There is an interesting article from a piece of Australian research into kids and how they interact with technology.

Basically it says that kids appear to want the latest piece of technology … nothing new there! But the report goes on to find that kids are a lot more tech savvy than we’d believe … I guess most teachers would say that that’s not new either.

The most important finding it would seem, at least as far as educationalists are concerned, is that kids want the same level of technology, sophistication and facilities as the kit being sold to their parents. Kids are well aware of when they are being offered some ‘dumbed down’ piece of kit. As the report says ‘ today’s kids are clearly tech-savvier than ever, and know when they’re being sold a kiddie version that isn’t as good as their mother’s, father’s or older sibling’s gadget. ‘

So it seems that we should avoid being patronising with regard to the technology we allow our kids to have. After all our kids grow up quickly but the technology grows even quicker and very son becomes obsolete, so why give our kids technology with limited functions whuch would only appear to make that tech have an even shorter life?

Related articles by Zemanta

• 7 New “Interesting Ways to Use” Resources (tbarrett.edublogs.org)
• Conversations #52 – Passion in Education (edtechtalk.com)
• Technology in schools (slideshare.net)
• 5 Fledgling “Interesting Ways” Presentations (edte.ch)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement
• Learning Score
• 6 Ways ICT Can Improve Education
• A Hundred Ways to Show What They’ve Learned
• Handheld Learning Conference 2009

A few weeks ago I took part in an online discussion led by Stephen Heppell on the Vital website. Stephen Heppell is a very highkly regarded figure in the world of education and if you ever have a chance to listen to him speak or present, then I’d certainly suggest you do so. He is a speaker who inspires and provokes thought.

In the online discussion, Stephen asked why was it that ICT had not reduced the costs of education? Apart from Health and Education, ICT had been deployed and used to reduce the overhead costs or running costs of their users. I cannot speak for Health but I can for Education and I felt at first that this was an unfair question. After all, we started introducing technology into the classroom we did so not to reduce costs but to expand and improve the resources and experiences offered to learners. So to criticise us for not using ICT to reduce costs when that had never been our aim, did seem unfair.

Was it unfair, though?

A few days after the online discussion, I received in my inbox an email linking to this article about ICT for students with disabilities in developing countries . In this article it suggests that students need ICT partly because it is cheaper than training and paying for a teacher. The inference being that ICT is a cheaper resource than a teacher and one which, possibly, better addresses the need of the students.

This would be quite a contentious argument here in the UK. How many people, schools or local authorities would welcome replacing teachers with computers, even if it reduces the bill?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Schools must embrace technology (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Managing Change: Engaging The Teachers (ictineducation.org)
• #BETT2010 – Playful Learning (olliebray.typepad.com)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Learning Score
• Transforming Learning
• Comfortable Technology -Learning Transformation pt4
• Knowledge, Learning and Information – Learning Transformation pt2
• In the Dark – An Introduction to Learning Transformation

I came across this article on the Wired UK website. It claims that playing Tetris can alter the structure of the brain; which is quite a bold, one might even say, alarming claim.

It appears that researchers have used brain scans to illustrate that playing the simple computer game had distinct effects upon the brain. It would appear that some areas showed greater ‘efficiency’ and other areas showed the development of more grey matter.

Unfortunately, the article does not really tell us what parts of the brain were found to be more efficient nor which ones developed more grey matter (or indeed whether there was any cognitive improvement as a result of having more grey matter).

Cynically, you notice that the research was funded by ‘Tetris’ makers, so I guess they had an interest in promoting potential positive benefits of using their game. The research also seems to have studied only the brains of adolescent girls, why not boys? Had the researchers assumed that boys might already have played or been exposed to such games and, therefore, were less likely to show any benefit?

Cynicism aside, the research would tend to add weight to the view that playing games is not just a mindless activity or distraction from real thinking. It does tend to show that playing games can act as a mental stimulant. Which may also lend weight to the view that playing games can have a beneficial education effect. Stimulating the brain, relieving boredom have been known for a log time to be of benefit in learning. So maybe, playing games such as Tetris can be beneficial. YOu do have to put this against the addictive nature of some games, however, and ask at which point does the positiove benefit of mental stimulation give way to the time-wasted element of addiction?

Finally, the article makes a claim that playing Tetris could help offset the effects of old age; another bold claim which may or may not be the case.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Survey says: Tetris is good for your BRAIN! (destructoid.com)
• How I Got So Smart (themoderatevoice.com)
• Is the Label “Games Based Learning” Useful? (edte.ch)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Is this … the Worst iPhone App Ever?
• Retro Teaching
• Do we really need a New OS?
• Can Anyone tell me How they have Learned from Failure
• mobile browser test

A recent study suggests that the use of interactive whiteboards (IWB) can improve learner achievement by 16%. This could be good news for those schools seeking to improve the number of learners achieving 5 A*-C grades grades, particularly the current crop of National Challenge Schools.

The study would suggest that by focussing upon the effective use of  a widely available piece of technology, schools and pupils can improve their performance.  This positive news, however, should be tempered a little because the study also shows that some inappropriate use of Interactive whiteboards may have a detrimental effect for some learners (see previous post). So, with appropriate staff training or CPD, schools could make better use of their IWBs and anticipate improved levels of achievement for their learners.

Training, CPD, of course, costs money but in this instance, it would seem to be money well spent. National Challenge Schools may already have budgets to help them improve the attainment levels of pupils. For all staff and schools, the upcoming ICT CPD for staff initiatives could help provide the necessary input.

So if you find yourself with an ICT CPD budget or an upcoming INSET day and you’re not sure what to do with it, spending part of it on improving the use of Interactive Whiteboards might be worthwhile.

For interactive whiteboard training in UK, you could do a lot worse than contact Danny http://www.whiteboardblog.co.uk/about/

Related articles by Zemanta

• Learning Platforms, Insets and lessons (digital-teacher.co.uk)
• Secondary Science on the IWB (warringtonict.wordpress.com)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Pupils and new Technology
• Learning Score
• 6 Ways ICT Can Improve Education
• A Hundred Ways to Show What They’ve Learned
• Handheld Learning Conference 2009

I confess, I have only recently watched this video. I cannot believe that I have not heard of or seen Learning Score before; I can only say that I must have had my head buried deeply in the sand.

Learning Score appears to be a fantastic tool for devising lesson plans. These things had been the bane of my life as a teacher and I’m sure the same is true for many other teachers.  Hours would be spent drawing up lesson plans either by hand or on a word-processor; it was probably the most tedious of all teacher tasks. Also, as John Davitt says in the video, you were never really quite sure how the lesson would appear in reality (and there were many times when the reality hardly matched the plan!)

What I  immediately like about the software is that it looks appealling; it’s not a word-processed grid or template that the teacher has to squeeze everything in. It’s interactive and it links dynamically to other resources. What made it appeal further for me is the potential to link  to resources on a VLE. So if you’ve been spending hours days uploading content onto you’re VLE now you have an easy way to make use of them instead of just letting them lie there. Or if you’ve not yet started loading content onto your VLE, now you have a good reason to start!

I’ve not used the package as yet but if you are able to save the Learning Score files onto the VLE then I can envisage further potential arising. What I’m envisaging is having a Learning Score containing links to other Learning Score files. Each of these Learning Score files would represent a lesson plan and the Learning Score we’re adding them into would be a Scheme of Work. Hey, if we then save the Scheme of Work as a Learning Score file and link in other scheme of work files, aren’t we creating a syllabus, then a curriculum etc..?

At points in the video, John alludes to collaborative lesson planning; with the learners having a say in how much time is spent on a particular part of each lesson. I very much like this idea, not least because it helps the learner have a bit more responsibility for their learning and having a say in the way the content is being presented to them. It also, of course, could help them manage their workload.

How about going a step further and having the learner draw up the learning score themself? Each learner could have their own individual Learning Score setting out what they are going to do, how long they are going to spent on each part of it and what resources they are going to access, possibly also indicating what ‘output’ (essay, video, discussion etc) they are going to produce. Let’s then say that they each present their Learning Score to the teacher for approval. The teacher examines each one and approves it or suggests modifications such as extra resources that could be used or alterations to timings.  The learner then takes their own Learning Score away and embarks upon their own learning path.

I’d guess that another beauty of the package is that it needn’t be confined to class lessons, the Learning Score could cover time spent on activities at home. As I started writing this paragraph, I was thinking of learning activities from home and thinking of supporting Home Access but I guess the term ‘activities’ could well include social or leisure activities … mind you I don’t know if the package has icons for some of these ‘activities’ Nevertheless, the possibility of using the package to include home learning is intriguing.

Overall, this looks a great piece of software that I’m sure many teachers would love. It has great potential for supporting innovation or transformation in learning. I do feel that not just teachers but also learners would love to use it. Maybe this resource should be made compulsory for any school involved in BSF or Primary Capital building programmes?

Related articles by Zemanta

• 10 Tips for Teaching Technology to Teachers (edtechpower.blogspot.com)
• “Both Adobe AIR 2 and Flash Player 10.1:” and related posts (techcrunch.com)
• It’s all done! (digital-teacher.co.uk)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Pupils and new Technology
• ICT : Education on the cheap?
• Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement
• 6 Ways ICT Can Improve Education
• A Hundred Ways to Show What They’ve Learned

It seems to me that there are 6 ways in which we can use ICT to improve education. I make no claims for the originality of these ways, indeed the first 3 have come from a forum discussion with Peter Twining on the Vital website (you may need a login to see the Vital page).

These 6 areas are;

1. Support – Using ICT to allow us to do things more effectively or efficiently but without changing the fundamental curriculum or pedagogic approach
2. Extend – Using ICT to present things in new ways or using ICT to access resources which would otherwise be difficult to access
3. Transform – allowing us to do new or different things that would not be possible without the technology and thereby changing the curriculum or pedagogy
4. Engagement – involving learners in activities through the motivational influence of technology or the functional use of technology (e.g. access from home as well as school) or social engagement (e.g. with fellow learners or between families and school)
5. Inclusion – using ICT to overcome learner disabilities or disadvantages
6. Improvement – saving time, being able to enrich a learning experience or using ICT to make a learning outcome possible which might not otherwise have been possible.

I claim no great originality in any of these but it does suggest to me that we might have the basis of a framework or matrix by which staff or institutions can record their use of ICT and the impact it has.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Engagement does NOT equal Learning… (greenbananablog.org)
• ICT and Citizenship (ictineducation.org)
• The New Primary Curriculum – England (dougdickinson.co.uk)
• Learning Confluence: Where Philosophy Meets Practice in the 21st Century (123elearning.blogspot.com)
• I’ve been thinking again … (dougdickinson.co.uk)
• 8 ways to get teachers talking about learning (deangroom.wordpress.com)
• ‘We are the people we’ve been waiting for’ – 2 (dougdickinson.co.uk)
• Teaching Skills: What 21st Century Educators Need To Learn To Survive (masternewmedia.org)
• Computers in Classrooms Post-BETT Special (ictineducation.org)
• ICT CPD 4 Free from NAACE (warringtonict.wordpress.com)
• Vital CPD from the Open University – I’m first in the hot seat… (olliebray.typepad.com)
• A Busy time for curriculum thinkers and planners (elgg.jiscemerge.org.uk)
• Giving Children the Tools is Not Enough (edte.ch)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Pupils and new Technology
• Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement
• Learning Score
• A Hundred Ways to Show What They’ve Learned
• Handheld Learning Conference 2009

‘Home Access’ is a UK Government initiative, in England, to provide computers and online access to disadvantaged learners to enable them to have access to online resources and services when outside school. It follows on from the earlier Computers for Pupils (CfP) initiative in which schools, backed by Government funds, provided computers and access to their most disadvantaged learners.

On one level, Home Access is the continuing Government attempt to close, in England, what has become known as the ‘digital divide’.  Home Access, like CfP, seeks to provide disadvantaged learners with a ‘taster’ of online access as a means of demonstrating to the learner, their parents or carers, the advantages of online access as an aide to learning. The term, ‘taster’, is used here because, while the computer is expected to have a life of around 3 years, the government initiatives would generally only provide online access for 1 year; the intention, or hope, being that having experienced the benefits for one year, the parents themselves would fund further access.

The digital divide, however, is more than just having or not having internet access from home; it is also about the way in which that access is used. Home Access provides the kit and the connectivity, which is just the first step in closing the divide, it also recognises the further issues surrounding use. It is the provision of hardware, though, which is likely to grab the headlines.

How likely is Home Access to succeed, though? Well, it already has the experience of the Computers for Pupils initiative to build upon, it has run pilot programmes in Oldham and Suffolk, and it has just completed the Home Access for Targeted Groups project (which provided kit and connectivity for looked-after children and  learners educated out of school). So it does have a fair amount of experience to build upon and help it succeed. All the projects, past and present do rely, though, upon learners and parents becoming convinced of the value and benefits of online access for their learning.

Why do it though? Why go to all these leangths and expense to provide learners and their families with online access? Well, the programme is supported by the Government’s own findings which appear to indicate that having and using online access has a beneficial effect upon learning; it can improve examination grades, lead to better financial reward and faciltate better learning opportunities for all learners. The underlying purpose of Home Access is therefore to improve the learning and future financial situation of current learners and their families.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Britain’s broadband ‘not fit for the future’ (telegraph.co.uk)
• Digital Literacy Debate (fraser.typepad.com)
• What happens when you give a class of 8 year old children an iPod touch each? (l4l.co.uk)
• Confused message on UK broadband (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Lane Fox: fixing holes in Britain’s net (guardian.co.uk)

Possibly Related Posts:

• New Ways to Learn
• Putting Your Hand Up is So Last Century (or how to ask questions) – learning transformation pt3
• Handheld Learning
• What is Home Access (part 2)
• The Future of Teaching is Online

1) write an essay / thesis / report / paragraph/ sentence

2) tick the correct answer from a list

Yet there must be hundreds, perhaps a thousand different ways in which a learner can demonstrate what they have learned. If you want evidence of some of the many ways, then take a look at John Davitt’s page here, where over a hundred different ways have been listed (you can add your own new ways too).

Technology, e-learning, ICT (call it what you will) seems to be the worst for offering only limited ways of allowing learners to record what they have learned. You are far more likely to be offered a multiple choice question in an e-learning exercise than be asked to, say, draw a picture or make a video. Learners are more likely to use a computer to write an essay rather than make a podcast.

By limiting the ways in which learners use technology we restrict the things we teach them. By focusing upon a narrow range of uses of technology, we restrict the benefits of technology to only those learners whose style of learning best suits that narrow range. It is by widening our uses of technology that we allow the widest range of learners to experience the benefits of technology.

For a tool that is capable of displaying multimedia, multi-sensory and exciting resources, it is despairing to see a computer used in ways that are largely text based, unexciting and favour learners who learn best through reading and writing. When used in such narrow ways, learning technology can be said to be letting down the majority of learners.

Who, though, is to blame and what is the answer? By way of irony, let me give you a multiple choice question and ask you to select the correct answer!

Q) How are learners being let down?

a) Technology is letting down the learners

b) Teachers are letting down the learners

c) The way in which we use technology is letting down the learners

The answer is not a) – technology is not letting down anyone; it is a tool, a versatile tool which can be used in a myriad different ways and has appeal to many people of different backgrounds and personalities.

The answer is not b) – it is not the teachers who are letting learners down; teachers know about different ways of teaching, teachers are great at devising new and interesting approaches to engage their learners.

I believe the answer to be c) – it is by changing the ways in which we use technology that we can improve, expand and transform learning for the benefit of learners.

Related articles by Zemanta

• 100 ways to use a VLE – #95 Setting an Assessment (elearningstuff.wordpress.com)
• eAssessment (iangardnergb.blogspot.com)
• Fast Forward – How Emerging Technologies is Transforming Education and Training (downes.ca)
• TECHNOLOGY In 2010 and beyond (slideshare.net)
• The challenge of quality in peer-produced eLearning content (downes.ca)
• UK Microsoft Innovative Teachers Forum and Conference 2009 (olliebray.typepad.com)
• Why Schools Should Learn To Use Online Services Like Facebook & YouTube Rather Than Banning Them (techdirt.com)
• The effects of peer-versus self-editing on learner autonomy in ESL writing (scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.com)
• Digital Learners – Pay Attention (q-ontech.blogspot.com)
• Giving Children the Tools is Not Enough (edte.ch)
• TeachMeet Inspiration (l4l.co.uk)
• The Myth of the Digital Native (ictineducation.org)
• Emerging Tools and Main stream practice (elgg.jiscemerge.org.uk)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Pupils and new Technology
• Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement
• Learning Score
• 6 Ways ICT Can Improve Education
• Handheld Learning Conference 2009

So how did the conference measure up and did I meet my four goals?

Let me start by saying that this was one of themost interesting conferences I have been to in the field of education. It was spread over 3 days; the first day being taken up by a Handheld Festival showcasing some of the work people and schools have been doing. For me, the best part of the day was the Learners Y factor session hosted by Jason Bradbury, he of the Gadget Show fame and also dot Robot (which sadly we didn’t get to see). This session showcased the work of several schools in using handheld technologies and was presented by the pupils themselves. It would be true to say that each of the schools were interesting and inspiring in what they demonstrated.

Earlier on the Monday, I had the priviledge of listening to a presentation given by Dawn Hallybone about her work using Nintendo handhelds and Wii devices. Dawn is well known for her work and rightly so for she has done some fantastic work using handheld devices in education. I however was particularly interestedwhen she mentioned some new work in the pipeline using the Wii with dyspraxic learners.

I attended only part of the session organised by Mirandanet. The problem was that there were so many sessions running in parallel, that it was impossible to attend to all the sessions I wanted to. This was a fascinating sesion and it is a shame that I missed the drawing up of the mind-map but was able to listen in to the discussion afterwards. Thankfully the mind-map has been posted on the web and should be found by following the above link. There was one aspect of the discussion afterwards which was perhaps more depressing than anything; there was a small group of student teachers who were saying that their exposure to ICT in their teacher training was very limited andd, they felt, did not fully prepare them for teaching modern learners.

Sessions clashing and missing speakers I would have liked to see, was a factor on the second day. I managed to attend an inspiring session by Ollie Bray , who has posted his presentation online, but this meant, unfortunately, that I had to miss a fascinating session by John Davitt. I also missed Tim Ryland’s sesion, which was a great shame. I was, however, able to catch the session from Tony Vincent, whose session came at the end of the day and after a few poorly presented sessions. Which is a great shame for I feel that many more could have benefited from his session.

The final day, Wednesday, was a packed day with 3 strands and various breakout sessions planned. The highlight of the day was probably the final speech by Ray Kurzweil at the end of the conference. He is an influential thinker, who I had only come across before as a result of his work in speech synthesis and recognition. His work, though goes a lot deeper and this session he chose to focus upon his work into the exponential development of technology. This work, I feel has a major importance for those of us in educational ICT. We often complaiabout how slow the world of educationchanges whereas the world of ICT changes rapidly, well Kurzweil’s work suggests that the ICT world will continue to change even more rapidly as it changes exponentially, rather than linearly. So in the future can we expect to see more of a gap between the technology and the pedagogy?

So did the conference help me achieve the four goals I set out before attending? I would say it did. I certainly had many opprotunities to see some new ideas and also to meet people. I certainly also got a lot of information bout how handheld technologies might be used in future education but any assessment of this will have to wait for a while! and was there any fun? yep!

As an addendum to this post. I am am planning to attend the 2010 Games Based learning conference in London. Hopefully, this will further develop my enthusiasm for handheld devices in education and also allow me to discover ways in which computer games can be used to support learning.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Games-Based Learning: 3 Things You Need To Know About (ictineducation.org)
• Handheld Learning Day Three (elearningstuff.wordpress.com)
• Handheld Reflections Day One (elearningstuff.wordpress.com)
• Overturn mobile phone ban in schools, urges union chief (guardian.co.uk)
• Networked handheld devices for learning and teaching (elearningstuff.wordpress.com)
• Mobile Phones in Schools: Friend or foe? (Times Educational Supplement Magazine Article, November 2009) (olliebray.typepad.com)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Pupils and new Technology
• Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement
• Learning Score
• 6 Ways ICT Can Improve Education
• A Hundred Ways to Show What They’ve Learned

My approach to transforming learning (Learning Transformation) is a combination of three elements;

1. CPD/training
2. Change Management
3. Project Management

First, though, we have to establish why learning transformation is important. The current capital build programmes are placing a lot of ICT and technical resources into schools;

• if those resources are unused, we will have failed,
• if those resources are only used in the ways such resources are currently used, we will have failed,
• if those resources are used by learners, staff and the community in innovative ways, we will have been partially successful,
• will we have been successful only if those resources are used by learners, staff and the community in innovative ways that lead to improved achievement, experiences and opportunities.

CPD/training

I believe that training is fundamental to learning transformation. If we want the resources to be utilised in new and engaging ways then users need to be both trained in using the resources and allowed to explore the potential of those resources. The training, however, needs to go beyond operating the hardware or software and focus on the usage with different learners. After all, why have expensive face-to-face ‘instruction manual’ sessions when we can read the instruction manual?

I feel that the CPD needs to be balanced between ensuring that all software and hardware are effectively covered or explored and that each trainee is able to draw up and follow their own ‘learning path’. We have to remember that not all users will be starting from the same point and that not all we be able to adapt or adopt the new ways of working with technology. Each one, however, is a valued member and should be allowed to proceed at their own pace and toward their own defined goals.

For me, the focus of learning transformation is about the learner using the technology. So the training is not so much focused upon getting the staff to use the technology as much as on getting the staff to allow and facilitate the learners to make use of technology. We are moving away from the learner being a consumer or passive recipient of technology and moving toward the learner becoming the active and creative user of that technology.

Change Management

There is obviously a lot of change going on around the whole capital build programmes in education; new construction, new resources, new facilities and new ways of working. All these changes need to be managed in order to avoid them getting out of hand or failing to materialise. What I am concerned with in change management, though is slightly different. I am not principally concerned with changing systems, changing services, changing specifications etc.; these aspects are more usually covered by protocols such as ITIL, FITS or project management procedures.

What I am much more concerned with is change management of people. Staff in a school are the most important and the most expensive resource available. They need to be valued and treasured. If we are going to involve them in a lot of change, they need to feel part of that change and to understand that change. Few people really like change and welcome it, most of us like to be able to control the change in our life or to feel that the change is going to be of benefit to us. If people do not understand the change and its benefits, then they can become resentful and entrenched in existing ways. If that is allowed to happen then we are only creating a barrier to learning transformation.

So my approach to change management involves skills taken from counselling and coaching, which allows people to express their concerns or fears while empowering them to move forward and benefit from the changes around them.

Project Management

It occurred to me that soon after becoming a consultant, that a lot of my work involved project management and working with project managers. This is why I studied for my project management qualification, so that I could better work in such environments.

Learning transformation, along with building design, ICT specification etc., does not exist in isolation from the rest of the capital build programme. It is a project that is part of a much bigger set of projects or programmes. As such, it needs to be carried out in alignment with these other projects or programmes, some of which may be on-going, some completed and some yet to start. In order for it to be successfully implemented, learning transformation, needs to follow the project management procedures in place across the rest of the programme. It is important, therefore, that those in charge of the learning transformation are also skilled in the ways of project management.

Related articles by Zemanta

• ICT CPD 4 Free from NAACE (warringtonict.wordpress.com)
• Vital CPD from the Open University – I’m first in the hot seat… (olliebray.typepad.com)
• Training Breakthroughs (digital-teacher.co.uk)

Possibly Related Posts:

• Pupils and new Technology
• ICT : Education on the cheap?
• Using Interactive Whiteboards to Improve Achievement
• Learning Score
• 6 Ways ICT Can Improve Education