will have an impact on home life. It will in some instances be the cause of missed sleep, family arguments and disputes – so involve parents in decisions.

Align the energies of staff

In any school community you have a mix of experience and engagement with technology. For some staff there is a long timeline of adoption and adaptation, for others it is shorter and more contemporaneous, and each engages withtechnology at differing points along the Professional-Personal continuum. 
Add another dimension of Participative-Passive and now you have four categories of user, each with different needs and offers. Profiling, and so balancing, your technology support groups this way will gain you whole-school buy-in quicker.
Integrate technology into staff development around core purpose rather than delivering lots of separate sessions on aspects of the technology. To complement the on-going formal staff development programmes, have clinics, master classes and pop-ins.
Technology alone will not mask the underperformance that comes as a consequence of an ill-considered or badly implemented approach to learning and teaching. Avoid flying your plane into the terrain. Stay focused on the core purpose: to plan, deliver, evaluate and improve quality learning experiences for all the pupils in your care and energise your school community to do so. Your core purpose is not going to change over time. The technology, and those who use it, will.

Thursday, 8 May 2014

The case for agile pedagogy | Teacher Network | Guardian Professional

The case for agile pedagogy

Learning to program computers can bring unique insights to other fields for both pupils and teachers – Miles Berry on how computational thinking can revolutionise the way we teach and learn
Students working on computers
Learning computational thinking also teaches transferable ways of solving problems and exploring situations which stretch way beyond the computer suite. Photograph: Juice Images / Alamy/Alamy
Policy makers, industry and many teachers are eager that pupils should learn more about computing. This includes learning how to write computer programs, but also "computational thinking", a transferable way of solving problems and exploring situations, which has wide applications across and beyond the curriculum. In short, as pupils learn to program computers and the principles of computer science they start to bring the unique insights of algorithms, abstraction and the like to other fields. The same is true for teachers – ideas from computing can dramatically change the way we think about our work, and one of these, agile development, is what I'd like to explore here.
According to many A-level specifications, students are taught that software projects follow the "waterfall" methodology, starting with agreeing requirements, designing and implementing the software, testing it and then keeping things ticking over when it's deployed to clients.
In other words, the sort of approach that has characterised public sector IT projects like the NHS database. Hmm… This doesn't sound that far removed from how we've designed curricula: a top down list of things "children should be taught", schemes of work, implementation in the classroom, plenty of testing, and the "service pack" of INSET as and when needed.
There is, though, another approach to both software development and, I think, curriculum design. In the world of programming, ideas of adaptive design and the lightweight approaches of the 90s were crystallised in 2001 with the publication of the Manifesto for Agile Software Development, which, while acknowledging that while processes and tools, comprehensive documentation, contract negotiation and following a plan all have their value, much more is gained through focusing on individuals and interactions, getting software that works, collaborating with customers and responding to change.
With a little adaptation, these are ideas which many of us would see as important in a more learner centric, flexible approach to teaching: an approach where we teach the pupils and students we work with, not the ring binder we're given.
Focusing on individuals and interactions means, I think, a serious attempt to provide the personalised learning we used to hear so much about, itself a reiteration of the heady days of Plowden's "At the heart of the educational process lies the child". If Gove goes ahead and "disapplies" the ICT programmes of study, we have an opportunity to tailor what we teach as well as how we teach to the needs, enthusiasms and aspirations of each learner – to ask, "What would you like to learn?" and then to help each find ways to teach themselves and one another.
While agile developers concentrate on getting working code rather than writing documentation, the agile teacher concentrates on developing useful, working knowledge, skills and understanding rather than detailed lesson plans. This is about starting at the beginning, rather than the end, making use of what learners know already and building on that rather than taking the next step in a pre-planned sequence to a pre-determined destination. Objectives are important, both in agile development and agile teaching, but they're immediate objectives in a short "time box", and ones which are immediately useful. There are issues here with more formal approaches to assessment; I'll return to these below.
Collaborating with pupils also ought to be part of agile pedagogy: recognising that it's impossible to make the classroom a learning community without pupils' contribution as partners in, rather than mere recipients of, our teaching. Initiatives such as 'digital leaders' go some way towards this, recognising the technological skills and insights which so many pupils already have, but we could go much further: peer to peer knowledge sharing shouldn't only be for the geeky few.
Response to change is vital in technology education, as the secretary of state acknowledges, but a responsive approach to what's happening in and beyond the classroom matters for all subjects. "Master Teachers" will be expected to "respond intelligently and confidently to the unexpected and wide-ranging questions their pupils are encouraged to ask"
Aren't some of our best lessons those where the learning journey takes an unexpected turn, because of pupils' contributions or, indeed, the unanticipated problems they encounter?
I suspect it's not that easy to adopt these sorts of agile approaches to teaching when there are controlled assessments for GCSEs and A-level specifications to contend with, but I have a sneaking suspicion that a more agile approach to learning might well allow students to take these exams in their stride. The portfolios, projects and problems emerging from a more agile approach might well count more, when it comes to winning a place on university CompSci courses or a job in the digital industries, than GCSE ICT.
Gove's plan to disapply the attainment targets mean that we can look beyond levelling and APP to a more granular can-do approach to assessment, reflecting the emphasis on unit testing in agile development and borrowing some of the tight feedback and goal-orientation of video games and applying these to the classroom.
While national strategies and school policies might have been based on a waterfall-like approach, more than a few teachers' practices have had more in common with agile development than they'd perhaps be aware. Assuming Gove carries through his plans, we've a great opportunity to transform what ICT we teach, but let's go further and use this as a chance to make some real changes to how we teach ICT too.
• Miles Berry is the chair of board of management, Naace and senior lecturer in ICT Education, Roehampton University.