Trace Pickering recently sent me a slide deck that's definitely worth viewing. Trace is a wonderful systems thinker. His slides do a nice job of describing historical shifts in American society and the concurrent changes that were necessary in American education. As he notes about our current era,

We seem to be stuck … arguing over which factory-age solutions we should try without fully understanding the implications of the context we are in and the new functions we need education to perform.

Trace's slides are embedded below. He's kindly made them available with a Creative Commons license. He also made a video in which he talks through the slides. Happy viewing!

You might also like

1. Largest U.S. universities
2. Creativity fatigue: Is it really possible to stop learning?
3. Stop Cyberbullying Day

Well, yesterday was Digital Learning Day. By all accounts, it was a busy day across the country. Lots of conversation and high-profile events and demonstrations of students doing cool stuff with technology...

Should every school day be Digital Learning Day? Nope. We still need down time from these electronic and virtual spaces of ours, times when we experience the joy of human connection, nature, solitude, reflection (and all of those other things that people say I should be experiencing!). But, nonetheless, we definitely need 'more digital, more often' in most of our primarily-analog schools, so it was good to have a nationwide day that reminds us of the power of digital learning.

Here are a few things that caught my eye from the unrelenting stream of educational technology news yesterday:

1. Instructure Canvas is now available to P-12 educators. If you're interested in a better learning management system, you definitely should check out what Canvas has to offer. Canvas is free for individual teachers and professors. Set up a Canvas account and start playing around with it for a course; you'll quickly see why its social media integration and other features blow the doors off of Blackboard or Moodle. Here are some other materials to get you started: overview video, Park City case study, Rockingham case study, teacher data sheet, administrator data sheet.
2. The online Student Opinion section from The New York Times is full of fascinating commentary and insights from youth. Hear from students 13 and older about learning, teaching, technology, and other issues. Similarly, also see the StudentsSpeak section of the MacArthur Foundation's Spotlight web site. There is great material at both locations to mine for instruction and conversation purposes.
3. Speaking of student voice, check out Using media to (re)claim the hood: Essential questions and powerful English pedagogy. Then see I love my city: Youth as community problem solvers and creators in 21st century classrooms. After that, be sure to investigate the other amazing resources and ideas for teaching writing in a digital, hyperconnected world at the National Writing Project's Digital Is web site. And then, before you collapse from exhaustion from all of this awesomeness, go visit Youth Voices. There, those will keep you busy for a while!
4. Apparently some students got to testify before the Ohio House of Representatives about digital learning. I love to see tweets like this one or this one. In contrast, I'm not so enthused about tweets like this one (from a district in Alabama).
5. The current issue of AASA's School Administrator magazine focuses on P-12 laptop initiatives, particularly issues related to learning, teaching, affordability, and planning. Districts profiled include Mooresville (NC), Pascack Valley (NJ), and a host of others, including Van Meter (IA), Owensboro (KY), and Piedmont City (AL).
6. Other things that I found yesterday included a great story on students with autism spectrum disorder using Google SketchUp, information about teaching digital literacy through game design, the Oakridge Elementary (VA) blog featuring book reviews written by elementary students, and news about the plan by MIT and Lego to bring robotics and coding to young children.

And, of course, we here at CASTLE were busy too. We launched our new online School Technology Leadership graduate certificate, Master's, and Ph.D. programs. We also gave our 1-to-1 Schools blog a visual makeover and opened registration for the 3rd annual Iowa 1:1 Institute, an event that focuses on high-quality learning and teaching in P-12 laptop programs. Last year we had over 1,300 participants for the Institute. Maybe this year you'll join us on April 11!

You might also like

1. Upcoming book: What school administrators need to know about digital technologies and social media
2. NECC 2008 – From digital divide to digital opportunities
3. Does your school organization reflect our new digital information landscape?

Short version

We're relaunching our online School Technology Leadership courses and programs today! Woo hoo!

(This is all pending final approval by Faculty Senate)

Long version

It's Digital Learning Day here in the U.S. As I said in my guest post for the event:

We ... need school leaders who can begin envisioning the implications of these [new technology-suffused, globally-interconnected] environmental characteristics for learning, teaching, and schooling. We need administrators who can design and operationalize our learning environments to reflect these new affordances.

I also said:

If a principal or superintendent isn't receiving [assistance] from the university that prepared her, her state and national leadership associations, her regional education service agency, her state department of education, the federal government, or a corporate or foundation initiative, where is she supposed to get the information and training that she needs to improve her technology leadership skills? From a book or a few web sites?

When we underinvest in the people that control all of the resources that instigate and facilitate change - money, time, training, personnel allocation, structural (re)alignment, organizational mission/vision, etc. - we shouldn't be surprised when desired changes in our schools fail to materialize. We also shouldn't be surprised when school administrators make technology-related decisions because of fear, lack of knowledge, or community or political pressure rather than educational appropriateness.

When an administrator's mental light bulb turns on regarding technology, it's not just an individual or classroom that's affected, it's his entire building or district. As such, it's time for more attention to [the technology leadership needs of] our principals and superintendents.

Those of us who work in Educational Leadership preparation programs are a big part of the problem. We should be envisioning what it means to prepare P-12 students for the demands of tomorrow and then designing principals' and superintendents' preservice experiences so that they then can go out and start to make those things happen. Instead, at best we're teaching traditional course content online or showing prospective administrators how to use a few tools. That's if we're doing anything at all regarding technology (and that's a BIG if in many/most university programs). Our self-affirmations that we're 'integrating technology' ring hollow.

Graduate certificate, Master's, or Ph.D. in School Technology Leadership

It is within this context that I announce that we're relaunching our online School Technology Leadership courses. When I was at the University of Minnesota, we received a federal grant to create the nation's first graduate program designed to prepare technology-savvy school leaders. Our evaluator, the American Institutes for Research, verified that our program had positive, statistically-significant impacts on participants’ technology leadership knowledge, skills, and abilities. We ran 4 national cohorts through that program before I left. Working with those educators was incredibly wonderful. I can't express in words how delighted I am that our courses are now available again.

So if you would like a graduate certificate, Master's degree, or Ph.D. with a focus in School Technology Leadership, this is your chance to go deep in all five of ISTE's National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators (NETS-A). All courses and programs are online and cohort-based; the Ph.D. program requires a few additional summer visits. All tuition is at the in-state rate. See the links below for more information. (This is all pending final approval from Faculty Senate)

I hope that many of you will apply or will encourage those leaders around you to boost their own technology leadership skills. We're aiming to start at least one American and one international cohort this Fall but can handle much more if the demand is there. And if we're not exactly what you're looking for, check out options from ISTE and Johns Hopkins University, Kennesaw State University, Leading Edge Certification, the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN), Intel, and others. There are 200,000+ school administrators in the U.S. alone. Most of them need a lot of help when it comes to technology, so find a program that best fits their needs and get 'em started!

Additional info about our STL programs

• Flyer
• Overview
• Graduate certificate
• Master's (or Ed.S.)
• Ph.D. [for which we expect a VERY competitive admissions process]
• Admissions requirements and application info [Fall deadline is May 15]
• Questions? Contact Dr. Justin Bathon, CASTLE Co-Director

You might also like

1. 15 questions to ask about the technology leadership in your school district
2. A technology broadside against school leadership preparation programs
3. 2007 recipients of the Technology Leadership Research Award

Image approved for copy by Creative Commons.
Source: http://bit.ly/vYUkXB

When laptops first arrived in my classroom, I worried about classroom management. How could I create an environment where students used their computers as tools rather than toys?

I was worried for nothing. The following are suggestions for keeping students engaged in a project and accountable for their time with computers:

Students make a plan. 
Students are most tempted to open widgets, games, and social chats when they are faced with a blank screen and have no plan.

Much of the time, students think they have a plan. If you ask them What are you going to do?, the answer is usually I'm gonna make a Power Point about... or I want to make a movie about... Those answers indicate that students are thinking of technology before content.

Instead, ask What are you trying to learn? or What are you trying to communicate? or What are you working on as a writer? Those questions get answers like I want to know more about the horses that Civil War generals rode or I want to convince people that Justin Bieber is the best singer ever or I'm trying to describe the character's actions.

When you ask about learning and communication, you are signaling that the content is more important than the technology. Pull aside those who are struggling with plans. Let them talk together and encourage them to sketch their ideas with diagrams or bullet points and return to the computer later. Students with a plan tend to stay on task.

Students set time-bound goals.
Once students have a plan, they break the project into smaller tasks that can be finished in 10- to 15-minute chunks of time. Have students write the specific tasks on Post-it notes. Post-its are set beside the computer. On their Post-its, students finish the sentence, "In the next [x-amount of] minutes, I plan to..." They generally write things like...

• Create an outline for my essay
• Write my introduction
• Find three pictures about...
• Do my voice recording
• Finish four slides of my Power Point/Keynote
• Find at least three database articles on...
• Draft at least three paragraphs
• Use Google docs to peer-edit so-and-so's essay
• Upload my story to Voicethread

Tasks should be specific. I'm gonna work on my project is not specific enough. At the end of class, Post-its become "exit slips". Students tick off the tasks they have completed and hand the Post-its to the teacher so the teacher can see the progress.

Laptop screens are "fisted" or "put at half mast".  

Teachers don't lecture much in a project-based learning environment. However, sometimes student work time is interrupted so the teacher can give reminders or clarify directions.

Ask students to "fist" their computer (or "put the screen at half mast"). Screens should be gently lowered so that students' fists fit between the edge of the track pad and the screen.

When screens are fisted, students are not distracted by items on their screen nor can they type. At the same time, students do not lower their screens to the point that the computers go to sleep. In an iPad environment, students might carefully face their screens down on the desk.

Fingers indicate the amount of time students need to complete a shorter task.
Some tasks are shorter and need to be completed within a few minutes of class. After students have worked for a reasonable amount of time, ask students to show fingers for how many additional minutes they need. Fisted computers signal completion.

If a student is far behind the rest of the class, try to determine whether the student got distracted or if the student needs reteaching. Have the student take a screenshot of his or her progress. Screenshots are helpful to guide future conversations.

Circulate the room, conferencing with students.
Walking and talking with students is important with or without computers. In her article 10 Ways to be a Terrible Teacher, Vicki Davis describes the terrible teacher as one who is working on his or her own computer and not paying attention to students. 

Students welcome teacher conversation. They are eager to share their progress and request advice when they're stuck. You build relationships with students when you talk to them about their work.

Rather than banning chat, teach students how to use it for collaboration.
Chat features are programmed into Gmail and Google products. The first year, I banned chats. Then, I realized that chats can be used for student collaboration.

I glance at the chat windows as I circulate the room. Since students have specific, time-bound goals, most chats are used to ask peers to look over a paragraph or help with another aspect of the project.

Don't be afraid to have tough conversations with individual students.
Each year, I have to pull aside one or two students to talk about time management. It's not a punitive conversation. The conversation goes something like this:

I've noticed you haven't made much progress on...I need to know what's getting in the way of your progress. I'm not asking because I want to get you in trouble. I'm asking because you're now x-years old and I'm worried that, if you get in the habit of...,then school will be really hard for you in the future.

Many of the suggestions above apply to project-based learning environments both with and without computers. The trick in a 1:1 environment is to maintain focus on learning and communication. Then let technology naturally enhance those outcomes.

What tricks do you use to keep students engaged?

Janet Moeller-Abercrombie is the author of Expat Educator. She has 16 years of teaching experience and currently works full time at Hong Kong International School. Janet is a doctoral candidate with the University of Minnesota and has begun curriculum consulting with administrators and teachers. She is certified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. @jabbacrombie

 

[cross-posted at 1-to-1 Schools]

You might also like

1. Text Based Adventures in the Classroom [Guest Post]
2. Reflecting on two years of 1:1 [guest post]
3. What I Ask of SLA Teachers [guest post]

Iowa Governor Terry Branstad's recent remarks about retaining 3rd graders confirm both the potential positives and the many negatives of in-grade retention in elementary school.

First, the potential positives: in-grade retention sometimes leads to short-term (1 to 2 years out) - and maybe even mid-term (3 to 5 years out) - academic gains. The peer-reviewed research shows that these test score gains occasionally occur when you force kids to repeat 3rd grade, partly because 4th grade test scores look better when low-achievers have been removed from the grade cohort and partly because retained students have had an extra year of schooling by the time they actually are tested in 4th grade. That said, the Greene & Winters study that Gov. Branstad mentioned in his guest essay comes from a research institute known to be quite ideological and has been cited as having serious methodological concerns. It thus should be viewed with skepticism.

Unfortunately, the peer-reviewed research also unequivocally shows that the longer-term effects of elementary in-grade retention are disastrous. A simple Google Scholar search brings all of the research to the fore. What it tells us is that 1) short-term academic gains due to retention disappear by the upper grades, 2) being retained significantly increases dropout rates (65% to 90% of overage children in grade 9 do not persist to graduation), and 3) retention greatly diminishes student self-concept as well as future life success as adults (e.g., lower postsecondary education attendance, pay per hour, and employment competence ratings). In other words, potential short-term gain equals a great deal of known long-term pain.

As Iowans, do we care more about brief test gains so that we look good compared to other states? Or do we care more about the long-term educational and life success of our children? Bumping up Iowa's 4th grade scores for a short period of time so that we can feel better about our rankings compared to other states - at the expense of longer-term life success for our children - makes no sense whatsoever. To put it bluntly, what's the point of having higher NAEP scores if our kids then later drop out of school? Do we want our graduation rates to look more like Florida's (44th in the country)? It's telling that the Governor and his education team continue to 1) ignore the long-term impacts of in-grade retention, instead repeatedly citing just a couple of proven-to-be-flawed studies that show short-term results, and 2) fail to produce an extensive body of peer-reviewed research that supports his retention proposal (because there isn't any).

This is not an ideological issue (or at least it shouldn't be). It's a question of what the data show us, which are consistent and unilaterally negative impacts on students and adult beyond the potential first few years of test score gains. The Governor's proposal to increase support and intervention for struggling readers in early grades is both admirable and desirable. But there's absolutely no peer-reviewed research that supports the failure of 3rd graders and an incredible wealth of research against it. Iowa educators are asked to implement research-based best practices in their schools and classrooms. We should hold the Governor and the Department of Education to the same standards.

Say yes to intervention, but say no to retention.

Image credit: I thought we were supposed to get answers

You might also like

1. Are Iowa’s teacher retention efforts worth the money?
2. #MobilityShifts – Day 5: Emerging Learning Environments, Peer to Peer Grading and an Interview with Cathy Davidson [guest post]
3. Soliciting submissions for new P-12 technology leadership research award

Revolution doesn’t happen when society adopts new technologies - it happens when society adopts new behaviors.
- Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody, p. 160

I visit many schools that have 'new technologies,' but not enough of them also have 'new behaviors.' It's time for us educators to raise our game (leaders, I'm pointing to you first).

You might also like

1. Upcoming book: What school administrators need to know about digital technologies and social media
2. TIES – Hot technologies
3. Does your school organization reflect our new digital information landscape?

Beginning in the 2010-2011 school year, our school went through a number of transformations and changes, all aimed at enhancing the quality of the learning and teaching within our building. We adapted a 5 x 3 trimester schedule providing longer class periods and a lower student-to-teacher ratio. We added a house system separating the student body into six different houses mixed by age. Through a partnership with Apple, we implemented a 1:1 laptop program with our students receiving MacBooks. Below are five lessons we learned and the two biggest struggles we continue to face.

Lessons learned

1. It's the pedagogy not the technology. Technology should always be at the service of pedagogy. If you've heard Gary Stager speak or read his posts, I'm sure you've heard this theme before. When technology integration moves from what Alan November calls automative to informative, the real fun begins. Technology integration in schools should not be about tacking technology onto poor pedagogy. Rather, the real joy and power of integrating technology into the classroom is the power it has to redefine the relationships in the classroom and reorient them toward a more student-centered approach to learning. In our efforts, pushing for a longer class period also allowed our staff to move away from lecture-driven instructional models and to start implementing strategies that are more constructivist in their nature. Project-based learning, challenge problems, and creative and collaborative work are all enhanced and enabled by high quality technology integration. Using a Google Doc and the Web to do a 20-minute kick-start with teams of students finding, validating, and creating information on a topic within the curriculum is a very engaging way to begin a new unit. Using various tech tools to easily integrate peer instruction strategies based on the work of Dr. Eric Mazur is a great way to leverage the technology. But in all of these examples, it is really the orientation to and relationship with the learning that has changed.
2. Support the pedagogy at all costs. Teachers will and can change their methods when they are comfortable with their knowledge and inspired by what they see from those around them. Any new teacher quickly begins to teach like her peer group. To support this shift in pedagogy, we spent the entire year before the 1:1 program began creating a full period a day for staff to attend PD sessions throughout the year. We created a new position, Director of Instructional Technology, to lead a good number of these sessions with the goal of staff literacy in a number of pedagogical tools before the 1:1 initiative started. As the work is ongoing, we now offer PD sessions after school on Tuesdays and Saturday mornings, giving our staff an array of choices, with a certain minimum number that need to be attended. We compensate them at $27 an hour through our Title II funds. A list of this year's sessions is here. This model has created small groups of teachers who attend sessions that they are personally interested in and who want to integrate these strategies into their classrooms.
3. The plumbing and the plumbers. For staff to choose these strategies, they have to be guaranteed the network and bandwidth will be supportive. To that end, we added to our technology staff, doubling its size from one to two. Additionally we upgraded in a significant way the technology infrastructure by adding numerous access points and made sure our bandwidth pipe could handle 800 students pulling on it at once. I believe these changes are essential and that without them our program would be in peril. Access to the Web has to work and work quickly if these strategies will be relied upon. Additionally, every student and staff member was given a gmail account hosted through the school. In a year and half of running, our network has been down for approximately one hour. It just so happened that one hour coincided perfectly with the superintendent's annual visit and the need to log mid-term grades. Funny how those things work out.
4. Student ownership. We had the choice early on to either externalize ownership to the students or keep the ownership of the machines on the books of the school. In our case - and after much study - we decided to externalize the cost and have families purchase their laptops through the school. We provide financing options to our families. As a private school we have this opportunity. I realize that in many public schools the machines must be school-owned. In visiting with other schools who have school-owned 1:1 programs, the breakage rates seem to be higher. In general our breakage rates have come in below expected numbers for the students. Yet, interestingly, the staff break their machines at a rate four times that of students. If our students want to put stickers and other stuff all over the machine, they can have at it.
5. Principal leadership. If it isn't important to the leadership, it won't get done. I'm not the world's greatest principal by any means - and I make a whole host of mistakes every single day - but if I do anything well it might be modeling technology use. I teach a class every year in the high school and lead a good number of the professional development sessions related to technology-rich teaching strategies. I believe that by spending my time modeling what I believe is important, it allows the staff to get on board. I won't ask you to do something I won't do or won't be willing to learn to do. Of course I pay for the time spent teaching by having to log more early mornings or late nights in the office, but I think the relationships built with students and staff more than make up for it.

Biggest Struggles

1. Classroom management. Our staff has learned rather quickly that if they want to continue to use lecturing as their dominant instructional strategy, equipping the audience with a laptop is not conducive to that end. The computer should be more than a $1,000 pencil for note-taking. Direct instruction in its proper place and within limited time frames can be an effective strategy. When everyone has a machine, how do you guarantee that they are all on task? To this end, our staff has learned about where to be physically while they lecture and how to set up the classroom. Some staff use the LAN monitoring program. In some sense, though, student engagement in a lecture-driven classroom has always been an issue. Note passing and eye rolling have always been there. Switching from passing a note to chatting on Skype is the same problem in different clothes. Good teachers have engaged students.
2. Assisting parents. Our students take their laptops home at the end of the school day and for holidays and the summer. At school we use the Barracuda system to filter the Web and their access and to block the traditional things that a school would block. When our students take the machines home, we presume competence on the part of our parents that they already are dealing with their own rules and Web access issues. For the most part this proves to be true, but I do think we need to do a better job of supporting some of our families that struggle in this area. One fear that some of our staff and families had is that our students would spend all of their time staring at the screen in front of them. This may be true the first week they pick up their machine over the summer, but over the last two years a few interesting things have happened. Discipline referrals have fallen by 50%, absenteeism is down by 30%, participation in school events like Homecoming and the canned food drive has more than doubled, and the number of student-initiated clubs and activities has grown by around 30%. And enrollment looks to be growing for the third year in a row. We interpret these changes to mean that technology is helping our school to form an environment that is truly conducive to student learning in a number of areas.   From what we see school is becoming more relevant and a place where our students want to be.

In conclusion, our journey is an ongoing one. Simply buying the machines and upgrading the network is not enough to be a 1:1 laptop school. The true work is in shifting the pedagogy to be more student-centered. As Gary Stager says, less "us" and more "them." The rewards to this point have been worth the risks.

Charlie Roy is the principal of Peoria Notre Dame High School, an 800-student coeducational Diocesian Catholic school in Peoria, Illinois. He also is an adjunct instructor for Aurora University, teaching courses in school leadership and instructional technology. In his former career, Charlie was an options trader on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade. Follow Charlie on Twitter at @caroy.

You might also like

1. Are Ed Leadership programs still leading? [guest post]
2. What Does Every Administrator Need from Teachers? [guest post]
3. Caring, engaging, learning, and leading [guest post]

Yesterday, along with thousands of other web sites, Dangerously Irrelevant shut down for the day to protest two bills, SOPA (House) and PIPA (Senate). I don't think my little blackout had any major influence, of course, but I wanted to express my solidarity with the larger concerns. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the issues, Congress is debating right now whether the Internet in America and elsewhere should be hostage to the demands of a few private companies. If SOPA, PIPA, and similar laws are passed, the Web could look like this for all of us.

Unfortunately, legislators are making policy out of ignorance. Indeed, they're even joking about it. This has to stop. The Internet is too valuable a resource to legislate stupidly or to hand over to the demands of corporations. As Josh Kopstein stated, it's no longer okay for Congress to not know how the Internet works.

Jason Gots recently articulated quite eloquently that

issues of copyright law, political control, privacy, and child protection are exciting governments around the world about stepping in to regulate cyberspace. While this may solve problems in the short-term, these regulations will be blunt, hasty, and hard to undo. And they will run the risk of extinguishing the Internet's connective power before we have the chance to realize it.

There are real dangers here. I encourage every one of you who lives in the United States to please contact your legislators to let them know of your opposition to SOPA and PIPA.

This applies to education too!

Of course all of this is true for education lawmaking too. We have a number of different education bills, particularly at the state level, that are being driven by corporate interests instead of pedagogical appropriateness. Read a bit about the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), for example (thank you, Pam Moran, for cluing me in). While you're at it, check out its list of alumni politicians. I think all of that is pretty scary. How about you?

Yesterday Senator Marco Rubio, the co-sponsor of PIPA, dropped his support for his own bill, essentially admitting that he didn't understand the issues clearly when he introduced the legislation. I don't know if he was as embarrassed as he should have been, but his turnaround highlights the fact that our lawmakers are too easily snowed by corporations and others who have interests that often run counter to the good of the people or our schools. This is true whether we're talking about corporate advocacy for self-advantaging legislation or high-profile, extremely political, special interest groups that pressure state-level policymakers to align themselves with supposedly-national movements.

My home state of Iowa is a case in point. It is quite clear that some of the educational initiatives recently put forth by our Governor, Terry Branstad, have political origins outside of the state. There is a tremendous press from outside groups to get certain legislative items passed, regardless of their known harm to children or educators. This is leading to extremely disconcerting disconnects, including the fact that Governor Branstad recognizes that certain students need less time to learn required material (thus his proposal for competency-based, rather than age- or grade-based, progression) but doesn't simultaneously recognize that other students need more time to learn required material (thus his proposal for 3rd grade retention). Genuine concerns about his inability to recognize that there are two sides to the learning time coin are deflected with accusations that critics are against 'high standards' and 'high expectations' and 'accountability.'

We have to do a better job of educating our policymakers about important issues related to the Internet and education and other critical areas of concern. We also must do a much better job of holding them accountable for educating themselves. Otherwise their lack of knowledge will continue to manifest itself in legislation that is potentially harmful and dangerous to us all.

Image credit: RIAA reminds us why we hate them with obnoxious smartass tweet

You might also like

1. We need a rural Internet initiative
2. Chart week – Internet access in public schools
3. Feds can’t make up their mind regarding Internet filtering

As soon as you say 'failure is not an option,' you've just said 'innovation is not an option.'
- Seth Godin, The Flip Side

Download this file: png pptx

See also my other slides and the Great Quotes About Learning and Change Flickr pool.

[cross-posted at Education Recoded]

You might also like

1. Largest U.S. universities
2. Slide – Who’s deciding your fate?
3. Slide – Asking better questions

The National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) has created a new Digital Principal Award to 'honor principals who exhibit bold, creative leadership in their drive to harness the potential of new technologies to further learning goals.' NASSP also will use the award process to 'showcase models of leadership that encourage the use of technology in instruction and for principals’ own professional use.'

Every year, eSchoolNews recognizes 10 technology-savvy superintendents. Now NASSP is recognizing some technology-savvy principals. If you know of a digital principal, nominate him or her by January 17!

You might also like

1. 100 principal blogs in 100 days!
2. Principal blogging not allowed
3. 100 principal blogs – Update 2