I’m sure I’m not the first to write about this, but Scott McLeod delivered his latest list of the (potentially) top 50 P-12 education blogs and he got me thinking. The list is what it is…a ranking based on one metric: how many other blogs (and blogs only) have linked to a given blog. As long as Scott’s clear about that, which he very well is, then readers can make what they want of the list.

I commented, noting first that the list overwhelmingly consists of ed. tech. focused blogs. There are many reasons for this, most notably that blogging requires some technological awareness and a little bit of tech. savvy that ed. tech. folks are most likely to have. I also noted my surprise not to see certain educational policy bloggers on the list, such as Sherman Dorn, Matthew Tabor, Alexander Russo and Gary Stager (who I see as more of a bridge blogger). Dorn’s been blogging practically since I was born, and I learn more from him than just about any of the other bloggers I read.

I’m still searching for the right metaphor, because I don’t know that “echo chambers” is quite right; maybe it is, though. According to Wikipedia, “[m]etaphorically, the term echo chamber can refer to any situation in which information, ideas or beliefs are amplified or reinforced by transmission inside an ‘enclosed’ space.” I’ve gotten myself in trouble in the past for suggesting that the edtechblogosphere is a closed space, so I have to be careful here. But, I’ve noticed that the ed. tech. folks on Scott’s list all tend to comment on each other’s blogs and they all tend to communicate with each other via Twitter and other communication media. There are LOTS of REALLY valuable reasons for that, mostly that there is lots of co-learning going on that way. [NOTE: I've noticed that the same sort of "echo chamber" exists for the ed. policy bloggers, although the echoes there are less frequent and more muted (IMHO), and I don't know that there's much electronic communication going on between them beyond the blogs].

So, maybe rather than a closed space, then, a problem as I see it is that there are very few nodes connecting the unfortunately and unnecessarily distinct networks (i.e. the ed. tech. networks and the ed. policy networks). When Gary Stager called out the ed. tech. bloggers for failing to write about the Reading First study, he (purposefully or not) served as a node/bridge but also pointed out just how little overlap there is between the tech. and policy networks. A few commenters thanked Gary for pointing out the “story”.

I’m problematizing this disconnect because, for me, it is symptomatic or an extension of the sort of compartmentalization that plagues the education sector generally. I believe that one of the reasons our public schools have not experienced rapid technological change is because the ed. tech. folks are treated as separate. Leaders and decision makers don’t really understand the issues, so they delegate it to the geeks and wireheads (I use those terms lovingly). It’s the same way with, for example, special education. Leaders and decision makers don’t really understand all of the laws, regulations, etc., so they delegate authority to THAT department and THOSE educators. We have the same problems in schools and colleges of education. For example, I work in a department of educational leadership. Separately, we have a Department of Special Education and Disability Policies. So, let’s say an educator wants to pursue a doctorate with the idea of serving as a special education policymaker or an assistant superintendent for special education. To which program does that educator apply?

We need more integration in education and less compartmentalization; fewer echo chambers. After all, everything is miscellaneous, right?

Tags: blogs, echo chamber, education, networks, nodes, policy, technology

I can chew with the best of ‘em, but I was not able to pull of the blogging feats I hoped to accomplish this week. The planned (and much hyped!) series on “Facilitating Technology Integration” did not happen. I underestimated the amount of energy it takes to drive around a mountainous state, visit 3-5 schools per day and ask the same questions over and over. On top of that, by the time I was able to retreat to my hotel du jour, I had…get this…(”real”) work to do! Plenty of it, too, including finishing a complex pre-proposal for a grant competition. So, for the three of you who were waiting with bated breath for my chronicles, I apologize profusely. To myself, I apologize as well.

Some notable “highlights” of my week:

• It’s not hard to understand why they call West Virginia “The Mountain State.” I drove on some windy roads that make the Pacific Coast Highway seem straight.
• I love some of the names of towns I drove through or past. Consider just these: Hurricane, WV; Nitro, WV; Pax, WV. Also, at one point, I drove past a street called Polemic Run Road. Do you think the people who live there even know what a polemic is? I had to look it up to remind myself.
• I visited schools in some of the poorest rural communities I’ve ever seen. If I tell you I saw over one hundred rundown, abandoned shacks on the side of the road this week, I’d be sorely underestimating. I try not to impose my own values, but I couldn’t help feeling sad for people who live in those areas. Maybe they feel sad for me and how complicated my life is? Maybe they’re right?
• In response to Scott McLeod’s post about the role of school leadership in school reform, Stephen Downescommented about “grassroots” change (my interpretation of his comment). Tim Stahmer agreed. Well, fair enough. But, in many of the communities I visited this week, there will be no grassroots movement. There is simply not enough, if any, social or cultural capital in the communities. Leadership is, therefore, so vitally important in the schools that serve those communities.
• Implementation of the technology support position I am studying is so incredibly varied. It turns out, IMHO, that I’m not studying A singular intervention; rather, I believe I saw 14 different models in 14 different schools. How one goes about facilitating technology integration depends on many factors, largely wrapped up in what I would call the ecology of the school. More on that some day…
• The fascination with interactive white boards, oy…i guess if kids get pleasure out of touching the screen and get engaged in the learning process that way, then there’s some value. But, for now, I question the cost-effectiveness of IWBs. Hopefully they’re being installed now so that down the road there are more applications that make them worthwhile.
• Finally, I saw some practices and conditions that I would deem progressive and/or promising, but the old Rip Van Winkle joke about schools is not so funny anymore. It’s really remarkable how a school and classroom in Mt. Hope, WV looks exactly like a school and a classroom in Pheonix, AZ (I picked a west coast city where I’ve actually been in multiple schools). So, with that, I leave you with this (for those who haven’t already seen it):

Tags: education, IWB, technology, West Virginia

[NOTE: please excuse the lack of gender neutral language in the title of the post. Despite my nausea, I thought making the language gender neutral would render the title meaningless to most.]

There has been no shortage of efforts to compare the institution of public schooling to other disciplines or industries. Business and medicine are the two that I’ve encountered most often. Well, today, I read an article in the New York Times magazine about the music industry that had me thinking quite a bit about public school educators. The article is called “The Return of the One Man Band” (probably requires login) and focuses largely on how solo artists can make great and sophisticated music thanks to technological advances. As the author writes, “advances in recording and performance technology now make it possible for musicians not only to fire the drummer but also — if so inclined — to do away with accompaniment altogether without losing the richness, or seemingly the spontaneity, of a full-size band.”

I don’t know that there’s a perfect analogy to education, but I have noticed that high-end technology using educators do tend to operate as solo artists. That is, often with no other choice, they perform their artistry on their own without support from others. My own research demonstrates that the vast majority of all of the variance in technology use is within schools and not between schools. And, though I don’t have the data to support this argument, I would hypothesize that if we looked at the use of technology by school leaders, we would see that the vast majority of all of the variance in technology use is between schools, not within districts. A district technology coordinator, in a recent conversation, told me that the early adopters of technology in the classrooms were considered “the lunatic fringe;” and that hasn’t changed.

The musician featured in the NYT magazine piece, Owen Pallett, is quoted as saying, “I think one-man bands are a rising trend. The era of solo performers…is pretty much done. There aren’t any new solo performers out there that are interesting; now it’s all this assisted-performance type of thing.” Assisted-performance type of thing, huh? For those of you lunatic fringe who read my blog, do you think of yourself as a one-person band doing an assisted-performance type of thing?

Tags: education, music, performance, technology

[Prelude: Now that I live in Virginia, I MUST get to know Andy Roterham. He's a powerful insider in many educational policy circles, and he's been edublogging longer than anyone I know. His post today pointed me to the article about which I write below, so here's a tip-o-the-hat to Mr. Eduwonk]

You may be well aware of Clayton Christenson’s theory of disruptive innovations. It has received a LOT of attention in the last couple of years (deservedly so, IMHO) and quite a few researchers/commentators have tried to apply the theory to the institution of public schooling. Well, now Christenson himself has…in a pretty big way. THIS article appears to be a preview for an upcoming book called, Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns.

I have two thoughts before I ask for discussion via comments. First, I always tell my students to “consider the source” when reading “stuff” on the Internet. This article happens to appear in Education Next, the education journal of the Hoover Institution, a notably conservative think tank based at Stanford University. The mission statement of the Hoover Institution speaks to limited government (”Ours is a system where the Federal Government should undertake no governmental, social or economic action, except where local government, or the people, cannot undertake it for themselves”) so it should come as no surprise that his vision hints at privatization of education.

Second, as much as I respect Christenson’s work, I’m not sure how “disruptive” his ideas are. Consider the following:

Is this much different than, for example, the MIT Opencourseware project? I think what Chrisentson writes about will transform learning, but will it, as the title of the article states, transform our schools? It certainly hasn’t yet…

Tags: Christenson, disruptive innovation, education, schools, technology

John Hendron points us to an article about work that his former Superintendent, Dr. Frank Morgan, is doing in Kershaw County, SC. Speaking about the use of podcasting, Dr. Morgan is quoted as saying, “I’ve just found it powerful…We live in a different world now, so we have to use multiple means to communicate with people.”

I have two things to say in reply. First, we need more superintendents like Dr. Morgan. Second, if you read to the end of the article, Hendron mentions that in his county (which happens to be one exit West of where I live) teachers are contractually obligated to blog. I think I’m starting to like living in a union-free Commonwealth.

Tags: blogs, education, leadership, podcasting, technology