Having just taught a class last night on tort liability in education, I thought it’d be fun to construct a hypothetical argument for a class-action case of educational malpractice [NOTE: I am fully aware that educational malpractice has been argued successfully in an actual court of law once, maybe twice, over the course of American judicial history].  Ed. Mal. is essentially a special class of negligence claims, and the elements of a negligence case are (c’mon Scott, Justin, etc…sing along with me!): duty, breach, cause harm.

DUTY: “Reasonably prudent person in the same or similar circumstances…”  That’s the legal mumbojumbo.  The specifics here?  I’d argue that the standard of care owed to public schoolchildren these days is to provide learning conditions and practices that best develop (quoting language from the Partnership for 21st Century Skills) the “skills, knowledge and expertise necessary to succeed in work and life in the 21st century.” 

BREACH: Are those conditions and practices in place?  I’d say “no.”  Conditions?  Maybe.  Student:computer ratios are lower than they’ve ever been (in the aggregate), but I would say that teachers (again, in the aggregate) are not prepared to teach 21st century skills and dispositions.  Practices?  Well, there’s plenty of empirical evidence of how little time the average U.S. student spends using computers in schools.  Try these data on for size:

But, computer use, in and of itself, is not a singular indicator of 21st century schooling practices.  So, here’s some more data:

HARM: I’ll skip “cause” for now…if we can successfully argue that there has been a breach of duty, what (concrete, quantifiable) harm has been done?  Tough to prove.  But, what if the plaintiffs were a group of recent college graduates who were having trouble obtaining competitive jobs in the technology sector; they were regularly being beaten out by recent immigrants who were deemed to be better educated and prepared in their native countries?  It seems to me that we wouldn’t have a hard time finding such plaintiffs.

CAUSE:  Negligence plaintiffs carry the burden of demonstrating “cause-in-fact;”  that is, but for the breach of duty, the harm would not have occurred.  I guess this boils down to a question of whether the institution of public schooling is solely (largely? mostly?) responsible for the plaintiffs lack of competitiveness.  There’s also the element of proximate cause…was the harm a foreseeable consequence of the nonfeasance (i.e. failure to affirmatively offer proper conditions and practices)?  I would say that proximate cause is easier to demonstrate than cause-in-fact; there’s been plenty of rhetoric around the consequences of sticking with the status quo in education.

This is all, obviously, meant to be hypothetical and somewhat playful.  But, I hope this post does cause (pun intended?) some discussion about what standard of care our public school students are owed?  And, what are the consequences of failing to uphold our duty?

Tags: 2st century skills, education, law, malpractice, technology

For me, this was a weekend of celebrating Passover with friends and family.  I’m not particularly observant of my religion, but I do enjoy this holiday because it is all about looking back and remembering the struggles of our ancestors in the fight for freedom. 

So, tonight, I find myself pondering the history of educational technology.  If we think of technology integration as at least partly about freeing children from the strictures of the traditional, behaviorist, stand-and-deliver forms of pedagogy, then I think now is as good a time as any to think about and recognize the pioneers of educational technology; those individuals who have helped to make schooling a bit more current and relevant. 

The name that immediately comes to mind is Seymour Papert.  It’d be hard to argue the impact and the legacy that Papert has had on our field.  Chris Dede, now at Harvard, has also been a trailblazer.  From a policy standpoint, I’d like to also recognize Brenda Williams, who has been the Director of the Office of Technology in the West Virginia Department of Education seemingly forever.  Williams is one of the founding members of SETDA, and under her direction, West Virginia has been a lighthouse state with respect to coherent, consistent and effective statewide ed. tech. policies.

For whatever reason, I’m having a little trouble coming up with more names (maybe b/c it’s now midnight after a long weekend?).  I also don’t particularly like these sort of lists because worthy inclusions will inevitably be left out.  But, I’ll throw it out to the blogosphere.  Who do you think of as the true pioneers as the field of educational technology?

Tags: education. technology, history, Passover, pioneer

CREDIT: Grant Leavitt

After presenting a paper about a study of an ed. tech. integration support program, the discussant mentioned that he drew very similar conclusions from a simlar study he did…20 years prior. In other words, the role of the technology support personnel in schools is no different today than it was 20 years ago.

That got me wondering and looking back at some other seminal writings about ed. tech. from a decade or so ago. I stumbled upon this article written by friend/colleague/mentor Dale Mann in 1999. My favorite part is this:

Mann also writes, “With the Internet, learning goes to the learner…The democratizing impacts of that reversal are only dimly perceived. And the consequences for bricks-and-mortar knowledge citadels have not begun to be imagined, although they are probably captured by the observation of technology as train–you will be either on it or under it.”

Many of us lament how the institution of public schooling has missed the train, and I personally have postulated that one of many reasons for missing the train has been fear (from and of many things). I wonder if there is some unorganized resistance to technology within the institution of public schooling out of fear of losing control of the learning enterprise. In other words, perhaps the learning revolution threatens the entire bricks-and-mortar enterprise.

Whenever I have my students read Roger Schank and Kemi Jona’s vision of education in the 21st Century, they are almost all shocked and horrified. Without articulating it explicitly, they are incredibly fearful of giving up the sort of control that Schank suggests.

I encourage you to read Mann’s article and the Schank/Jona white paper and let me know what you think. Do you want a learning revolution?

Tags: education, learning, Mann, revolution, Schank, technology

I’m writing this post in the middle of reading a dissertation that will be defended tomorrow (actually, by now it’s technically “later today”).  From the data, the author (doc. candidate) paints a tale that is simultaneously depressing and inspiring.  The study is about how 11 African-American students managed to become high achievers within a school and a district that is perpetually labeled as “in need of improvement” and was taken over by the state.  The conditions and practices described by the student-participants are borderline criminal.  Yet, the resilience and positivity displayed by these students is extraordinary.  As I read their accounts of their academic success, I want to hug each and every one of them.

I don’t want to equate the situations, but reading this study got me thinking about the so-called “digital natives” (I know, contested language, but I don’t have a better option yet) and the general failure of their formal schooling institutions to serve them in relevant and meaningful ways.  I could imagine a similarly structured study of technologically sophisticated students who’ve managed to learn and do extraordinary things with technology despite the digital dysfunction that is characteristic of their schools.  It must happen a lot; tech. whiz kid learns, explores, etc. and does incredible things with technology all while attending a traditional, bricks-and-mortar school largely committed to instructivist pedagogy, static texts, and other artifacts of 19th Century teaching and learning.

If you know of such stories, I’d love to hear them.  If there are enough, maybe there’s a way to archive them electronically?

Tags: digital natives, education, resilience, success

You’re breaking up with me?  I thought we had something…

So many comments/pingbacks/etc.  Be careful what you wish for?

A few thoughts, comments, replies, etc to Scott et al…

First, I just want to be VERY clear that I NEVER used the word “elite” or any form of that word in any of my posts.  Never.  In fact, I very specifically and carefully wrote that there was “an awesome cocktail party conversation…”  Meaning, there was great stuff being said.  Also, I basically retracted the cocktail party metaphor in my subsequent post.  I think it’s really dangerous to inject one’s interpretative, normative language into someone else’s reflections.  Remember, all, these were reflections…I continually started with “I feel…”  Those are the key words in any form of reflective practice.  I should know; two of my dearest colleagues wrote the book.

Second, Scott, I’m having trouble reconciling Facts 1 and 2 with the rest of the brutal facts.  If I build it and nobody is going to come and nobody cares about me anyway, then why does it matter that there are things I can do to build traffic and that there are people who can help.  With what would they be helping me?  And, patient for what?  Nobody cares and nobody’s going to come anyway, at least according to facts 1 and 2.  And, you were one of the first to write about comment intensity.  So, help me with the logic here.

Third, many of the comments suggest something to the effect of “don’t blog for the stats.”  Again, I never said that I was blogging FOR the stats.  Furthermore, how do I reconcile comments/replies that suggest that I shouldn’t worry about stats, I should use blogging as a form of reflection and focus on the kids.  Well, I am absolutely committed to the blogsophere as an author and as a particpant because I want to effect change; I want to improve the lives of school-aged children and those who work with them directly or indirectly.  But, if I’m authoring a blog as a reflective exercise and nobody’s listening, how am I achieving my goals?  So, I’m not blogging FOR the stats; I’m simply looking at the stats to gauge my progress.  That’s also a key component of reflective practice; staring the data in the face and using them for growth.

Fourth, I’m stuck on (at least) one issue.  Kate Olson (Hi Kate, and welcome to my Bloglines account!) wrote: “When you directly quote another blog and share your response and opinion, it’s just plain NICE to encourage everyone to visit the blog you are referring to. So, because I’m naturally a little, let’s say - contentious - I’m going to ask that you please share your thoughts on the original topic with Jon, this post wouldn’t be here without him.”   Vicki Davis responded with, “The conversation doesn’t BELONG to anyone! It just doesn’t - we can talk any place, anywhere that we want!”  I agree that conversations don’t belong to anyone, but isn’t Kate’s way one very small step towards putting some very light boundaries around a conversation?  IDK…this one’s tough.

Finally, THANKS.  Thanks to all who’ve commented, replied, taken the conversation away (c’mon, that was a joke people!).  Scott, I couldn’t agree more about being gracious.  A wise professor once told me that if I do nothing else in life, I should pay my bills, pay my taxes and write my thank you letters.  So, thanks all for aiding my reflective exercise.

Now go away!  (again, a joke people…)

Yours in the blogoshpere,

JB

Tags: blogging