Something Something Something: I’m Only Adding This Because All Good Titles Have A Colon.

I’m sure I’m not the first to write about this…

but I read this really interesting article over at  [insert hip magazine here]…

The author of the article…

writes about [insert phenomenon X here]..

The author really nails it when she says…

This phenomenon is not new, but I am an expert on this topic now because I read a couple of articles that confirm my hypothesis.

This got me thinking about my particular area of expertise…

where I see this same phenomenon all the time…

One time…

So, in conclusion, we should all think about the phenomenon the author wrote about and how it applies to our practice…

photo credit: geraldford

[NOTE: this blog post was entirely inspired by this video. You didn't expect me to have an idea of my own, did you?]

This coming semester (Spring 2012), I’ll be once again teaching a course called Educational Technology for School Leaders. This is a masters- or post-masters-level graduate course. The course is fully online (almost entirely “asynchronous;” there will be webinar-style sessions held at specific times, but “attending” those will not be mandatory and they’ll be recorded/archived/posted for after-the-fact viewing). The course is also an “open” course in that (nearly) everything we do will be “public.”

The course is also “open” in the sense that there are slots available for registration from anyone outside of VCU.¹. Maybe you’d like to learn with us this semester? Or, maybe you know someone who should or would like to? A little more about the course:

The “official” course description (i.e. the one in the VCU course catalog) reads:

Provides an overview of the impact of technology, particularly Web-based technologies, on K-12 instruction, from pedagogical considerations and associated tool choices to more pragmatic leadership issues of planning, funding and faculty development. This course is designed for administrators, teacher leaders and other interested professionals who are or intend to be leaders in technology.

In other words, this course is designed for sitting and/or aspiring school leaders who want to explore the intersection of school leadership and educational technology. Furthermore, the course is loosely framed around the National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators (NETS-A).

Fun will be had and lots of learning will happen. If you, or someone you know, would like to take the course, please contact me (or have them contact me).

NOTE: there is tuition associated with registering for the course. Including fees, tuition for the 3-credit course for VA residents is $1,119. For those outside of VA, the tuition is $2,727 (I’m just the messenger!).

 photo credit: IntelFreePress

1. The course is not SO “open” that I’m accepting students who are not formally registered for the course. There will be many opportunities for peripheral participation, though

Unless you live under a rock (or if you don’t track education policy matters through social media – same thing), you know about the “big” study about teacher effects that was conducted by Chetty, Friedman and Rockoff, disseminated through NBER and reported in multiple outlets, most notably the New York Times.

This is an important study for at least a couple of reasons. First, methodologically, the study is massive and novel in some important ways. Second, from a policy perspective, even if the authors overreach in their interpretation, the study adds to the growing body of literature on teacher effectiveness and value-added measures. The more empirical evidence we have, the better; that’s the nature of scientific research.

I haven’t read the paper yet, so I won’t comment on it. What stood out to me over the last few days, though, is how scholarly communication unfolded. The authors published the paper through the National Bureau of Economics Research (NBER), which is a reputable research organization, but one that publishes working papers that don’t undergo traditional academic peer-review. The paper is dated December 2011, but it was essentially “released” when the New York Times reported about it on Friday (January 6). Within the last 48 hours (over a weekend!), we already have a number of scholars/academics who have issued a range of reviews of the study. Consider just the following:

• Bruce Baker, professor in the Graduate School of Education at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, offers a fairly comprehensive review.
• Sherman Dorn, associate professor of education at the University of South Florida, has already written two posts about the study: one is a brief review of the study and the other is about the reporting of the study.
• Cedar Riener, assistant professor of Psychology at Randolph-Macon College, writes about the study and about the reporting.
• Matthew Di Carlo, a senior research fellow at the Albert Shanker Institute, offers a comprehensive critique of the study.

Through traditional forms of scholarly communication, this would have taken months to a year+ to get published and hashed out. Instead, we get the paper and 4 thoughtful reviews, all within 48 hours! Our traditional forms of scholarly communication are broken and woefully outmoded. And, education scholars wonder why research is ignored and ill-respected.

One other note – consider the disciplinary backgrounds of the four reviewers: Baker (economics), Dorn (history), Riener (psychology), DiCarlo (sociology). Publishing to the open web also helps us break down disciplinary silos.

In the span of the last two weeks, three articles were published about the role of for-profit corporations in K-12 online learning. Individually and collectively, they are serious and comprehensive pieces of investigative journalism and they all reach similar conclusions and raise serious concerns about the role of these companies, especially K12, Inc., in the public education landscape.

I encourage you to read all three articles.

Virtual schools are multiplying, but some question their educational value (Washington Post, November 26, 2011)

K12 has hired lobbyists from Boise to Boston and backed political candidates who support school choice in general and virtual education in particular. From 2004 to 2010, K12 gave about $500,000 in direct contributions to state politicians across the country, with three-quarters going to Republicans, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

How Online Learning Companies Bought America’s Schools (The Nation, December 5, 2011)

Corbett, a Republican who rode the Tea Party election wave in 2010, supports a major voucher expansion that is working its way through the state legislature. The expansion would be a windfall for companies like K12 Inc., which currently operates one Pennsylvania school under the limited charter law on the books. According to disclosures reported in Business Week, Pennsylvania’s Agora Cyber Charter School—K12 Inc.’s online school, which allows students to take all their courses at home using a computer—generated $31.6 million for K12 Inc. in the past academic year.

Profits and Questions at Online Charter Schools (The New York Times, December 12, 2011)

The New York Times has spent several months examining this idea, focusing on K12 Inc. A look at the company’s operations, based on interviews and a review of school finances and performance records, raises serious questions about whether K12 schools — and full-time online schools in general — benefit children or taxpayers, particularly as state education budgets are being slashed.

I’m not opposed to online learning in K-12 education. In fact, I’d say I’m rather bullish on the possibilities and affordances of online learning, especially for children with limited opportunities or access to meaningful learning environments. But, with some forms of educational research, we view triangulation as an evidentiary hallmark. So, while I was critical of the policy brief issued by the National Educational Policy Center, I can’t read those three articles and not conclude that we are in desperate need of oversight and regulation here. Dr. Justin Bathon’s legal brief and model legislation is a great starting point.

I have great respect for the folks at the National Educational Policy Center. In particular, I hold Gene Glass and Kevin Welner in very high regard; they are genuine, world-class scholars. But, I think they fouled up their newest policy brief, Online K-12 Schooling in the U.S.: Uncertain Private Ventures in Need of Public Regulation.

[go ahead and read the brief; it's brief not very long. I'll wait until you come back...]

[welcome back]

Generally, Glass & Welner show a serious lack of understanding of modern, web-based technologies and what’s possible by way of online learning. I think they’re outside of their respective areas of expertise here. I also think they have legitimate concerns about corporate creep in the domain of online learning, but they overreach here by generating a biased brief about online learning in general.

More specifically, here are some statements in the brief and my associated thoughts:

• “Some areas of the curriculum (the arts, for example) are likely beyond the successful reach of these new arrangements.” I disagree. This is a classic argument I hear from people who have little to no understanding of modern technologies and what’s possible with computers. What about web design? Digital storytelling? Heard some of the music being made with computers these days? Seen Kevin Honeycutt play instruments on his iPhone? Have you seen any of the online art exhibits showcased through Omeka.net? There are plenty of artistic endeavors and learning experiences that can be facilitated from a distance. Relatedly, a school district near where I live offers PE class “online.” I was really, really skeptical until I investigated further. There is some “traditional” online coursework around health, nutrition, etc. for the online PE class. But, the students are also required to do a very significant amount of physical activity certified by a professional. They can work out at a gym and have their exercise logs signed by a trainer. They can swim at a Y and have their logs signed by a lifeguard. Kids can go on hikes and have logs signed by a trail guide. There are lots of possibilities. Online PE!
• “However, the challenges are particularly acute for states, because states bear responsibility for sanctioning and chartering online providers.” That’s not necessarily true. Here in Virginia, the state has “approved” 13 providers of online learning, but school divisions (districts) are free to contract with other vendors. The school district in which I reside uses a non-approved vendor to provide credit recovery courses for thousands of students.
• “In its contemporary form, virtual education provides asynchronous, computer-mediated interaction between a teacher and students over the Internet.” Asynchronous only? What about all of the online educators using Skype and other forms of videoconferencing technology to “meet” with students to go over learning plans or to do academic advisement? What about real-time webinars? I believe if Glass & Welner had done a little investigation and observed what happens in some online courses, programs, schools, they would have learned that there are great possibilities for synchronous online learning.
• “This brief focuses on privately owned and operated virtual schools, most often taking the form of charter schools.” That’s just not true; I wish they’d have stayed focused on that. But, throughout the rest of the brief, there’s NO effort to separate out this particular segment of the market. The “incidence” data are not limited to this segment. The research they cite is not at all about this segment.  Same with expenditures. It is not until page 11 that Glass & Welner turn exclusively to the issues presented by commercialism and corporate interests. This is simply NOT a brief “focused on” private providers; it’s a policy brief about K-12 online learning in toto.
• “However, the Wikipedia entry for ―virtual schools lists more than 200 full-time virtual K-12 schools.” Wikipedia? That’s their source? Whatever.
• “No reasonable person doubts that learning can take place ―over a computer network. Perhaps no reasonable person likewise believes that everything students learn in a traditional education can be acquired working alone on a computer.” Maybe I’m unreasonable, but I disagree. First of all, Glass & Welner seem to imagine that online learning can only happen outside the existing bricks-and-mortar infrastructure. But, nearly two decades ago, Roger Schank and Kemi Jona outlined a scenario where the “academic” learning takes place on computers in schools where teachers become, essentially, camp counselors whose (very important) job it is to foster socialization; to counteract the isolation that comes with online learning. Secondly, Glass & Welner imply that learning is limited to schools. Combine online learning resources with community-based educational experiences (see e.g. museums, libraries, etc.) and, yes, schools may not actually be necessary.
• “…there exists no evidence from research that full-time virtual schooling at the K-12 level is an adequate replacement for traditional face-to-face teaching and learning.” OK, fine. But, how will we ever realize innovation in education if everything has to be “research-based?”
• We believe that, because online education is merely a tool and can take on a variety of forms and quality, all of these are important concerns.” This statement comes at the end of the section about equity, which I believe is a very important consideration. But, “…online education is merely a tool…” Really, a tool? Bias much? Online learning, in its best forms, equips students with a host of tools for collaboration and learning.
• “Thinking back to our own schooling days, we can recall how teachers organized and supervised the classroom environment to minimize the possibility of cheating. But in a virtual classroom, how does one…know that the student who signed up for the course actually did the assignments and took the tests?”  Here’s where Glass & Welner show a limited understanding of how assessment might happen in an online learning scenario. Going back to the synchronous/asynchronous issue, what if students had to demonstrate mastery by doing a presentation to the teachers via Skype? What if they had to videotape themselves working on assignments and document their learning with video and other artifacts?

I have real concerns about online learning at the K-12 level, including some of the same issues Glass & Welner raise. The equity issues are important. Pedagogically, I’m concerned; it’s really, really easy to put a bad online course online. Commercialism and corporate creep is a real concern.

But, this policy brief is not about what it claims to be about and generally overreaches badly. It’s possible I’ll run into Dr. Welner at the UCEA conference in a few weeks. I hope we can talk about this brief and my critiques.

Well, certainly the best one I’ve ever read (and I’ve read dozens).

This is the dissertation recently defended by one of my new colleagues, Dr. Hilary Hughes-Decatur. It is an absolutely brilliant piece of work; it’s rich with issues to be explored, ranging from how we deal with “bodily-not-enoughness” in schools to how we elicit the voices of students as researchers and practitioners. Her understanding and use of phenomenological inquiry is outstanding, and the substantive issues addressed in the dissertation are vitally important. What jumps out to me, though, is the format. It’s not so much the magazine-style and the multigenre writing that are noteworthy as it is how that all interacts with the particular topic of the study. It’s all very purposeful and wonderfully effective, IMHO.

Dr. Hughes-Decatur writes on page 15, “I don’t write like this to turn the academy on itself – I write like this, because that is what just comes out.” Well, I’m so glad it came out like that… and I hope it helps turn the academy on itself.

[UPDATE 10/30/11: Dr. Hughes-Decatur realized that the dissertation as I had posted it is under review by a publisher to be published as a book. Therefore, the right thing to do is to not post it here. Hopefully, the publisher will have the good sense to publish it exactly as is. Until then, if you'd like a glimpse into the work, be in touch with me or Dr. Hughes-Decatur.]

I’ve copied the text of an email that I sent today to all the members of the VCU School of Education community.

To some of you, the idea of scheduling a room and inviting people to have a conversation may seem benign, hardly “guerilla;” especially in “the academy.” But, I anticipate a good deal of pushback, especially since I had to distribute the invitation via an email group I’ve been told I shouldn’t be using (with the subtext being that people don’t appreciate the “mass” sharing of information electronically).

We shall see…

***

Greetings colleagues,

Next week (October 24-28) is Open Access Week.

As some of you may know, I made a commitment to publish only in peer-reviewed, open access journals. I believe that, especially as scholars in the field of education, we have a moral obligation to disseminate the knowledge we generate as widely and freely as is possible in the digital/information age. As John Willinsky argues in The Access Principle, “A commitment to the value and quality of research carries with it a responsibility to extend the circulation of such work as far as possible and ideally to all who are interested in it and all who might profit by it (p. xii).”

I’ve written more about the affordances of the modern Web for our lives as scholars HERE and HERE. I also gave a workshop on this topic over at the CTE last month. Nobody from the SOE attended, but you can watch an archived recording of that session HERE.

In recognition of Open Access Week, on Friday October 28, at NOON, I will be sitting (or standing) in OLIVER HALL, ROOM 4078   ready, willing and able to discuss/debate open access publishing and any other topic related to how the Web causes us to re-consider our woefully outdated and inequitable, elitist system of scholarly communication.

[NOTE: if you're not available Friday and/or you'd like a primer on Open Access publishing, the great Dan Ream is holding a workshop on Thursday, October 27th, from 1-2PM in Cabell Library Room 319.]

So, let’s have a discussion about this. Let’s talk about why the VCU faculty senate turned away an open access resolution much like many other institutions of higher education are passing. Let’s consider what such a resolution might look like specifically for the School of Education.

I’ll be there…

JB

We lost two giant minds last night.

From Steve Jobs:

Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently — they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.

And, on Derrick Bell:

But in Mr. Bell’s hands, the narrative technique became an accepted mode of legal scholarship, giving female, Latino and gay scholars a new way of introducing their experiences into legal discourse. Reviewing “Faces at the Bottom of the Well,” Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times wrote: “The stories challenge old assumptions and then linger in the mind in a way that a more conventionally scholarly treatment of the same themes would be unlikely to do.

I don’t normally find inspiration in the lives of others and especially not through quotes. But, I find myself particularly moved this morning, inspired to continue to be the one who is crazy enough to challenge old assumptions.

Thanks for all you did, gentlemen.

No! Real classrooms, schools and districts.

We need to stop calling high-tech classrooms or schools of the future. They’re happening NOW!

We need to stop asking if technology integration is related to improved test scores. It’s about learning, not test scores!

I spent a little time today collecting videos about “lighthouse” classrooms, schools, districts, etc. Here are just some. Most of those who read this post will be familiar with many of the names and faces. For some, though, these videos will highlight new names, faces, ideas, etc. So, I place these videos here in the spirit of possibility.

Science Leadership Academy (Philadelphia, PA)

High Tech High (San Diego, CA)

New York City iSchool

Mooresville, NC (“Digital Conversion”)

There are more, many more, but these are places where I know people and where I can trust that the videos aren’t just marketing puffery.

To repeat, I’m teaching a fully online course this semester called “Educational Technology for School Leaders.”

The course site is almost ready for launch.

As part of the course, I’ll be asking the students to “shadow” a school leader who actively uses social media for professional purposes. My hope is that by virtually shadowing a sitting school leader, the aspiring school leaders in the course will see what’s possible and consider the affordances of social media for school leaders.

What is “virtual shadowing?” Heck if I know; I’m making this up, I think. You can read the current assignment description, but, basically, I plan to ask the students to:

• Follow their mentor on Twitter (my preference is that the students actually start a Twitter account and follow their mentor that way, but they can also just regularly read their mentor’s Twitter page).
• Read any blog posts their mentor writes.
• Send an email to their mentor to find out if there are other spaces that are public where they might see their mentor engaged in professional practice.

I would ask the mentors to basically be themselves, to “act normally” (i.e. no dog-and-pony shows). The students will be shadowing their mentors for 6-8 weeks, so I’m not asking mentors to do any extra blogging (micro- or long form blogging) within any condensed period of time. I hope my students will reach out to you and interact with you online, but we’ll see; this is a new assignment/activity for me.

I only have five students right now so I need five fine school leaders to volunteer as mentors. If you are an educator in a formal leadership position¹ who is an active user of social media (Twitter, blog, etc.), please be in touch.

Thanks for your consideration!

1. yeah, I know that’s going to cause some unease, but I really want my students to see that there are folks in positions that require administrative certification who are active social media users