I’ve just read some great reflections on the Expanding our Boundaries by colleagues Shannon Smith, Kent Manning and Doug Peterson, and I am sure there are more to come. Some of the recurring themes centre around developing professional networks, facilitating teachers with a familiarity of the digital tools that can engage students in collaborative, creative learning, and helping students, and teachers, find their passions as eloquently stated by Ken Robinson in The Element.
Truly an exciting, collaborative 2 days of learning, sharing, scaffolding and eating, lots of eating. But just how inclusive was it? Certainly there were teachers there who were on the early adoption scale of the ed- tech continuum. And kudos to them for hanging in there, we covered a lot of ground! We all shared in their personal triumphs when they got that video embedded in a wiki. Giant steps. I hope they sustain the networks that they started so we can continue to learn of their experiences in their classrooms upon return. It’s one thing to work with a litany of digital tools during a 2-day conference; another thing entirely to understand, and use, the power that these tools can bring to modern practice.
But the reality is that for most of the people in the room, this was not their first ed tech conference, and in fact were rather familiar with all the tools. Are we in fact getting our message out to those that need to hear it?
Many of us fundamentally believe that we need to engage our students differently from the socratic teaching methods that are the foundations of our current pedagogy. Many of us "get" where we need to go when talking about modern literacies, that kids learn through on-line socializations, and that we need to understand this connected world so that we may guide safe passage. I personally believe that we as educators have a moral obligation to act as signposts in the changing digital landscape. Who else is going to do it?
But who are we shouting this out to? Where are the preservice teachers, the parents, the administrators, the policy makers, the students! at these conferences? Are we doing a good job of demonstrating the power of these digital tools in an engaging, constructivist classroom, or are we just playing with our toys, dazzled by the next best thing that comes along at a dizzying speed of invention? Are we just reinforcing our own beliefs? Is any body out there?
Next conference: Expanding Everybody’s Boundaries
Comments
I think you are on to something here, Barbara.
Preaching to the choir this past weekend? - - perhaps in part. I heard, through a couple of side f2f conversations that the "converted" community [knowledgable in most things web2.0] at #expbound was in the 15 to 20% range. Too high, too low?
I agree that the stakeholder group needs to expand. As you have said, how is the question. You have identified the "Who". Right on!
You also mention the Ken Robinson - "The Element" thread that was weaved through the conference. Could this be part of the solution? @shannoninottawa quoted the definition of the element. And when I deliberately asked some folks I was talking with this weekend about their interests and passions, most were able to speak about one thing [at least] that really "brought it home" for them. One person said, "Project Based Learning" another "Writing with High School Students". As I'm sure most folks have several passions [one would hope] it was great to hear about "just one" from many people.
Thank you for your questions and thoughtful insights.... Kent
To continue this train of thought....
When I answered PBL to your question on Sat., Kent, had I probably given it more time I would have probably said Knowledge Building...inquiry...or constructivism...the bigger umbrella under which PBL might (but not always) fall. It's hard to name one passion actually!
Barbara mentions,
"Many of us fundamentally believe that we need to engage our students differently from the socratic teaching methods that are the foundations of our current pedagogy" and I think this is the key. We would be teaching differently from many with our colleagues even without the technology, wouldn't we? I know I was....before a computer even entered my classroom!
In planning for a hands-on day at ECOO (generally technology oriented) this is something on my mind...it's not about the tools, it's about the learning and the pedagogy behind that. Am I on the right track?
More...[Brenda]
I think so, Brenda [on the right track]
On... "it's not about the tools,it's about the learning and pedagody"
I couldn't agree more. When guiding students and teachers through digital storytelling process, we do not even touch the computer part [OK, so they write the narratives using a word processor] until the afternoon of a day long session. During the morning, we write compelling stories, ones that are heartfelt and will move the reader.
Bernajean Porter in her 2004 book "DigiTales, The Art of Digital Story Telling", she writes [on page 3] "Anyone crafting or leading a storytelling experience will need to focus their thinking on developing a story first rather than technology. No amount of technology will fix a poorly written or flat, impersonal story. When the digital storytelling is finished, you want your story to be remembered for its soul, not the bells and whistles."
So can we apply this Bernajean-ism to most technology related tasks we do in the classroom? Interesting question.
And thanks for the tweak [not tweet :] about inquiry, constructivist - - I do remember you mentioning this and my mind was going off to the work Jeffrey Wilhelm writes about inquiry here and of course our old friend Vygotsky.
Brenda, thank you for the discussion... Kent
Thanks Rodd, Kent and Brenda for your thoughtful responses.
Indeed Kent, if your numbers better reflect the demographics of attendees than my presumption, then we are definitely moving to inclusion of the congregation
.
Barbara