OllieBray.com

Magic Moments #16 - Turning Bike Sheds in Climbing Walls [Outdoor Learning]

Up in Moray (New Elgin Primary School, I think?) they have invested in some new secure cycle storage.

Then, instead of leaving the old bike sheds to become ‘dead space’ they have turned the area into a simple traversing wall for the children to play and climb on.

It is undercover as well – so you can even climb in the rain (something that you have to get used to living in Scotland!).

How might you use a bit of paint to brigten up some of those dark and boring spaces in your school grounds?

More on climbing walls and climbing wall holds for children here – from the wall that I was involved in building and the Grove Infant School on Portland (Now part of Isle of Portland Aldridge Community Academy).

 

Magic Moments #15 - Floor space can be learning space [World Map Rug]

I snapped a picture of this great rug a South Lanarkshire Classroom not too long ago. Its bright and colourful and really livens up the learning space.

We often forget about how useful floor space can be for learning. Its also great to see a bit of geography to help children gain a sense of place and where they are in the world.

I'm not to sure about the traditional stereotypes around the edge though... although I guess it would make an interesting discussion to have with the children!

 

1:1 Learning: Myth 5 – 1:1 is all about independent learning [nope, the impact on collaborative learning is far greater]

This is part of a series of posts that document some of my personal thoughts on some of the myths surrounding 1:1 learning (one device per learner) and 1:1 deployments in schools and school systems.

--------------------------------------

Myth 5 – 1:1 is all about independent learning

Obviously, if used in the right way, 1:1 (one device for each learner) does offer opportunities for independent learning. But the reality of it is the digital collaborative learning opportunities are far greater with 1:1 than without. It is also important to remember that ‘independent’ learning doesn’t necessarily mean ‘learning by yourself’.

I think there is a time and a place for children to learn independently but then I also feel that as human beings we achieve our greatest learning feats through collaboration and copying. Just think how you learnt to walk, talk and read. Isn’t it a shame that education is still one of the only aspects of society that still calls copying, ‘cheating’.

Even in large scale 1:1 deployments that don’t necessarily involve good connectivity, the right solution can still offer digital collaboration on a classroom / school level through a Local Area Network (LAN). Of course the real power of digital collaboration comes when you combine 1:1 with good connectivity and give learners the full power of the Internet.

For me the photo below sums it up:

 

Photo: Fearghal Kelly

You have a group of young people working on Chromebooks in Google Docs. If you look carefully you can see that there are a number of other learners in the document all collaborating at the same time. In this case all of the collaborators are all in the same room, but they could be anywhere in the world.

When you observe learning like this it really starts to make you think more about ratios and what it is we are actually trying to achieve in education. Google Docs can achieve a ratio of 50:1 (fifty learners all contributing to one document in real-time). What’s more because Google Docs is a browser-based application you can easily edit documents on any Internet enabled device (although it is optimized for Android and Chrome)

The real-time collaboration features of Google Docs really does make it a killer application for education. I just wish more people would consider using it to support learning and formative assessment. Microsoft’s Office 2013 supports similar features, so perhaps we might see more of an uptake then?

Google Docs is obviously not the only suite of collaboration tools now available to learners. Other collaboration tools include blogs, wikis, web-based conferencing, voice threads, glogs and loads of other stuff.

 

There really is an amazing suite of opportunities available for educators to help support learning theses days. Combined with good learning and teaching 1:1 technology integration in our schools can only enhance these opportunities.

Magic Moments #14 - Duck Tape in Prague [Glogster]

Most people will know that I’m a bit lastminute.com… or just very up-to-date as I like to pretend!

In Prague recently it all got a bit close to the wire though – Tomas Plojhar (one of the co-founders of Glogster – that fab online digital poster maker) literally had to use some duck tape to hard wire my laptop into the schools projection system!

Anyway, we got away with it… just!

I was out in Prague visiting Glogster (it’s a Czech Company, not an American one as most people think). And also doing some work for Intel, running an Intel Teach Essential Course with teachers from across Europe.

 

1:1 Learning: Myth 4 – 1:1 is the best ratio for learning [only some of the time!]

This is part of a series of posts that document some of my personal thoughts on some of the myths surrounding 1:1 learning (one device per learner) and 1:1 deployments in schools and school systems.

--------------------------------------

Myth 4 – 1:1 is the best ratio for learning

I can’t disagree that 1:1 isn’t a good ratio BUT sometimes other ratios are a lot more appropriate. Just because you have the capacity for 1:1 in your school doesn’t mean that it is the best ratio to use all of the time.

Indeed, when we look at learning from 3 years to 18 years a significant amount of thought needs to go into when you would like to achieve 1:1 (if you do at all). This is particularly the case when you don’t work within a 3 – 18 school. I know of a number of examples where 1:1 has been integrated successfully and purposefully in the upper primary (elementary) school yet when the children move to secondary (high) school this provision has not been continued and as a result has a regressive impact on learning.

So, what are the optimum ratios? In short, there is no easy answer to this. It really depends on what it is you are trying to achieve. But it is important to remember that sometimes 1:many (one device for many learners) is fine and that there is absolutely nothing wrong with a lecture style presentation.

Of course the advantage of learners having their own device in this type of environment means that they can provide feedback and ask questions during the presentation (sometime referred to back channeling). Devices can also be used to follow up links that the presenter has mentioned – these can be bookmarked for exploration at a later date or quickly shared with others across social networking spaces. One important consideration during this type of environment is that this type of interaction, although powerful, does not come naturally to young people – it is a skill that is required to be taught and practiced if it is going to have any real impact.

As well as 1:many, there are also lots of examples when 1:3/4/5 (one device for three, four or five learners) might be appropriate. These are all good ratios to support collaborative learning and group work. Tablet technology can have a real advantage here.

There is something about children working around a tablet device that seems to make it more collaborative – could it be that in physical collaborative learning scenarios the screen can actually act as a barrier to learning. Despite their cost the role of the Interactive Table should also not be underestimated in developing collaboration and problem solving skills.

Research from my genius of a friend Professor Sugata Mitra (University of Newcastle) and others has also proved time-and-time again that 1:2 (one device for two learners) is also another great ratio for learning (particularly for younger children). It’s small enough to allow opportunities for children to get time on the computer without arguing who should be in the driving seat BUT it also allows dialogue and conversation between children as they work to solve real world problems and consolidate their learning tasks.

Of course the nice thing about having 1:1 (one device for each learner) is that all of the above can be achieved but children can also work with their own device where appropriate. 

Photo: Fearghal Kelly

Now, in my opinion, one of the biggest mistakes that is often made in 1:1 deployments is that people aim for a 1:1 ratio and provide teacher professional development for learning and teaching at this ratio.

Of course (particularly for older children – but increasing younger ones as well) the real ratio that we should be aiming for is at least 2:1 (two devices for each learner). I see this more and more in the forward thinking progressive schools and systems that I have the pleasure to work in from time-to-time.

In this scenario, learners are supported by a main device (it could be a desktop, laptop, netbook, hybrid or tablet) and their handheld (normally their phone).

Many of the people reading this article will probably already work this way. For example, I’m writing this blog post on my Laptop (my choice is to use a keyboard for extended writing) but I’ve got an eye on twitter on my iPad that is next to me and 5 minutes ago I replied to a text message on my mobile phone.

Another recent example is from when I checked into a hotel for a conference in Stockholm last week.

The wifi voucher that I was given by the hotel receptionist allowed me to connect 5 personal devices to the hotel network.

Now, I only had 3 with me (laptop, tablet & phone) but that is not the point – the point is in the business word and increasingly in the education world we are required to be connected by a variety of devices most of the time, in order to do the tasks we are set (and set ourselves) to the maximum efficiency.

 

As you start to develop 1:1 learning scenarios in your school / system don’t forget to develop other scenarios in parallel that involve other ratios and other types of technology integration. 

 

1:1 Learning: Myth 3 – 1:1 Computing Improves Standards [complete nonsense!]

This is part of a series of posts that document some of my personal thoughts on some of the myths surrounding 1:1 learning (one device per learner) and 1:1 deployments in schools and school systems.

--------------------------------------

Myth 3 – 1:1 Computing Improves Standards

Nonsense! Only good learning and teaching improves standards.

A poor teacher with great technology will still not deliver the results that our children deserve.

However, I truly believe that a good or excellent teacher, who is committed to professional learning and who is supported by great technology has the potential to transform lives. It is also important to remember that technology is only part of any model for educational transformation.

Now, there are lots of models of educational transformation available, they are all high level and they are all useful up to a point. Lets take the Intel model of education transformation as an example – as this is the one that I have been working with the most recently.

In this model for transformation to occur a number of things need to exist in equal parts.

First you need good policy (at national, local and school level) this is the bit that gives teachers and school leaders permission to transform education. A key failing of most education policy is that people don’t actually understand the policy or have time to read them. Good education policy must contain specific objectives as well as higher level strategic advice. In short, people need to know which way they are aiming!

Good policy also gives permission to develop the curriculum and assessment methodology. Again the two must match up. You can’t have high level policy that talks about preparing children for life in the 3^rd millennium and then develop a curriculum that re-invents something from the past and its only way of verifying children’s learning is by a hand written assessment when they are about to leave school – this just does not make sense.

Policy, curriculum and new assessment methodology must be based on sound academic and action research. But it must also be based on local need.

Evaluation must be on-going at a system, state and local level. Most of this type of resource should be put into evaluation at a local level – rather than a state or system level that it is at the moment. While comparing one country to another country through standard measures such as PISA might be important to politicians – what is actually going on in the classroom must remain the most important thing.

Technology integration should be seen at a number of levels but also people need to understand it can fulfill a variety of purposes. The following purposes are not inclusive but people need to understand that technology has a number of roles in educational transformation.

Firstly, the use of technology as a pedagogical methodology to support teaching and learning across the curriculum. Good technology integration is not just about up-grading computing labs. See my work on Exciting Learning.

Secondly, the use of technology to track learning, report to parents, improve the productivity & running of a school and to share data with others. Working at a conference with Michal Fullan recently I heard him say he thinks that school improvement can be sped up by at least 20% through good technology integration. I think he is right.

Thirdly, the use of technology to deliver appropriate rich digital content to learners. This content, where possible, should support local curriculum and national standards. Modern IT delivery systems should allow for personalization, guided learning and structured courses – all of which are appropriate at different times of a learners journey.

Fourthly, the use of technology to support assessment and evaluation (see above). Unfortunately, many technology solutions only cater for summative assessment. BUT, good technology integration can also be incredibly powerful in supporting formative assessment as well.

Lastly, the use of technology to support teacher professional development.

Teacher Professional Development (or Professional Learning) is another important aspect of educational transformation. In some systems technology integration (particularly around 1:1) have not been as successful as they could have been because of a lack of training for teachers (Thailand for example). Where others systems, such as Macedonia, built in robust training programs from the start.

It is also important to remember that professional learning doesn’t have to be face-to-face. Good professional development like any good learning needs to be blended and should include a combination of face-to-face, online, large group and personalized learning experiences. It is also important to remember that learning and teaching looks very different in a 1:1 environment than a traditional classroom environment. Educators need early support here to stop the technology becoming a distraction to rather than an improvement to learning.

In short, before any major investment in technology you need to be absolutely sure what it is you are trying to do. If your aim is to raise standards – what standards are you trying to raise and why? If improved use of technology the best way to do this do you have the policy, research, curriculum, assessment methodology and professional development in place to reach your objectives. If not your project is likely to fail.

1:1 Learning: Myth Two – ‘Children aren’t used to 1:1’ [this is just an excuse]

 

This is part of a series of posts that document some of my personal thoughts on some of the myths surrounding 1:1 learning (one device per learner) and 1:1 deployments in schools and school systems.

-------------------------------------- 

Myth Two – ‘Children aren’t used to 1:1’ 

This is an excuse that is sometimes given to delay / prevent technology deployments in schools. The truth is that most young people already live in a 1:1 environment as they are constantly connected via their mobile / cell phones or other Internet enabled devices.

Research published in the Ofcom report ‘Children and parents: media use and attitudes report 2012’ illustrates this well.

Here is what it says about children and smartphones:

Children’s access to the internet is not restricted to PCs or laptops. Those aged 12-15 are more likely than last year to go online using their mobile phones and are more likely to say that this is the device they would miss the most.

Since 2011, there has been a 50% rise in 12-15 year olds owning smartphone devices. Almost two thirds (62%) of this age group now has one – up from 41% the previous year. This is significantly higher than the UK average for adults of 45%.

Mobile phones are more important to this age group than any other device, even TV. Two fifths (39%) of 12-15 year olds now say they would miss their mobile phone more than any other device, up from just over a quarter (28%) in 2011. Only one in five (20%) said that they would miss TV the most.

Around one in seven (14%) of all children aged 5-15 now use a tablet device at home, a threefold increase since 2011 (5%). Children aged 12-15 are most likely to use a tablet, with 17% saying they do, up from 6% in 2011. 

 

However, just because young people are used to 1:1 environments doesn’t mean that they are used to them in schools. It also doesn’t mean that school staff are comfortable teaching when young people have ubiquitous access to the Internet.

Indeed, I would also argue that young people are not great at learning on-line in a structured and formal way and we have a lot of work to do in schools to prepare young people for this type of learning.

It is also interesting to note that organizations like the Open University (who specialize in distance learning) only use on-line as part of their overall model. Experience has shown that on-line alone does not have a great success rate – the key to success is ‘blended’ learning where on-line is supported by good community management, peer support and local tutorials.

Before schools go down the route of 1:1 access it is important that they ask themselves what the potetial impact on teaching and learning might be.

 

The Future of Learning, Networked Society [YouTube Video from Ericsson]

I came across this great little video via a tweet from from friend and former colleague at Learning and Teaching Scotland @charlie_love.

Its a powerful video which contains, in my view anyway, some of the worlds best educators and education thinkers outlining their view on the ‘future of learning in a networked society’. The voices captured include Stephen Heppell, Sugata Mitra, Jose Ferreira and Seth Godin.

I've embedded the video below, which is definitely worth a watch (particularly the first 5 minutes):

 

David Hopkins, managed to capture some of the quotes from the video - of which my favorites are duplicated below:

“This is the first generation of people that work, play, think, and learn differently than their parents … They are the first generation to not be afraid of technology. It’s like air to them.” – Don Tapscott

 

“We are probably at the death of education right now. I think the structure and strictures of schools, of learning nine-to-three, working on your own, not working with others, I think that’s dead or dying. I think learning is just beginning” – Stephen Heppell

 

“There’s a very big difference between accessed information and school, they used to be the same thing. Information is there, online, to anyone of the billion people who has access to the Internet. So what that means is that if we give access to a four year old, or an eight year old, or a twelve year old, they will get the information if they want it.” – Seth Godin

 

“You don’t actually need to know anything, you can find out at the point when you need to know it. It’s the teachers job to point young minds towards the right kind of question, a teacher doesn’t need to give any answers because answers are everywhere.” – Sugata Mitra

 

“The textbook of the future is going to be delivered on connected devices. What that means is the incredible amount of data that students have always produced, when they studied, are now capturable and usable.” – Jose Ferreira

 

“You can’t imagine in a world where you sit down to do an exam and you ask yourself the question ‘I hope there are no surprises in the paper’. And your teachers think ‘I hope I prepared him for everything’. How would that prepare you to then go out into a world that everyday is going to surprise you? Learning prepares you to cope with surprises, education prepares you to cope with certainty. There is no certainty.” – Stephen Heppell

 

 

 

1:1 Learning: Myth One – ‘1:1 is new’ [is it really?]

This is part of a series of posts that document some of my personal thoughts on some of the myths surrounding 1:1 learning (one device per learner) and 1:1 deployments in schools and school systems.

 --------------------------------------

Myth One - ‘1:1 is new’

No its not! We have had 1:1 computing in schools for many years. Now it might have not been ubiquitous across the school but that is not really the point. 1:1 has been around for a long time - its just been confined to the domain of the computer lab or business education suite.

Unfortunately, during my work as Scotland’s National Adviser for Emerging Technologies I observed some of the worst pedagogy in schools in computer labs (don't forget its not just computing teachers who use labs). It great to see movements like Computing at School (CAS) challenge this and new pedagogy was one of their focuses at their recent conference in Edinburgh. 

Photo credit: Doug Belshaw (cc)

I think that one of the reasons that pedagogy is not always as good as it should be in computer labs is actually down to how labs are often designed.

Just think about standard computer lab design for a minute. Often the desks are around the sides of the room (to make it easier to get power and Ethernet connections to machines) which means that children spend most of their time with their back to each other and their teacher.

Modern and better thought out furniture is starting to change this and we can be a lot more creative with power and connectivity in new school build projects. But this means we need to build schools in different ways.

Photo: St Monica's Primary School,  NSW, Australia

We can even make some quick changes to ‘old style’ labs but putting a few mirrors behind the computer screens so that a teacher can still make eye contact with his students or by introducing ‘muster points’ in the classroom where students can meet away from the screen to discuss their learning with peers or with a teacher.

 Photo Credit: Stephen Heppell

Laptop and wireless technology is also having in impact on school design – although it is important to remember that wireless is still a challenge in many schools due to bandwidth issues.

However, even with the best furniture, agile spaces and high tech hardware learning is not always great in ICT suites.

One alarming trend that I have seen in recent years is that some teachers now constantly give children free time at the end of the lesson (or even during the lesson) to use the computers in anyway that they like.

Now I don’t have a problem with ‘free time’ or ‘golden time’ or any other classroom based reward system as long as it is well thought out. But I worry that with some teachers it has become an expectation of their classes and the reason why learners ask for this free time is because they a board and not stimulated with what they are being asked to do. My preference has always been to set ‘learning challenges’ when there are free gaps of time to fill, or to ensure that learners always know where they are going with their learning - both of these strategies remove the need for a random ‘free-for-all’.

As a teacher my best lessons are / were the ones when the class are still captivated with their learning when the bell goes because we have lost track of time. I’m never worried in these situations that we don’t have time to recap the lesson objectives as the students rush to get tidied up and get away to their next class. If the learning before the bell has been deep and purposeful then that is the most important thing to me.

Another criticism I sometimes have of 1:1 projects is that the rollout is often left to a computing or ICT teacher. Although there is nothing wrong with this we need to make sure that the right person in a school takes some responsibility and accountability for rollout.

One of the reasons that a computing or ICT teacher may not be the best person is because out of any teacher in their school a 1:1 project should benefit the computing teacher the the least. Why? because they already work in that environment and are unlikely to give up the powerful computers in their lab (why would you?) for less powerful handheld devices. In situations where school use their computing staff to roll out 1:1 deployments you are in danger of creating a very overpaid ICT technician and reinforcing an unnecessary stereotype of what a computing teacher actually does.

In my experience a matrix management approach to 1:1 rollout combined with good project management, involvement from school senior managers and senior students always has the most success (and ultimately impact).

In any 1:1 rollout it is important to make sure that computing and ICT teachers are part of the pedegogical solution as well as the technical solution. 

Impressive Speech Recognition Breakthrough from Microsoft Research [YouTube Clip]

In June 2010 I wrote a successful series of posts titled “Technologies that will change how we live, work, play and learn”. Even though my thoughts on this are now two years out-of-date I still think many of my observations at the time hold true.

One of my predictions was around on-line translation tools and I’ve really seen these improve in leaps and bounds since June 2010. I spent two weeks working in Eastern Europe over the October holidays (Albania, Romania and Bulgaria) and if it wasn’t for Google Translate and Bing Translator I would have really struggled to transfer the learning to the teachers I was working with.

The following YouTube clip from Microsoft Research is a really interesting step forward in real-time translation. Although it is still not 100% perfect what is interesting about it is that firstly, it is pretty good and secondly not only can it have a pretty good go at translating the spoken word into Mandarin Chinese but when it does it, it sounds like you!

The video gets off to a slow start, but if your interested in this sort of thing it is definatly worth a watch.