Join the conversation

...about what is working in our public schools.

Technology and Learning

Blog Entries

Ann Flynn's picture

Steve Jobs’ edtech legacy

Editor's Note: Our guest blogger today is Ann Flynn, Director of Education Technology and State Association Services at National School Boards Association (NSBA, a member of the Learning First Alliance). This post was originally published on NSBA's School Board News Today.

The death of Apple founder Steve Jobs has triggered an outpouring of worldwide support by individuals touched by the innovations he enabled. One reporter compared Jobs to the Thomas Edison of our generation, and indeed his vision has transformed the way we create, connect, and communicate much as Edison changed the lives of those in the past century. We take the contributions of Edison for granted now, rarely thinking of his innovations with electric lighting or the phonograph as “technology”. They were simply devices, that over time, changed the world. The collection of devices attributed to Jobs’ vision, from the early computers to the latest iPads, are already regarded for what they enable us to do to simplify day-to-day living and learning, rather than just being the newest cool gadget.

His innovations allow adults and children alike to interact with their world in ways only previously imagined in science fiction. Many adults recognize the convenience of having the power of the Internet in the palm of their hand, the ability to manipulate content with the touch of a finger, the option to carry a lifetime of favorite tunes, or download applications to simplify everything from airline schedules to paying for parking meters. Yet some of those same adults have not embraced the idea that these tools can have the same transformational impact on education for today’s youth. Jobs’ Apple was among the earliest technology companies to recognize that their devices could impact learning and ...

Story timeFall’s arrival heralds the start of school and classroom teachers are excited to welcome back their students for another year of learning. At the same time, they are faced with the reality that students seem to know less than they did last spring. On average, all students lose ground and begin the year a month behind where they performed in the spring. One study suggests that two-thirds of the achievement gap for low-income students entering ninth grade can be attributed to summer learning loss. The gap is particularly pronounced in reading, where low-income students lose ground, as opposed to high-income students who maintain or gain ground.

The achievement gap is a widely recognized reality in American public education. It is troubling, persistent, and continues to elude remedy. When a potential solution arises, it is difficult to maintain realistic expectations, and that is exactly what must be done when it comes to summer learning programs. We can take heart that evidence from studies to evaluations shows the promise of such programs in reducing the achievement gap that separates low-income and minority youth from their more privileged peers. ...

Last weekend, Matt Richtel wrote a piece for the New York Times that has lit up the education blogosphere: “In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores.”

In it, Richtel questions the shifting of public tax dollars towards education technology when those technologies have not been proven to improve student standardized test scores. Some are outraged, claiming that money could be spent lowering class sizes or on other proven strategies for school improvement.

My immediate reaction was, “But current standardized tests are not a good measure of what we expect children to know in the 21st century.” And several bloggers have responded to this piece with similar sentiment.  

My next thought was concern about how some education “advocates” and watchdog groups who track public spending will use this information to bolster their argument against funding education technology. And I found myself wondering what kind of schools their children attend.

That took my mind back to a piece I remember from School Finance 101 last July. In it, Bruce Baker explains his decision to send his children to private independent schools while being a staunch defender and supporter of the public system. While ...

Social media in education is a touchy issue, for some good reasons. In utilizing social media, schools, educators and students take certain risks. Consider the consequences when bullying on sites like Facebook creates a distraction at school – or is conducted on school-owned equipment. And think about the (extremely rare) cases in which a social media site contributes to an inappropriate relationship between a teacher and a student (the state of Missouri is so concerned about this potential it has enacted a law that says contact between these parties must be in the public, not private, sphere – in other words, “teachers can set up public Facebook pages or Twitter accounts but can’t reach out to their students as friends or followers, or vice versa”).

There are educational consequences, too. For example, recent research suggests that middle school, high school and college students who are active on Facebook get lower grades, display more narcissistic tendencies, and are more prone to anxiety and depression than students that aren’t.

So why would we promote the use of social media in education?

Last week I attended the first #140edu event, a conference that allowed stakeholders from students to teachers to company owners share their thoughts on “The State of Education NOW” – specifically, the effects of the real-time web on education. And I heard a number of great reasons why social media should be incorporated into a school culture.

Conference co-host Chris Lehmann (@chrislehmann, for those of you on Twitter), principal of Philadelphia’s Science Leadership Academy, pointed out that social media gives students the power to be “in and of their world,” – for example, the ability to ...

Clearly we live in an age when customers have great choice in products and services, many of which can be delivered via computer applications. Education authors and former teachers and administrators Chuck Schwahn and Bea McGarvey want to integrate this reality into school learning.

They recently published a new book, Inevitable: Mass Customizing Learning, in which they discuss how schools can alter current outdated practices by utilizing customizing technologies to better meet individualized needs of students. We recently asked the pair some questions about their book and its potential for improving the schools. Check out the description Bea provided of creating a learning plan/schedule under their system at the bottom of the page after the interview.

Public School Insights:  Your book is titled Inevitable: Mass Customized Learning.  What is Mass Customized Learning?

Schwahn/McGarvey: Mass Customized Learning (MCL) is actually a very descriptive label.  From a learner’s perspective, MCL means that “every day when I go to school, I am met at my individual and personal learning level, I am able to learn in my most powerful learning modes, I am motivated to want to learn with content that is of interest to me, I feel a sense of challenge, I am successful, and I look forward to ...

Clearly there are many worthwhile focuses competing for time, funds, and energy within public schools, especially in our current fiscal context. And while it’s often difficult to prioritize these issues, it is increasingly clear that technology is of critical importance in modern society—and thus for schools—and it will only become more important in the future.

To this end, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) focuses on promoting technology-friendly policies and instructional information for schools. Their advocacy efforts make clear that technology proficiency is critical for students of all demographics and income levels. I want to focus on a few points ISTE makes on its website.

One, we should emphasize technology mastery in teacher preparation. Among crucial players to effect this is the federal government—which should provide funding to ensure that teachers understand current technology and can integrate it into curricula. While there are some great federally-funded programs like Preparing Teachers for Digital Age Learners (PTDAL), there is a shortfall in this emphasis, and we should come up with a ...

Technology has redefined how we work, play and communicate at work and at home.  For those of us involved in advocating for technology’s appropriate role and substantial impact on public K-12 schooling, the redefinition has been slower than we would have liked.  The Learning First Alliance (LFA) hopes to accelerate more widespread understanding and implementation of technology for both instruction and information management by expanding our coalition to include, effective March 1, 2011, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).   ISTE represents more than 20,000 educators, 80 affiliate member groups, 89 countries, and 65 education technology corporations in their efforts to advance excellence in learning and teaching through innovative and effective uses of technology.

ISTE’s value system aligns nicely with LFA goals and objectives and includes the belief that:

  • strategic partnerships and collaboration are essential to realizing a shared vision for education excellence
  • organizational excellence focuses on innovation, transparency, and fiscal responsibility
  • power resides in a diverse and inclusive global community of members who learn, teach, and lead to advance the field
  • global connections and partnerships advance educational excellence, teaching, and leadership for all stakeholders

For too long K-12 education leaders have communicated within silos of ...

Yesterday, the Commerce Department released a broadband access report based on Census data. The conclusion? While broadband use among all American increased sevenfold between 2001 and 2009, the U.S. faces a significant gap in residential broadband use that breaks down along incomes, education levels, and other socio-economic factors. For example, 94.1 percent of households with income over $100,000 had access to broadband in 2009, while just 35.8 percent of households with income of less than $25,000 did. And 65.9 percent of urban households, compared to 51 percent of rural ones, subscribed to broadband in 2009.

One surprising finding: African-Americans and Hispanics lag behind in broadband access even when controlling for factors such as income and education. A possible reason: “Internet usage relies on networks. ... If the people around you don’t use the internet, you will be less likely to use the internet, too.”

In looking at this data, I make the assumption that children who have access to the internet have someone teaching them how to use. And so data like this remind me that in developing our education reform strategies, we have to look beyond just the teacher, school governance and the other currently hot topics. If we believe that technological literacy (including knowledge of how to best utilize the resources that the internet offers) is a critical component of future success, and if we want all students to have access to the skills needed to succeed in an increasingly complex society, we cannot ignore disparities in ...

The news has been getting me down recently. And not just the news itself (depressing enough to those who share my views on a number of issues), but what people are saying about it.

Like most people these days, I get most of my news online. And as you know, most newspapers allow comments on the articles they post. In theory, this is great. It allows those who read them to gauge public opinion on the issue at hand. But too often these comments seem counterproductive to me. So many essentially tell the author or another commenter that he or she wrong, dumb, and a terrible, awful person who (in the case of education news) cares only about adults and not about children. I miss productive conversations between people who disagree respectfully and then work to see the other’s position and find common ground.

So I was delighted to see Bill Ferriter’s post on The Tempered Radical yesterday. It appears he shares my views on the potential of this type of web-based communication. As he pointed out:

Web 2.0 tools have given us the opportunity to join together in public forums----electronic versions of the ancient Roman marketplaces----and to think across borders. We've got amazing opportunities to ...

We hear a lot about urban schools—their performance, the challenges they face, how we can make them better. We don’t hear nearly as much about rural schools, despite the fact that almost half of our public schools are rural and about a third of America's students attend these schools.

Rural schools face challenges similar to urban schools (such as poverty and high mobility rates), as well as unique challenges related to attracting and retaining staff, capacity to apply for large competitive grants, access (or lack thereof) to providers of supplemental educational services and more. 

But there are a number of successful schools and districts that are overcoming these challenges and helping rural students meet their potential. South Dakota’s Wagner School District is one such place. The district, located next to the Yankton Sioux Reservation, has one school that serves grades pre-K through 12. Its diverse student population is overwhelmingly poor. It has a high mobility rate.

Yet students in Wagner graduate at a higher rate than others in South Dakota. And Native American and high school students outperform their peers across the state on standardized assessments.

Critical to the district’s success is technology. By embracing initiatives ranging from a one-to-one laptop program to online AP courses to iPod touches that help differentiate instruction for kindergarteners, this district is truly using technology to enhance student learning.

Wagner Superintendent Susan Smit recently told us more about this remarkable district.

Wagner: A Rural, Diverse District

Public School Insights: Tell me about the Wagner School District.

Smit: Wagner is located in rural South Dakota, along the Missouri River at the base of the state. It’s a beautiful part of the United States.

We get federal impact aid under Title VIII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. We're right next to the Yankton Sioux Reservation, which is a checkerboard reservation. It was one land mass at one time, but pieces have been sold by different entities through the years and now it's a checkerboard. One piece of land may be reservation, the piece next to it may not be.

We're a rural community with changing demographics and a diverse population. The two primary demographics are Native American and non-Indian. When I came here six years ago, we were under 50 percent Native American. Now ...

Syndicate content