Hundreds of educational technology bloggers and conference speakers hold forth on the need for transformational change in our educational system, and the conversation can get pretty lofty and philosophical.

I am a strong advocate for transformational reform; but it seems to me there are two very serious roadblocks in our way that we have yet to address.

The first roadblock is our school structure:

How does a Middle School or High School teacher use technology to create a student-centered, project-based learning classroom environment, when they have less than 45 minutes with their students per day?

BTW, they  must use these precious minutes to meet demanding state NCLB standards, and their curriculum may be governed by detailed ‘maps’ that outline the pace and sequence of teaching and learning in their classrooms.

Maybe the teacher does their best to squeeze in a project or two for the students during the year; but that doesn’t significantly change the primary classroom dynamic that is presently dominating secondary education.

The second roadblock is our technology deployment practices:

How does a Middle School or High School teacher use technology to move to student-centered, project-based learning, when they generally have only one or two computers, and maybe an interactive whiteboard and projector in their classrooms?

Maybe the teacher has a student use the interactive whiteboard while the rest of the class sits and watches, maybe the class watches a good video clip, or simulation; but the one computer classroom is a passive one and does not fully utilize the potential of technology to empower each individual student.

Unless we fully address these two basic questions, our best PD and transformational change efforts will make little impact on what is really going on in our schools.

pete

I’m a tall person and from my earliest years was drafted into the world of basketball. I had a fair amount of success on the court ranging from high school and college teams to various tournaments and Men’s leagues. I’ve coached at the HS level and when my children were born, I was privileged to coach their tyro teams and as they got older, their AAU clubs.

When kids are young and shooting basketballs in their driveways they have to generate a lot of motion and energy to get the ball up to the hoop which is 10 feet high. After all, they’re little, and that’s pretty far up. They grip the ball with two hands and heave it over and over again, until it starts to rattle in to the basket. After lot’s of this kind of practice they get pretty good at shooting this way. It serves them well when they are playing alone or just shooting around for fun.

Then comes the day they want to take themselves to the next level. They want to play the game of basketball. They want to play on a team competitively. It’s here that they run into a coach like me. One of the first things I try to do with these young players is to teach them to shoot more effectively. I let them know that the two handed set shot that they have perfected is not going to serve them as they move up the ladder in the basketball world. It’s too easy for a defender to block the shot. It takes too much time to shoot it. Watch any high school, college or pro game and  you will see is the one handed jumper, not the two handed set shot that rules the game.

So, I take the time to teach them and have them practice this new and more effective method of shooting. For them it feels clumsy and all wrong. They clank shot after shot off the backboard. They can’t seem to get it near the basket. They get discouraged. When I look out of the corner of my eye (when they think I’m not paying attention), I can see them shooting their two handed set shots and swishing them in. It feels good to them. It has brought them success to this point.  I know what their thinking,  “If I can make the shot with two hands, why change?”

Some of them get the message that they need to learn and master this new way of doing things, others don’t. Some work through the discomfort of abandoning something familiar and practice the new and uncomfortable way of doing it. Over time it becomes embedded in their muscle memory. It becomes their new normal. They are prepared to compete at higher level than ever were before. Their commitment and practice pays off.

Others, for whatever reason, stick with the old and familiar ways and are not successful at the more competitive levels and, in time, drop off the team and leave basketball completely.

I believe there is a lesson here for leaders.

Most of us are self-taught. We use what we know and what talents we have to succeed. One day we are promoted, or we run into an difficult individual, dysfunctional organization, or a challenge that requires us to move to a new level. We need to up our game. We need new competencies to succeed. For some of us, it’s just too uncomfortable to change our old behaviors. We like our two handed set shot. The first few times we try some new leadership behaviors they flop, like the kids’ first one handed shots clanking off the backboard. We may decide that the problems aren’t with us, it’s with the folks who are giving us the problems. Their the ones that need to change.

A few of us, stick with it, realizing that the challenges that vex us are calls for us to abandon the behaviors that are not serving us anymore and to learn and practice new behaviors that will allow us to succeed as the game gets more competitive. We may find a leadership coach to help us perfect our ‘one hander’. We may find a friend who can support us as we deal with the discomfort of mastering something new. It can be daunting at times; but one day we find ourselves leading effectively and the one handed shots are raining in from all over the court.

So, are you going to keep shooting the two hander, or move on?

pete

At some point in your career you may have experienced a leader who we say has ‘presence’. What is ‘presence’? Are some lucky people born with it? Can it be learned?

We gravitate naturally to leaders with ‘presence’. They seem to have some intangible quality that draws us to them. They engender trust much more quickly than we would expect. We give them the benefit of the doubt. We are willing to follow them; not blindly, but much more readily than with others we know who are in leadership positions.

What is it that creates this attractive ‘presence’ that serves them so well as leaders?

It’s not their intelligence. There are lots of intelligent people who we’d never follow.

It’s not their way with words because there are many glib tongued educators that we would never trust as leaders.

It’s not their sense of humor, or their good looks, or their emotional IQ.

All of these qualities may be found in a leader with ‘presence’; but there is another domain that figures in greatly and that is the domain of the body.

The tag line for my blog and web page is:

‘Learning is a journey of the body, mind. and the heart.”

So is leading.

Leadership books often talk about matters of the mind and heart; but rarely speak of the body, so let’s examine the importance of having the ‘body of a leader’.

A Superintendent of schools addresses his administrative leadership team at the beginning of the school year, his shoulders are tense, his voice high and tight, and his breath short. No matter what words he speaks, his listeners are unconsciously hearing another message…”I am not grounded. I am saying things that are not coming from my heart.” The Superintendent’s body is not building trust. It was working against him.

A leader avoids eye contact and thus communicates that he isn’t fully engaged. It seems like he is hiding something. Unconsciously, I might ask myself, why would I want to trust someone who isn’t fully engaged, someone who seems to be hiding something?

A leader stands with his shoulders rounded and bowed in a concave circle. He sends a message of timidity.

A leader has a body that is stiff and inflexible. Unknowingly he is communicating stiffness and inflexibility to others.

A building principal is full of distracting winks, nods, and pats on the back. He creates a feeling in some that he isn’t really serious and grounded in his beliefs and actions.

A longtime Assistant Superintendent  holds his chin out and high; giving off just a whiff of arrogance.

There are so many leaders who seem totally disconnected from their bodies, as if it were only a vehicle to carry their heads from place to place.

When a leader doesn’t face you straight on when they are talking; the message may be that I’m busy and I’m not really listening to you.

There are many, many other ways that our bodies communicate messages to others. Our bodies are windows to our hearts and minds. If we are truly grounded in our purpose, if we are authentic, present, open, and connected to others; our bodies will communicate this. When our bodies, hearts, and minds are aligned and in sync, then we are living from the ’sweet spot’. We have leadership presence. We embody what we believe. Unconsciously, others feel it, and it helps to build trust more quickly.

I believe strongly that we can develop and build an effective leadership presence. It takes a deep commitment and quite a bit of practice. Often it takes the help of a leadership coach or a committed friend; but it can be done.

If we want to transform education, we will need leaders who not only know what changes need to be made; but embody their beliefs so that they are able to inspire and motivate others to take action and to make difficult changes.

pete

My ‘Product of the Month’ for October 2009 is the Internet browser called…

I’ve been using Flock for several years now and it has become my favorite browser. I like the fact that it is an ‘all-in-one’ Web 2.0 browser. You can configure Flock to login to your favorite Web 2.0 services. (See the image below)

Flock has a built in RSS feed reader.

By clicking on the Media Button you can drag photos directly to Flickr, PhotoBucket, and other web applications.

Below is an overview of a few of the other features that Flock offers including a blog editor that posts directly to your blogging platform.

Click on the Flock Star and create a Favorite. Click twice and your Favorite is automatically saved to your Delicious account.

Flock is available as a Free download.

AppGap Review

CNet Review

AppleTell Review

pete

We teach our children to share and if we remember to ‘walk our own talk’ technology sharing can save us an enormous amount of money. Some states have formalized technology cooperatives called Educational Service Agencies or BOCES (Boards of Cooperative Educational Services), others do not. If you do not have a technology cooperative in your area, think about starting one.*

Why?

1. Cooperative bidding and purchasing. Instead of asking for pricing for a small purchase of computers for your district, combine your purchase with the other districts in your cooperative. Will the price be cheaper if you are offering to purchase  3,000 computers or 300 computers? The same concept holds true for negotiating pricing for other equipment, software, and services. Join together and build ‘Economies of Scale’ and reap the benefits of ‘Volume Discounts’.

2. Disaster Recovery. Design disaster recovery plans together with other technology cooperative members. Each district can work with another to act as a ‘Hot Site’ to host a partner school district during emergencies. Working together can reduce the cost of ‘renting’ a Hot Site from a private, for profit DR company.

3. Develop a school district site or neutral site as a Network Operations Center for the technology cooperative. The idea here would be to develop a shared Internet ‘On ramp’. The districts in the cooperative would have broadband lines to the shared NOC which would have a large, scalable (hopefully redundant)  pipe to the Internet.

This is a conceptual diagram from private industry. Individual schools and districts connect via broadband (red lines) to the shared NOC (cloud -located at a school or neutral facility) and from there are connected to the Internet (lightning bolt).

Why is this a good idea? Once again, by combining all the Internet lines and bandwidth, the cooperative can negotiate lower Internet costs.

Also, once all the schools’ data lines come to one location before going out to the Internet, the NOC can put in a centralized firewall for all the participating districts. The same can be done for Internet filtering, spam filtering, intrusion detection, e-mail virus scanning, etc. Think about the savings both in time, effort, and money that having a centralized firewall, Internet filter, and spam filter would offer, as opposed to maintaining a firewall, filter, and spam filter in every district.

The shared NOC could also securely house Cloud Applications that don’t belong on the public Internet. These might range from web-based SIS and Financial systems to a host of educational applications.

4. Shared trainings, consultants, and keynotes. By pooling training and consulting dollars a technology cooperative would be able to offer PD or hire consultants that would be cost prohibitive for a single district.

5. Mature technology cooperatives may consider joint-hires for specialty positions. Much the same as pooling resources for training, consultants, and keynotes; members of the cooperative can find savings in sharing FTE’s that could not be justified in one district’s individual budget.

The need for sharing is there. The opportunity to share is there. The savings is there. So, how do you get started?

Begin a conversation with your colleagues. Keep it simple. Grow from there. If you need help, contact me.

pete

*Full Disclosure: For many years I directed the Lower Hudson Regional Information Center, a non-profit, educational technology consortium of (60) school districts located just north of New York City.

*Also, if you have an educational service agency in your area that is not meeting your needs, take the time to re-engage them so that together you build a more responsive cooperative arrangement. Don’t give up, it’s too important. The dollars you save can be re-allocated to student technology.

When I am asked to help districts save money or financially justify the paradigm shift to One to One computing, I suggest they audit their technology energy use. Shifting from traditional desktop PC’s to laptops, netbooks, or thin clients can save significant amounts of money, to say nothing of it being the environmentally correct thing to do.

A typical desktop computer uses between 65w-250w of electricity. A typical CRT monitor uses 80w and LCD 35w of electricity. You can get the actual amount of energy usage by checking the label on the specific device, or you can use a watt-meter to measure real energy consumption.

So, if we use 158w as an average for desktops and 58w as an average for monitors our total energy use is 216w per computer.

Let’s compute the energy cost of running just ONE computer for a typical school year.

Assumptions:

1. The computer is in use 6hrs per day. (6hrs x 216w = 1296w)

2. The computer is left in power saver mode over night. (18hrs x 35w = 630w)

3. The computer is in use 200 days per year. (200 days x (1296w+630w) = 385,000w)

4. The computer is in power saver mode on weekends and holidays, approximately 100 days. (24hrs x 35w = 840w) x 100 days = 84,000w)

5. The computer uses no energy 65 days of the year.

Total yearly energy cost for ONE computer is 469,000w or 469 kilowatt hrs.

Estimated yearly cost for ONE computer @ .17 per kw hour = $80.

Energy cost for ONE computer over a (5) year lifespan = $400.

Total annual energy cost for ONE THOUSAND computers = $79,730.

Total energy cost of ONE THOUSAND computers over (5) years = $398,650.

Now, lets look at alternatives to the energy hungry desktop PC approach that is so prevalent in our schools today.

A laptop or netbook averages about 30w, most of it related to the display.

A thin client and display also averages about 30w.

Thus replacing a standard desktop with a laptop, netbook, or thin client device theoretically produces an 86% reduction in energy consumption.

Estimated yearly cost for ONE device @ .17 per kw hour = $11

(Savings =$69)

Energy cost of ONE device over a (5) year lifespan = $55

(Savings =$345)

Total annual energy cost of ONE THOUSAND computers = $11,000

(Savings=$68,530)

Total energy cost of ONE THOUSAND computers over (5) years = $56,000

(Savings=$342,650)

Even if we take the ‘best case’ desktop scenario: a 65w computer and 35w display, the energy savings for shifting to laptop, netbook, or thin client devices is 54% resulting in a savings of $227,230.

In One to One implementations, if students use battery power during the day and are required to charge their devices at home, the energy savings can be more than 95% and a cost savings of $378,717.

The yearly $68,530 savings in energy costs (ONE THOUSAND computers) can purchase:

An additional (228) netbooks, or thin clients per year. (@$300 per device)

Over (5) years a school can DOUBLE the number of devices available to students (1140) based on energy savings generated by switching to netbooks or thin clients.

If you are more interested in the traditional route you can purchase laptops and add an additional (86) devices per year (@$800 per laptop) and increase your network by (430) devices over (5) years.

Anyway you look at it there is a good case to be made to go “Green”.

It’s time to shift our technology energy paradigm.

pete

Without thinking about it consciously many of us change the emphasis of this question to make it a financial one that sounds like this: “Can I afford to go to a One to One model?” Our answer is generally, “No, I can barely afford the technology I have today!” When we think like this we believe we are being ‘realists’; but looking at educational technology this way shuts down many possibilities before we’ve fully explored them.

I like the approach that Bernajean Porter espouses:

Reality is too confining. If we are going to transform education, we need to let go of “reality”. If it is worth doing, then let’s do it. We should say “Yes!” first, then deal with questions of “How?” afterReality is too confining. If we are going to transform education, we need to let go of “reality”. If it is worth doing, then let’s do it. We should say “Yes!” first, then deal with questions of “How?” after.

If we keep deploying technology in the same ways we have for years, it seems to me, we are bound to continue getting the same results. It’s time for a new approach. One that puts technology in the hands of teachers and students so that they can move beyond the ‘many watching one’ model…

….and ’shared pencil’ approach that has dominated our classroom-based technology paradigms for decades.

How can we move to One to One financially? technically? pedagogically? There are lot’s of strategies to explore. There is no One Perfect Way to travel this path. In just the last two years the emergence of low-cost Netbooks,  Smartphones, new wireless standards, and  the availability of broadband in the home have made the initial cost of One to One more affordable.

In addition, Cloud Computing, virtualization, blade servers, and other new technologies have made One to One more easy to manage. All in all, One to One is more accessible to the average school district than at any time in the last 30 years.

Many visionary districts have found the answers to their questions and have created dynamic new One to One environments for learning. Many are beginning the journey with a single grade level or a single pilot. If you aren’t exploring and plannng for One to One, you should be.

It all starts with saying,”Yes!”

pete

One-to-One  & Ubiquitous Computing

‘Pilot’ Opportunities

Ed Tech Journeys is seeking school districts interested in exploring the possibilities of One-to-One computing and desktop virtualization. Right now we are seeking districts for the 2009-2010 school year. To learn more contact me by e-mail:  preilly@edtechjourneys.com

You can get a good idea of what a proof of concept might entail by downloading a copy of one of the final Pilot Reports below:

Deer Park USFD One to One project completed in June 2009

The Shoreham-Wading River  CSD  One-to-One project completed in June 2009

The Wethersfield Schools (CT)  Virtualization project completed in June 2009

The Niagara-Wheatfield CSD  One-to-One project completed in March  2009

Cloud computing is getting a lot of play in the k-12 community and there’s no doubt that there are some wonderful benefits to this model for schools.

Web-based software can be the road to 24×7 access from any location with Internet access.

Software as a service off-loads the costs of servers and the ongoing cost of maintaining them by an already overburdened tech support staff.

Web-based software gets updated centrally and insures that all students and teachers are using the same version.

However, there are some limitations to the public cloud:

Not all applications run in the public cloud.

Storage of sensitive student data is not under the complete control of the school district.

Software becomes an annual subscription and not an outright, one-time purchase. Over time, software budgets will grow as we add more subscriptions.

We still need the local network for policies, printing, grouping students, web filtering, and local storage

We can address these issues by developing ‘private clouds’ within the district.

We can virtualize desktops and applications and run them from servers in the ‘private cloud’ so that little or no software remains on the students’ or teachers’ computing device. Combining Public and Private clouds provides the best of all world’s:

All the benefits of the public cloud as stated above…

plus

The school can run applications that are unique to their environment.

Access these applications 24×7 from any device with Internet access.

Become device independent (apps are running on servers) thus allowing the purchase of thin clients, netbooks, and other low cost computing devices.

Install and manage applications centrally.

Slow the replacement cycle (software runs on servers so no need to buy new computers every few years.

There is no doubt that we are at a unique crossroads in educational technology. There are huge changes in the ed tech paradigm that are about to take place. The Public and Private clouds are a means to an end and not the end itself.

As we shift to this new paradigm we also make it possible for each student to have their own device and to access their learning resources and files from anywhere, at any time.

pete

Each of us has a professional identity. What is yours? You may think you are looked upon as a hard working educational technology leader; but your identity, what others think of you, may be very different.

For example, I know a few folks who feel they are going ‘over and above’ to do their jobs and that people recognize their effort. In fact, their identity  among professional colleagues is that they are  folks who can’t be relied on. Why do people feel that way about them? They don’t return phone calls or e-mails consistently. This inconsistency leaves people hanging, and after a while they have lost faith in them.

There are those that attend various meetings and commit to doing things and then get so busy with their ‘real’ jobs that they don’t have time to follow through. It’s not the end of the world to do this once; but because they’ve repeated the pattern, these folks become known as ‘all talk’.

There are folks I know who have identities of ’self promoters’. At meetings with their colleagues they have all the answers. They talk a lot about how wonderful things are in their districts; and rarely listen to what others have to say. It’s all about them.

On the opposite end of the spectrum are those with the ‘I can’t win’ identity. As their budgets shrink and their aged computers age even further, they see no correlation with their own ineffectiveness as leaders. However, their colleagues do. Whatever their image is of themselves, these folks are seen as negative and weak. They are often sarcastic, “Sure, my teachers can’t wait to use technology.” Their signature responses to suggestions from others are things like, “I’ve tried that.” “You don’t understand, that won’t work with my (insert group here: teachers, administrators, superintendent, principal, board of education).”

I know folks who have the reputation of having great ideas; but little follow through.

There are those who are known as ‘control freaks’. Everything has to go through them. Every request, every issue, every piece of information must pass through their filters. They control the flow of information to their superintendents, administrators, and teachers. They are guardians of the gate.

Their are those that deal in ‘drama’. They’re involved in conflicts where ever they go. They are well-known among their colleagues because they are always talking about some other colleague (usually negatively) when they aren’t around.

It is a good idea to give some thought to what identities we have created for ourselves. We need a good mirror because what we think our identity is may be very different from how others see us.

A practice that I employ before meetings is to ask myself, “What identity do I want to have with the others in this meeting?” My identity for a specific meeting might be focused on:

a trusted adviser, a team player,  a good listener, someone with specific expertise, someone that is organized, a strong leader, an individual with vision, an individual with experience, etc.

Focusing on our identity is not play-acting or being manipulative.

It is simply being deliberate about the actions we take in the world.