Educators as Empowered Learners

I guess I might as well start this series with my soapbox message- the importance that educators continue to be learners and what that looks like in the digital age. If anyone sees the importance of this as much as I do, we immediately become fast friends. Below is the excerpt from the ISTE Standards for Educators that describes this standard:

Empowered Professional

1. Learner - Educators continually improve their practice by learning from and with others and exploring proven and promising practices that leverage technology to improve student learning. Educators: 
• Set professional learning goals to explore and apply pedagogical approaches made possible by technology and reflect on their effectiveness.
• Pursue professional interests by creating and actively participating in local and global learning networks.
• Stay current with research that supports improved learning outcomes, including findings from the learning sciences. 

                                               (ISTE Standards for Educations- 2017)

There isn't a teacher worth a grain of salt that doesn't try to better their teaching yearly but these standards suggest looking at oneself through the lens of technology integration. If we believe that our students need technology skills then we as educators need to be plugged into ways of remaining current and relevant with technology opportunities.  For me, this looks like the following-

• Professional Learning Goals: At the beginning of every new year (yes, January not the school year) I ask myself what goals do I have that will make me better at what I do. For instance, this year I have a goal to work on my Google Educator Certifications. As a technology coordinator, I believe this will give me a skill set that will aid me in supporting the teachers at my Google Suites adopted school. Has anyone asked me to do this? No. Part of being an empowered learner is that I look for ways to better myself. I don't wait to be told where I need to better myself. Although I am open to that as well!
• Participating in Local and Global Learning Networks: I take this seriously. I am constantly connecting with others to better myself for my own knowledge but also for the knowledge of my school. if I am stuck in the silo of my school getting feedback from the same people over and over, I become stagnant. I participate in the following ways (please note that none of these options cost me a dime of money)-
• Edcamp GigCity. This is my fifth year of participating in this edcamp unconference in Chattanooga, TN. This participant directed day allows me to grow contacts outside of my school and learn from others- and edcamps are free. While edcamps are not technology conferences, technology is often discussed in some of the sessions because of it's exponential reach and use in today's classrooms. 
• #CHAedu #coffeeEDU. A couple of years ago I decided to start a local monthly 1 hour coffee meetup for any educators interested in discussing education issues/concerns/thoughts. This monthly meeting usually has anywhere from 4-12 educators from higher ed, lower ed, private, and public schools. Last week a Georgia high school math educator shared some really important information that would impact my school. Without me having that discussion with him, I would have been blindsided by it later. 
• #TNEdChat. And other educationally based Twitter Chats. My good edu-buddy Greg Bagby and I serve as co-moderators for the weekly (Tuesdays at 8pm ET) #TNEdChat twitter chat. Educators from all over can join in various weekly discussion topics from anything educational related. Not sure how twitter chats work? Check this out. Wondering if there is a chat out there you might be interested in? Check this out but let me invite you to join us on Tuesdays at 8pm. It is a smaller chat group and might be less overwhelming for beginners. Twitter has grown my connections to other educators exponentially. It is the number one reason I feel I am seen as a change agent because I am always looking for ways to better the educational process and Twitter is my go to. The connections I have made have often turned to school visits and face to face encounters to learn more about what other districts are doing.
• Digital Learning Day. I don't believe my role as an empowered learner should just be about taking. I see that I also need to be sharing myself to help others. Not that I have a lock down on how to do everything in tech integration well but I can perhaps share my fail forwards to prevent others from making the same mistakes. Last year our lower school had an open house for Digital Learning Day so we could show our technology integration in action for any educators wanting to visit and take part. 
• Staying Current: In my role, either I am cutting edge in knowing what is out there or I am irrelevant. I have to be a visionary and forward thinking in order to best meet the needs of my school system. For me this means all the above things I am associated with but I also look for opportunities to attend local, state, and national educational technology conferences. This can be an expensive part of who I am but I look for ways to offset the cost when possible. For instance, at many conferences if you are chosen to be a speaker, you can attend for free or discounted. I take advantage of this when I can. I also try to balance myself by doing reading that contradicts my views on technology integration. Iron sharpens iron and by staying relevant on research I become a more rounded educator.

I believe educators often fear the imposing of technology in their classroom. This first ISTE standard for Educators sets a framework for teachers to become empowered and knowledgeable about educational technology. Dig deeper, become a learner about what's out there and what's coming. Have an open mindset about views you disagree with. Find a group that will grow you. Be a lifelong learner about the things you enjoy but also about technology integration. 

Interpreting the "ISTE Standards for Educators" (Series 1 of 8)

As a member of ISTE (the International Society for Technology in Education), I appreciate the vetting process that the student, educator, and administrator standards go through to support best practice digital age educational environments. These standards focus on learning and not the tools to learn. While the standards have concrete ways to address technology integration, all of these standards are goals educators should and do have for themselves in general.

This is part one of an 8 part series that gives my views and suggestions on how educators can use these standards as a catalyst for becoming significant adopters of the digital landscape in regards to educational technology. Each of the 7 areas designated give educators agency in creating meaningful opportunities in their classroom that encourages digital skills for our students. I have quoted and requoted this statement: "65% of children entering primary school today will ultimately end up working in completely new job types that don’t yet exist, according to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs report." With that we need to prepare students with skill sets that will transfer to any job that they might have. The ISTE Standards for Students  create a framework to make that happen but in order for that to come to fruition, there has to be an understanding of the role of the educator in this digital age. 

The following outline explains the goals of the ISTE Standards for Educators (the dates by each section is when I will be blogging about that particular standard):

• Empowered Professional

• Learner (week of 10/9/17)
• Leader (week of 10/16/17)
• Citizen (week of 10/23/17)

• Learning Catalyst
• Collaborator (week of 10/30/17)
• Designer (week of 11/6/17)
• Facilitator (week of 11/13/17)
• Analyst (week of 11/20/17)

Often when people feel they are being held to a standard they immediately hesitate or push back. It feels like another box to check, lesson to learn or reason to feel challenged. As with any standard we are striving for competency in, excellence is not immediately expected but forward motion is the key. Unlike other standards, I feel these standards empower educators in the classroom to be recognized for their stepping out of the traditional framework of teaching and walking the plank of change but instead of an awaiting group of hungry crocodiles, freedom to work with students that desire to be self-motivated learners can await. To adopt the ISTE Standards for Educators means a willingness to see cultural changes from what has been the norm in education. I can tell you from firsthand knowledge, it won't come easy. Students aren't use to having agency in their learning in the way their ISTE student standards provide. Teachers aren't use to the lack of "control" that their ISTE educator standards suggest.

I do believe these standards will be accepted and widespread in 5-10 years as the norm. If you look at the "life expectancy" and re-writes of all the ISTE standards, they change based on the norm catching up with them...and like any good goal, the finish line moves again. Right now I look at some of the above subsections and think "we just aren't there yet" or "wow, is that who we want our teachers to be?" but I believe the gauntlet is there for competency to be had. I believe the empowerment teachers would feel if they were in this type of educational culture would make them feel both needed and successful.

Often teachers worry that they will be replaced by technology but the goals of the ISTE Standards for Educators is to create opportunities for teachers to truly touch every life in a personal way by leveraging the use of technology to give more time to the teacher's and student's day. These standards encourage teachers to model what lifelong learning looks like as they learn their students and lead them. 

Semantics in the School House

Possibilities for instruction are changing in education faster than ever before. As I have said before, how we define what words mean can seem both passive and aggressive to many teachers in the same room. The connotative meaning of "technology integration" can have varying degrees of expectation associated with it from the eyes of all stakeholders- teachers, administrators, school boards, students and parents. What one teacher sees as "enough" someone else might say "it doesn't even scratch the surface." When one teacher might say "I'm equipping them with future ready skills," someone else might say "they have too much screen time in that class setting." Who is right? Is someone wrong? Or are we nit picking the semantics?

How does a school move beyond the semantics/connotations of individual ideas of what "best practice" looks like to an acceptable use profile that all stakeholders can wrap their heads around? Lately, we have been working on just that at our school. I find myself looking at sentences word by word for interpretation purposes and I'm wondering if like the Louis Armstrong song "Let's Call The Whole Thing Off," I'm digressing on tomato versus tomahto.

I do believe frameworks are important as a guide to get everyone on the same page. I also believe there is value in breaking frameworks down into smaller bite size pieces, making it easier for people to see the goals. And to be honest, the more I dig deeper into these ideas the more I realize mindset of what technology can do in a classroom has to be recognized and considered first. Articles like this one in Edtech Magazine and research like this by OECD makes me mindful of how important it is to define the tomato and tomahto as well as to teach student's balanced use inside and outside the classroom.

Balance doesn't need to happen just in the classroom regarding screen time but also personal usage. We are in a society today where people are applauded for their passion or ridiculed for it depending on what society deems as appropriate. An athlete that becomes drive to train all the time and breaks records is applauded but someone that collects things to the same level of passion is called a hoarder. Helping students navigate balance goes beyond the idea of technology, it is a shift in what we should be teaching in general. Many of the things in regards to technology are like that. Looking at this deeper lately I am seeing the ubiquitous nature of technology and how it overlaps so much of our world. Getting more people involved in the semantics seems both worthy and needed. I don't begin to think I have a lockdown on all the moving pieces.

Finding Your School's Meaningful Language

Lately, our school has been revamping, rewriting and rethinking our student/parent handbook. This has led to some really great conversations that have shown the need to open the door for even more conversations...which I feel is always a good thing. The more voices, both horizontally and vertically within, and best practice viewpoints outside your district, the better the chance to get to a place where all can either "agree on" or "agree to disagree and strategize for the common good." I'm thankful for this period of uncomfortableness and for pushback. I'm thankful to be heard and to be in community to listen to other viewpoints.

During this time of decisions within our technology department I am also dealing with a dog in a halo cone due to surgery (innovation that is a disruption to reach a future goal) and a book that is helping me sift through my thoughts on analog behaviors (our desire as a human race to use all our senses and experience realness). Lump that with having the opportunity to hear Heidi Hayes Jacobs speak at Covenant College last week on the essential question of "How can we prepare our learners for their future?" and my mind is working 90 mph at any given moment with the feeling of conflicting ideas surging through me looking for resolution. I'll be honest, I love it.

One of the things I don't do well as an instructional technologist is assuring others that I am not trying to radically change every classroom in the world. I am just so passionate about what I learn about and the future possibilities I see that I come across sometimes as being a techno-fanatic. I can guarantee you that if you don't work hand in hand with me, you probably have thought that, and as much as I have tried to temper that opinion over the last few years, I do get excited when I see tools evolve that can make a difference in education. Right now I am über excited about two things:

• Next generation chromebooks with touchscreen and the ability to run android apps.
• Paper or paper-like options for computer input that is becoming reasonably cost efficient. 

Forgive me, I digress into a potential future blog post but I share that to say, that's how my mind works. You tell me things you want to do and I am looking towards the future of what that will one day look like. I look for streamlining of tasks, blending of current good pedagogy with contemporary technology tools, and creating a culture of future readiness for our students in a world where the job they may work in does not currently exist. I do get passionate about that, sometimes to a fault.  And that is where Heidi Hayes Jacobs put into words what I sometimes fail to communicate when I am talking with teachers. She has a cut the chase type behavior that makes me envious. She very succinctly shared that pedagogy falls into 3 categories: Antiquated, Classical, and Contemporary.

I love the wording of this. Much to my chagrin, this is what I've been trying to say but I often fill the void with too many words or with too strong of words regarding contemporary. There are things that are outdated or unneeded that we need to cut in our classrooms, there are things that are enduring/essential or well done in our classroom that do not need to be done away with, and there are things that are being created or learned that we need to create in the spaces of our classrooms. Three distinct categories of pedagogy that allow us to sort, filter, and critically look at options, opportunities, growth, AND stability. 

Words matter. As we discussed these 3 words this week, we realized that defining words are important for a sense of cohesiveness. Classical doesn't mean "classical education practices" in this case. We can't allow educational buzzwords to derail us from having a growth mindset. It is my desire to become better at defining words I use and asking others about their words. Assumptions cause us to posture around each other with no moving forward. Creating a culture of safety both horizontally and vertically in a district allows people to feel comfortable to share their views, concerns, and goals. It also allows us all to get to a place where we realize that all disciplines bring value to the conversation of how to best teach students. Feeling valued doesn't mean always getting our way but that you are respected for what you bring to the table. 

As we move forward to both define what our goals are for a graduating student from our school system, we must also realize that expectations from each curricular discipline looks different due to standards, best practice, and prior experiences. Finding meaningful language helps define the culture, expectations, and future of both the educator and student subcultures within a district. Finding how to mold that language based on input from a variety within the constituency creates common vision and buy-in to best answer that essential question Heidi Hayes Jacobs started with:  "How can we prepare our learners for their future?"

The Writing Process that Utilizes Tech Integration

I've been thinking about ways to utilize the efficiencies of edtech and create consistencies for our students lately. While teachers may all expect MLA format at our school, do we also expect the same process in writing? I am not an english teacher but I do enjoy writing. Our school does a wonderful job of growing students that can whip out a paper in no time. It's definitely one of our academic strengths. I believe that is because we see writing across the curriculum, which is a wonderful thing. I also know that some rubrics are either being worked on or are in place to grade papers equally no matter what the subject matter. I love that. 

I can't help but wonder how does technology support that well-oiled process because well...that's what I do...wonder about technology. So I am using this blog post to brainstorm possible ways to suggest technology be utilized both for efficiencies of the teacher/grader as well as to create efficiencies, standardized expectations, and additional learning opportunities for the students. 

http://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/paragraph_hamburger

Prewriting: That time when students are gathering together in their mind what this paper will say and look like. It's the prep stage. I'll always remember sitting in on a fourth grade teacher explaining the parts of a paragraph to his students as a hamburger. I had never heard that before and it has always stuck with me. We, as educators, work hard to help our students learn to write. For many students this planning stage might best be done through pen and paper. Why not allow students to plan using the Wave Rocketbook notebook that would back up to their Google drive? Or let them use some mind mapping tool like Popplet to organize their thought processes to decide which direction to go? Or let them organize their main parts of their paper in Google Docs and allow peer review feedback via comments? 

Drafting: We are a school that uses GSuites. The ability to create their first draft in Google Docs adds so much robustness to the writing process because of the ability to give immediate feedback as soon as a peer or teacher makes suggestions. The ability to see past correction histories in the process can help writers maneuver forward in creating a very good paper. The beauty of self-saving Google Docs is there is less pressure to work on the fine tuning and more ability to just GO while writing. Research shows us that in the process of paper writing creativity is stronger when typing due to the fact that the brain works faster than we can physically write. The act of "writing" slows us down. While I don't believe technology integration = typing papers in class, I do believe the efficiencies of faster creation and a teacher working the room either virtually in a document or reading over a student's shoulder is a huge benefit to today's classrooms. 

Revising and Editing: There are multiple ways that Google Docs aids the revising and editing stages even before anyone other than the author lays eyes on it. For instance, teaching students to turn on the editing options (to the upper right of the paper) as they type allows them to learn as they go. 

One of the more recent features of Google Docs that can help students in researching is the "EXPLORE" feature that allows a student to access a web browser within the Google Doc to quickly look up things to support their writing. This can be found under the Tools tab on the tool bar.

While talking about research, here is where others might disagree with me but I think we are at a time where it is more imperative than ever that we help students learn what plagiarism is and we allow them to make corrections before they actually "turn in the paper."  When I was in high school (a long time ago) I think it was easier to realize if you were plagiarizing or not. I went to a library to gather a limited amount of resources and I read through them. Because it was a limited amount of resources, it was easy to remember what I read verses what I inferred from what I read. Today's students can pick up their device and have access to oodles of information on any given topic. I think it is easier than ever before to plagiarize and not even realize it. Look at all the hot topic media reports of various celebrities and politicians being called out for plagiarism. I know this is a judgment on my part but I wonder if it is truly intentional plagiarism much of the time. 

By expecting students to import their papers to something like www.turnitin.com before turning it in for grading, we help our students become aware of what plagiarism is in the process. Not only that, we put the owness on our students to correct grammatical errors before they get to the teacher (this works unless you are actually grading for grammar obviously). The point I'm trying to make is this can become an effective teaching tool in itself and make for efficiencies for our teachers. I do not think running a paper through a self-checking software means it is a good paper. I do think it can be part of steps that could ensure a paper is well written though.

Rewriting: Teachers being able to give feedback during the revisions stage (after going through something like turnitin.com) via Google Docs comments allows the teachers to see if corrections to suggestions were actually made or just ignored. Instead of having multiple papers in front of them of drafts, this makes for efficiencies as well. On the student side, to be able to click "resolve" in the process of rewrites creates a neatness of process for the student. Dare I say receiving suggestions or questions from a teacher via comments instead of pen marks potentially written all over a page is also both easier to read for the student and less overwhelming when doing final writes?

Publishing: In the past, a "published" document basically meant a teacher and maybe the students in the class got to see the finished document but in today's world the ability to allow students authentic feedback from the world at large is both an amazing ability and meets the ISTE (International Society for Technology Education) standards for students in multiple areas in regards to educational technology. What if our students added their paper to a blog? Shared their paper with a prominent author on the subject of their paper? Created an opportunity for authentic feedback by emailing the paper to scientists, historians, or others they feel might connect with what they have said? 

To repeat the process I think might best meet both student and teacher needs in integrating technology into writing:

1. Students receive rubric for assignment when the assignment is explained.
2. Students create mind maps in their planning stages, either by using digital paper or online graphic organizers.
3. Students draft their paper in Google Docs and utilize both the editing options and the explore options during this process.
4. Students upload the paper to www.turnitin.com to look for both grammatical and plagiarism issues and then rewrite after receiving the results but before sharing with teacher/grader.
5. Students share document with teacher/peers for review and feedback. Comments in Google Docs are used to make the process of corrections more streamlined for students.
6. Expectations for publishing are in place for (x) number of papers a year for every student.

I know I am not an English teacher so I wonder what parts of this seem worrisome? A burden?....Thoughts?

Squad Goals

As we navigate technology integration at our preK-12 school we are looking at establishing a better understand of definitions and expectations.  This includes:

• Philosophy of Instruction Technology Integration
• Integration Expectations
• Instruction Standards Related to Technology
• Device Infrastructure

Most currently we have been rewriting and reassessing our philosophy statement. While this is a work in process, I'm wondering what philosophy statements have others seen that they really liked? 

I have several questions for anyone willing to discuss:

1. What could be stated better in your own district's philosophy statement? 
2. Does your district/school have a philosophy statement for technology integration?
3. Would you include the ISTE standards in your philosophy statement? Why or why not? 
4. Should a philosophy statement offer examples?
5. How should the philosophy of technology integration support the mission statement of the school. Should that be stated in the philosophy?

The following is our work in process...thoughts? 

"At Chattanooga Christian School we see technology as both a medium and a tool that can be used individually and as a society for human flourishing. It is our desire to lay the foundation for appropriate usage to mold our students into digital citizens with a biblical worldview. Technology is not a replacement for education or an end in itself, but it can be used to to enhance education and to expand that education outside the walls and timeframe of the classroom, empowering students to become lifelong learners. We are preparing our students to learn how to be motivated to leverage technology for best learning practices both now and in the future.

These opportunities are significant, but must be understood within the context of a biblical worldview. As educators, we need to model and instruct wise and discerning use of technology. Technology is rightly used in education inasmuch as it helps improve student learning, teacher effectiveness, and institutional coherence and communication.  The technology team will constantly be evaluating current tools of instruction as new innovations come available. This will happen in direct collaboration with curriculum leaders at our school to find the needed balance to best meet the needs of both students and teachers.`

Technology integration expectations (based on ISTE student standards 2016) for the student include :

• Empowered Learner: Students leverage technology to take an active role in choosing, achieving and demonstrating competency in their learning goal informed by the learning sciences.
• Articulate and set personal learning goals, develop strategies leveraging technology to achieve them and reflect on the learning process itself to improve learning outcomes.
• Students build networks and customize their learning environments in ways that support the learning process.
• Students use technology to seek feedback that informs and improves their practice and to demonstrate their learning in a variety of ways.
• Students understand the fundamental concepts of technology operations, demonstrate the ability to choose, use and troubleshoot current technologies and are able to transfer their knowledge to explore emerging technologies.
• Digital Citizen: Students recognize the rights, responsibilities and opportunities of living, learning and working in an interconnected digital world, and they act and model in ways that are safe, legal and ethical.
• Students cultivate and manage their digital identity and reputation and are aware of the permanence of their actions in the digital world.
• Students engage in positive, safe, legal and ethical behavior when using technology, including social interactions online or when using networked devices.
• Students demonstrate an understanding of and respect for the rights and obligations of using and sharing intellectual property.
• Students manage their personal data to maintain digital privacy and security and are aware of data-collection technology used to track their navigation online.
• Knowledge constructor: Students critically curate a variety of resources using digital tools to construct knowledge, produce creative artifacts and make meaningful learning experiences for themselves and others.
• Students plan and employ effective research strategies to locate information and other resources for their intellectual or creative pursuits.
• Students evaluate the accuracy, perspective, credibility and relevance of information, media, data or other resources.
• Students curate information from digital resources using a variety of tools and methods to create collections of artifacts that demonstrate meaningful connections or conclusions.
• Students build knowledge by actively exploring real-world issues and problems, developing ideas and theories and pursuing answers and solutions.
• Innovative Designer: Students use a variety of technologies within a design process to identify and solve problems by creating new, useful or imaginative solutions.
• Students know and use a deliberate design process for generating ideas, testing theories, creating innovative artifacts or solving authentic problems.
• Students select and use digital tools to plan and manage a design process that considers design constraints and calculated risks.
• Students develop, test and refine prototypes as part of a cyclical design process.
• Students exhibit a tolerance for ambiguity, perseverance and the capacity to work with open-ended problems.
• Computational Thinker: Students develop and employ strategies for understanding and solving problems in ways that leverage the power of technological methods to develop and test solutions
• Students formulate problem definitions suited for technology-assisted methods such as data analysis, abstract models and algorithmic thinking in exploring and finding solutions.
• Students collect data or identify relevant data sets, use digital tools to analyze them, and represent data in various ways to facilitate problem-solving and decision-making.
• Students break problems into component parts, extract key information, and develop descriptive models to understand complex systems or facilitate problem-solving.
• Students understand how automation works and use algorithmic thinking to develop a sequence of steps to create and test automated solutions.
• Creative Communicator: Students communicate clearly and express themselves creatively for a variety of purposes using the platforms, tools, styles, formats and digital media appropriate to their goals.
• Students choose the appropriate platforms and tools for meeting the desired objectives of their creation or communication.
• Students create original works or responsibly repurpose or remix digital resources into new creations.
• Students communicate complex ideas clearly and effectively by creating or using a variety of digital objects such as visualizations, models or simulations.
• Students publish or present content that customizes the message and medium for their intended audiences.
• Global Collaborator: Students use digital tools to broaden their perspectives and enrich their learning by collaborating with others and working effectively in teams locally and globally.
• Students use digital tools to connect with learners from a variety of backgrounds and cultures, engaging with them in ways that broaden mutual understanding and learning.
• Students use collaborative technologies to work with others, including peers, experts or community members, to examine issues and problems from multiple viewpoints.
• Students contribute constructively to project teams, assuming various roles and responsibilities to work effectively toward a common goal.
• Students explore local and global issues and use collaborative technologies to work with others to investigate solutions."

Requiring Edtech

I'm in an edtech conundrum. I've been looking at student and teacher standards posted by the leading educational technology society in the world (ISTE). While my edtechie heart says "Yes, finally!" my realistic teacher heart says "These are too technology centered to become widely accepted." It doesn't surprise me. The balance of what looks like edtech integration and what doesn't is a fine line I have been trying to interpret for years! Add to the fact that it is a fast moving target. Technology changes tend to be fast yet we are in a slow moving industry - education. Technology is always changing and the relevancy of what I should be can easily be outdated from year to year at our school.

Educational technology is a fluid thought- new hardware and software floods the market constantly. Once edtech rolls off the assembly line it is somewhat outdated. It's just the nature of the technology beast. So how does the edtech culture create standards for usage that should last at least 5 and no more than 10 years and it be both relevant and cutting edge at the same time? Better yet, how does my technology department come up with a philosophy of instructional technology integration and integration expectations in this ever changing culture? Should we create expectations that lead to growth or should we set minimum expectations? Should the technology department at my school be making these decisions in an edtech echo chamber or should the curriculum leaders also be a part of these ongoing discussions and decisions? Silo thinking rarely leads to meeting the needs of the vast, just the viewpoints of the few tend to be represented.

The next heavy weighing conundrum in the ever changing world of edtech is how do we decide on what's best for our school in a flood of so many choices? I get hung up on the idea of whatever I choose may be less desirable a month from now. How often is changing and reassessing necessary and needed? And how do you find the balance between status quo to prevent extra work on teachers and moving forward for the greater good? Because regardless, the front end of new technology adoption always leads to more work.

I want to support and lead our school to get the most out of technology but I also want our teachers and staff to know I support their need for consistency as well. The conundrum is ongoing in my head for my school but as I assess and reflect on the changing ISTE standards with others in my PLN, I realize I am not alone. There is both comfort and frustration in that.

Blended Learning from an Edtech Perspective

Year one of the blended learning math prototype for the eighth grade math class is in the books. It has been a year highs and lows, confusion and accomplishments, making things work and figuring out what doesn't work. And that is just from my perspective, not from the actual teachers that made this prototype rock. 

Taking on learning a brand-new LMS that was actually a student performance system was a feat in itself. Adopting blended learning with students that were used to "sit and get" seemed like an impossible task at times. Navigating standards, modalities, checkpoints, and grading heaped extra fast learning on the part of overwhelmed teachers on a regular basis. To say they persevered would be an understatement for the year. Not only did they persevere but they owned and achieved far more for our school than anything a gradebook, NWEA testing, or administrative satisfaction can show. And yet gradebooks, testing and administrative satisfaction in the program were all evident as well. 

There are things that prototypes do that you don't expect.  This prototype created a culture of risk-taking that is not the norm at our school. This prototype allowed me to flourish in the idea of innovation by giving me authority and opportunity. This prototype gave Ed Tech a voice in academia more than ever before. 

But what really excites me about this prototype is that it proves that even the students you don't always expect to have the desire to succeed or take on their own learning will choose to set their own goals when they feel supported. The results of the student survey abundantly stated that the majority of students loved the self pacing aspect of this class. In the beginning of the year that wasn't even a goal but these three amazing teachers saw the value. The students loved the feeling of empowerment that voice and choice  in the path of their learning created for them. Students were setting their own goals higher than the teachers would have ever created and they were learning what works best for them in order to meet their learning objectives. Personalized learning happened. Every person in the class that filled out the survey left the class feeling successful in math this year. 

I am thankful for the opportunity I had to be a small part of this math prototype, I am thankful for the teachers that I worked with at CCS that jumped in with both feet and followed the vision but took it beyond where we ever expected it to go. The very essence of the word prototype means learning, adapting, revamping, trying, failing and in then creating a sample or model that could serve as an example for the future. I have no doubt that has been done. I also believe that many of the students that were a part of this prototype learned more about themselves as learners than they ever have in the past because they were stretched beyond their normal mode of learning. I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that we have taught the students the process of recognizing how they best learn. 

The teachers of this class went into this prototype feeling ill equipped and overwhelmed by the change. They came out of the school year seeing the value, becoming passionate about the vision, and willing to take on more. I cannot wait to see what the future holds! Jennifer Matthews, Sara Davick, and Nicole McKinney thank you for not shutting the door in my face when I said "exit ticket," "lms," and "standards" over and over again. Thank you for supporting me in my role as well. All year long I stood amazed at God's orchestration of a team that brought to the table so many varied gifts that played a crucial role in the success of this year. Team work makes dream work!

The Problem with Checklists

I'm guilty. I just opened up my iPad case and 5 different lists of "things to do" fell out of it. We all need a source for organization and for me, writing it on a note ingrains it in my head, but that isn't the type of checklist I am talking about in this blog. I am talking about "integration checklists." IF we say "you have to use this, this, and this in your classroom" we are doing two things:

1. Stiffling the creativity of teachers that look beyond the things they have been taught.
2. Placing criteria for tech use into a checklist of "done this" which never leads to "tech inteGREATion." 

My views on this have changed over the years. In year one of having 3 iPad carts in the elementary school, the "requirements" were two projects based on current units of study with the technology coach. I'll be honest, I think the idea had massive value in that first year to push some teachers out of their comfort zone with a bit of handholding or to support teachers excited about the thought of technology but nervous about implementing alone. Year 2- the same "requirements" were there but I also saw an influx of teachers wanting to implement technology in their "centers"- blended learning began! We are at year 3 now and we started the year with the same "projects" requirement but for a few grades mandatory implementation of tech-based math instruction has also been added. Now that there is a comfortability for most of the teachers the struggle is "we want more iPad time and more iPads." I find myself researching for them more than ever before because they are thinking outside the box at "what if" ideas. I rarely have to twist arms or remind them of the "requirements."

Where am I now in what things should look like in the future? I think we are ready to move to expectations based on standards. Currently I see myself perusing the ISTE standards for teachers and students. I see next year perhaps looking differently with what can be seen as a bit more freedom for creativity. Next year, perhaps, we will base requirements on standards with concrete examples from the tech coach on ways to meet those standards. 

It has been exciting to see teachers wanting more iPads and iPad time for their classroom. It's been exciting to see the revelation of what technology can accomplish in the elementary classroom as well. Not everyone is "all in" and that is alright but some of our teachers are all up in the R of SAMR. 

I'm thankful for transformational classrooms that I have gotten to be a part of the planning of implementation. I'm thankful for teachers that are owning implementation. And I am thankful for the hesitant ones that make me dig deep and force me to prove the worth- it's always good to be reminded why you do what you do and what you believe in. I believe in technology coaching collaboration, using technology to support learning, and seeing technology used for consumption, curation, connection, and creation on a regular basis that makes some students super excited about learning.

The Beauty of Collaboration

After 3 FULL days of mapping, planning, and strategizing with 3 different groups of educators (administration, technology, and math teachers) from 3 different schools within 3 different areas of the United States, I can tell you that the Three-cubed prototype project was amazing. Every single day of my life I connect with my twitter PLN to become a better educator and I truly find great value in that. I also found great value in meeting with like-minded individuals to work towards a solution for the common good of Christian education.

As we walked into this meeting, the majority of us had met one other time, over a couple of days for a few hours, so to say there wasn't a huge "connection" between the different schools would be a fair assumption. After a day and a half of some really good "give and take" safe discussions we broke up into groups to create a "lesson plan" using some math standards. My group consisted of a principal from Sioux Falls, South Dakota, myself as an instructional technologist from Chattanooga, Tennessee and a math teacher from Chattanooga as well.

We went right into prep mode looking at our standards we had been assigned. Immediately the math teacher had ideas on what she would want to do. The administration looked at it from what are the different modalities we could use in order to reach the most learning styles and he started aligning the standards being reached based on the choices we started brainstorming. I, of course, started looking at what technology could enhance the learning objectives that could also be standard aligned. In a matter or 30 minutes of thinking and rethinking, asking each other questions and seeing the math teacher as the true authority of the group, we had a blended learning lesson that felt right with a prior night flipped video for a hook.

It felt good to talk it out amongst ourselves. To share ideas when we each got stuck on a certain point. To reiterate the value of certain objectives when it got lost in the discussion. To search for helpful alternatives for each modality. To share our concerns over things that had the potential to cause a bottleneck. To share our excitement on things that certainly would cause certain students to have a better chance at learning well. It was the beauty of collaboration. A collaborative opportunity that worked so well it felt like perfection. Maybe it was because we had spent so much time together pushing ourselves to think outside the box and to be open to new ideas. Maybe it was because we had been forced to think creatively for a while. Maybe it was because we were all invested in the concept and were ready to "see" it in action. Regardless of the why's, it was a lovely moment.

You know those kind of moments, I have had several as an educator: Like the time the third grader that had never spoken out loud in class that I had taught since kindergarten raised her hand and answered a question, or the time that a co-teacher told me "I don't fear technology, your encouragement has made me brave to try new things and with your help, I see the value of this tool in my classroom.", or when I walk into the classroom as a tech coach and a student looks up and sees me and starts clapping because he's so excited to get to use technology, or my all time favorite is when a parent comes to me concerned about technology use in the elementary school and leaves saying "you've opened my eyes, my student is fortunate to have you as an instructor." We have those moments that make us go "YES!" The last three days were like that for me. I love innovation, I love collaboration. I believe that iron sharpens iron. These days included all those things. If I could do that type of thing every single day and throw in some student interaction as well, I would be walking on clouds professionally speaking.

As a rule, the teaching profession has been silo-centered...teachers have plugged away in their classroom with 20-30 students with little accountability, being the sole authority, with no resources beyond the 20-30 minutes they MIGHT get for lunch and a brief planning period on some days that they choose to seek out if they want to. Administration tries to develop meaningful professional development as best they can within that as well. But times are changing- educators are seeing more support staff in their classrooms and they are being evaluated as they teach more often. I saw a quote today that made me smile-- it says "If we create a culture where every teacher believes they need to improve, not because they are not good enough, but because they can be even better, there is no limit to what we can achieve." - Dylan Wiliam (University of London). I am a believer in this. I continue to seek out ways to collaborate for the greater good of the students that I teach. I have a strong desire to be a lifelong learner and never grow stagnant and "happy" with my teaching ability. I love thinking beyond "how does this affect my students" and looking at a broader picture. These last 3 days have just solidified that within me more and more. Thankful hearted today.