In Educational Technology

Memory, tradition and myths — Is technology changing our brains?

Science and technology revolutionise our lives, but memory, tradition and myth frame our response.

— Arthur Schlesinger

Earlier today my Twitter buddy Carl Hendrick tweeted a quote and a link to Sophie MacBain’s thought-provoking piece in New Statesman titled Head in the cloud. Carl chose this quote for his tweet: “By blurring the distinction between our personal and our digital memories, modern technology could encourage intellectual complacency, making people less curious about new information because they feel they already know it, and less likely to pay attention to detail because our computers are remembering it. What if the same could be said for our own lives: are we less attentive to our experiences because we know that computers will record them for us?”

Socrates at The Louvre
Socrates at The Louvre

This struck a chord with me because objections to new technology on the grounds that  technology will make us dumber are not new by any measure. Socrates thought that writing would “create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth; they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without the reality.” 

Luckily for us Plato did not listen to his teacher and wrote the whole lot down, which is the only reason we know that Socrates said that and many other things in the first place.

The belief that having more information available to us atrophies our brains and that technology is making us stupid – as Nicholas Carr warned in The Shallows – is widespread. But, as Jonah Lehrer put it in his eloquent critique in the New York Times of Carr’s narrative, “there is little doubt that the Internet is changing our brain. Everything changes our brain. What Carr neglects to mention, however, is that the preponderance of scientific evidence suggests that the Internet and related technologies are actually good for the mind.” 

To be fair though, technology is changing us anatomically. It’s been changing us from the very beginning. We are, to a large extent, a product of our technological advances. An alarming thought for Socrates would have been that he actually looked the way he did because of technology.

One of Socrates's ancestors
One of Socrates’s ancestors

It turns out that after mastering the creation of fire hundreds of thousands of years ago, our digestive systems started to adapt to cooked food, so we gradually lost the ability to digest digest raw meat and vegetables efficiently. Cooking food meant that our jaws and teeth gradually shrank, and the ridges on our skulls and brows needed to support heavy chewing musculature started to disappear. Most importantly perhaps, pre-digesting food by cooking it increased the number of calories available to our digestive system and may have been the single most important factor in allowing our brains to grow larger. Increased brain power in turn allowed for the development of new technologies such as agriculture or metallurgy, and, more recently, the printing press and the internet, all of which continue to shape who we are, literally so.

But all of this only happens in evolutionary time scales. “Brain change” of this magnitude does not occur in decades, centuries, or even a few millennia. If we were to dissect Socrates’s brain and compare it to yours, it would be impossible to tell any difference. According to leading neuropsychologists Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons (the folks behind the invisible gorilla experiment) the brain’s anatomy “is determined by genetic programs and biochemical interactions that do most of their work long before a child discovers Facebook and Twitter.” 

Despite all that we know about how the brain actually changes and the benefits that technology continues to have in our development and success as a species, advances in technology are often portrayed as retrograde steps – as humanity’s Achilles heel. Influential academics, such as Susan Greenfield, broadcast vociferously their concerns about the negative impact technologies may have on our cognitive ability, suggesting that we should worry about this in the same way we worry about climate change. Artists too — the very word technology derives from the Greek tekne (art or craft) and logos (account, narrative, study or explanation) — often present a dystopian vision of the future through their work. Some of it is very intelligently and perceptively crafted and the very best of it makes you think hard and reassess your own assumptions and convictions.

But, as Chabris and Simons conclude, “there is simply no experimental evidence to show that living with new technologies fundamentally changes brain organisation”. Technology is not making us dumber, after all. For that we only have ourselves to blame. To paraphrase Steven Pinker, with technology, as with so many other concerns, human nature is the problem, but human nature is also the solution.

In Education

Technology and the death of civilisation — The truth never goes viral

It is a failing of human nature to detest anything that young people do just because older people are not used to it or have trouble learning it. So I am wary of the “young people suck” school of social criticism.

— Steven Pinker

Earlier this week I walked into a classroom during morning break and saw a group of three girls sitting on the floor concentrating silently on their iPads. I wondered what they were doing. When I walked over to them, I saw that two of the girls were reading a book for pleasure and the third one was finishing her English homework. I chatted to them briefly and we joked about the fact I couldn’t quite pronounce correctly the title of one of the books. ‘W’ has always been my phonetic nemesis in English.

To someone who is not familiar with our context, the sight of three students ‘staring into’ a screen at break might have evoked more negative reactions — distractions, social media, games… The sort of negative reactions that seeing three children ‘staring into’ a paper book would probably never evoke, because to many of us paper is rigorous, scholarly and academic, whereas screens are distractions from which nothing good could possible emerge.

Late last year this photograph of children looking at their smartphones by Rembrandt’s ‘The Night Watch’ in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam started doing the rounds on the web. It quickly became viral. It was often accompanied by outraged, dispirited comments such as “a perfect metaphor for our age”, “the end of civilisation” or “a sad picture of our society”.

Clearly, to lots of folk, the photograph epitomised everything that is wrong with young people these days and their ‘addiction’ to technology. These children were being distracted by their technology to such an extent that they weren’t paying any attention to the beauty surrounding them in the real world.

Only they weren’t. It turns out that the Rijksmuseum has an app that, among other things, contains guided tours and further information about the works on display. As part of their visit to the museum, the children, who minutes earlier had admired the art and listened attentively to explanations by expert adults, had been instructed to complete an assignment by their school teachers, using, among other things, the museum’s excellent smartphone app.

I wonder whether the photo would have caused so much indignation and disapproval if it had depicted students ‘ignoring’ the masterpiece while reading a paper leaflet or museum brochure instead. Though I suspect not. It would appear that, once again, reports heralding the death of civilisation at the execrable hands of technology might have been greatly exaggerated.

I would like to think that all those who liked, posted, shared and tweeted the picture of children on smartphones by Rembrandt’s masterpiece in the erroneous belief that it illustrated everything that is wrong with society feel a tiny bit silly and a little more humble as a consequence. But it won’t happen.

The tragic thing is that this — the truth — will never go viral. So, I wonder, what is more likely to bring about the death of civilisation, children using smartphones to learn about art or the wilful ignorance of adults who are too quick to make assumptions?

This blog was originally published in Medium.

In Education

Martin Robinson @Trivium21c on technology —A distraction from proper learning?

Pupils write and research with screens, their eyes flit between one link and another, and they never arrive at an in depth reading of anything. Sure, pupils can cut and paste, and look for superficial links, as long as wikipedia or an algorithm or two leads them that way. But they can’t concentrate.

— Martin Robinson

I can’t claim to know Martin very well, but I have had the privilege to have had a drink or two with him on a couple of occasions. Martin is well-read, erudite and possesses the kind of cultured charm that makes a conversation with him a treat any day of the year.

I have a great deal of sympathy and time for his views on character education, his suspicions of evidence-based practice and, above all, curriculum design — in fact, I’d go as far as to say that his book Trivium 21C is a must-read for anyone who has any interest in the subject.

But I do honestly think he is often wrong on the subject of technology. Especially technology in schools.

But for all our cumulative wisdom this is also an age of foolishness and our biggest folly is found in the technological distractions in our classrooms.

— Martin Robinson

Martin views technology through a dystopian lense. To him technology destroys tradition and distracts children from proper learning. Children can’t possibly derive anything good from its use and teachers are fools for believing technology can support teaching and learning. In the same breath Martin cites Dewey, Huxley, Freire, Marx and Engels and tries to convince you that he is right. Why? Because they were right, stupid. Like the serpent around the proverbial apple tree, Martin winds his prejudices and preconceptions around established truths of pedigreed provenance, tempting you to swallow the whole lot down without you noticing. Unthinking. Unquestioning.

We need to replace the age of distraction with the age of conversation and for this to occur teachers need to cease worshipping at the altar of technology.

— Martin Robinson

Distraction! Like many other polemicists, Martin latches on to any example of poor practice and stacks arguments made of straw around it, which he then proceeds to blow down with ease, aplomb and self-regarding satisfaction. If only it were true. When challenged about why he thinks technology must always be such a distraction and presented with evidence to the contrary, Martin responds with questions, not answers, masking his lack of knowledge in this area with the socratic equivalent of smoke and mirrors. Martin views technology use and poor practice as one and the same. His antithesis to this thesis is that the avoidance of technology will engender good practice. Never for one moment does Martin consider that the antithesis to poor practice is actually good practice, with or without technology.

You see, Martin sustains that Aristotle would have abhorred iPads; that da Vinci would have eschewed 3D printers; and that Pithagoras would have refused computers and opted instead to complete his calculations by ploughing tiny furrows in the sand with a fine stick. “That, my man, is true science, true art, true human achievement” he would say, forgetting that what makes da Vinci one of the greatest artists of all time is not the technology that he used or did not use, but his genius. “Who needs XXI century skills when you can have XV skills?” he would quip, contrasting Michelangelo’s David with a computer generated effigy out of a Grand Theft Auto screen grab. Art is dead, you see? And technology killed it. He huffed, and he puffed, and he blew the house down.

In Digital Strategy, Education

A hopefully down-to-earth and accurate review of technology in teaching — A @PivotalPodcast

I was very fortunate to be asked by Paul Dix and Kevin Mulryne to contribute to their Pivotal Podcast, which aired yesterday. The text below is borrowed from their website.

José is also in charge of Digital Strategy at Surbiton High despite not having a background in technology. He sees this as an advantage because he thinks that knowing what happens in the classroom is important rather than just coming from a technological point of view. The position became available when the school invested in mobile technology a few years ago.

How do you get the best out of technology?

Technology should be invisible. It should be something you expect to work. You don’t bring candles into your classroom in case the electricity doesn’t work.

José believes that technology should always be there in the background – it should be enabling and you shouldn’t have to plan your lessons to cope if the technology doesn’t work. His aim is to have technology available and reliable in his school so there has been a lot of investment in the wifi connection, projector-less Interactive Whiteboards and the quality of the internet connection.

On top of this, the school has also concentrated on improving teaching and learning more generally – with and without technology.

We haven’t bought tablets and expected magic to happen.

The school has done a lot of research into how tablets can enhance teaching and learning – the school trains its staff to be better teachers and introduces technology to, for example, help them give better feedback or help their students be better organised or collaborate better. It’s all about how technology can fit into the picture of what makes great teaching.

Technology in language teaching

Old-fashioned language labs were removed from Surbiton High several years ago. José says this typifies how technology in learning has changed. Teachers used to plan a lesson for the language lab and take their classes to the technology. Now, however, tablets ‘are’ the language lab so teachers just plan lessons and use the technology where it is useful.

Photo Credit

In Digital Strategy, Education

Social media: What options do schools have? —Are children addicted to technology or to each other?

Students entering secondary education in the last five years would not have known life before social media. The use of the internet has become an integral part of our lives and, as a result, we are communicating with each other on an unprecedented scale.

This presents both challenges and opportunities. On the one hand, research suggests that the use social media has many benefits: people who are social online tend to be very social offline as well; social media allow us to establish links and connections with like-minded people with whom it would have been otherwise impossible to do so; social media have become an important source of knowledge and information; social media allow us to keep in frequent touch and thus strengthen relationships with friends and family members regardless of distance. Furthermore, research shows that the use of social media is not a substitute for more traditional forms of relationship but rather an extension of them.

However, on the other hand, studies have also shown a link between the misuse of social media and increased levels of anxiety and even depression among young people. Clearly, schools and parents cannot afford to ignore this. So what are we to do?

Default ban

Most schools go down the path of banning the use of social media during school hours. This has many obvious benefits, not least because it allows pupils to concentrate on their studies free of social media distractions during lessons. Having said that, where many schools — and parents for that matter — go wrong is when they disengage from social media altogether, failing to grasp the important role that social media play beyond school, not only in the private lives of young people, but also in the wider school community and society in general.

One reason why schools and parents may prefer disengaging could be because the prevalent discourse surrounding our use of technology in popular media is littered with threats, warning, fears and concerns, many of which — though not all — are unwarranted and depict an almost certainly dystopian vision of how technology is and will be affecting our lives.

Even before Socrates worried that writing — still a new technology in 400 BC — would “create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls“, because “they will not use their memories” and “they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves”, generations of parents had disapproved of the way young people behave, speak and write. And they still continue to dislike intensely the tools young people use to do so, from comic books to Walkmans, from TV to video-games, from texting to online social networks. Indeed, texting was once the sworn enemy of proper English and literacy. But at a time when we are reading and writing more than ever on all kinds of devices (Ofcom has confirmed that text has overtaken voice in the UK in mobile telephony) the suggestion that reading and writing more will somehow have a negative effect on literacy seems ludicrous.

Children are addicted

According to renowned cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker, “it is a failing of human nature to detest anything that young people do just because older people are not used to it or have trouble learning it.” And so, one of the most worrying aspects of this cultural bias is adults’ propensity to vilify young people and view them as different from us. As if we adults did not feel the need to socialise when we were young, or as if we didn’t bully or were subject to bullying. It may be comforting, though highly inaccurate, to hark back to a time before social media when teenagers didn’t feel anxious about their relationships. As danah boyd (that’s right, no capitals), principal researcher at Microsoft, puts it “children are not addicted to social media. They’re addicted to each other”.

Others go further and even argue that technology is changing young people’s brains. However, according to leading neuropsychologists Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons the brain’s wiring “is determined by genetic programs and biochemical interactions that do most of their work long before a child discovers Facebook and Twitter.” Yet the concept that the technology is indeed changing brains — in a bad way — continues to be propounded on traditional media channels, as well as, ironically, on social media. But, as Chabris and Simons conclude “there is simply no experimental evidence to show that living with new technologies fundamentally changes brain organisation”.

Getting it right

So it turns out that, as ever, the picture is more complex than sensationalist headlines would have us believe. If the use of social media and life in this 21st century are inextricably linked, how do we best serve the interests of children entering secondary education?

Part of the answer is to not assume that social media is someone else’s problem. Parents of children about to start secondary education ought to take an active interest in what being social means nowadays and ask their prospective schools these questions:

  • Does the school provide children with good role models of appropriate behaviour on social media?
  • Does the school have a well maintained social media presence? E.g. does the Head tweet or blog?
  • Does the school encourage the use of social media for academic purposes? E.g. is there a Maths department twitter feed? Is there a Geography blog?
  • Does the school have a social media policy that sets out, not only how it deals with misuse or abuse, but also how it encourages the appropriate use of social media?
  • Does the school behaviour policy include expectations of appropriate behaviour online as well as offline?

Not less importantly, parents ought to ask themselves these questions:

  • Am I a good social media role model? E.g. are my Facebook posts or tweets appropriate?
  • Do I check social media at the dinner table? Should I be doing that?
  • Do I supervise my children’s access to mobile devices or allow them free rein?
  • Do I take an interest in my child’s social life online?
  • Have I helped my child set up their social accounts or otherwise offered advice?
  • Have I ever explained to my children what is appropriate or inappropriate when, for example, leaving a comment on a YouTube video?

From this perspective, education, balance and clear boundaries emerge as the key factors in ensuring that children are able to use social media in a relatively safe, supportive and productive environment. For this to happen both parents and schools need to gain a better understanding about the important role the internet and social media have come to play in our lives and that this bright, colourful and engaging new way of communicating and transmitting information is here to stay.

And let’s not forget that, despite the many dystopian predictions, people have always managed to integrate technology in their lives with overwhelmingly positive results. Sure, there will be challenges as well as opportunities. This is why children need our guidance. Whatever the case, and however schools decide to tackle this, wishing social media went away is probably not the answer.

Originally published at www.educate1to1.org on November 14, 2015 under the title ‘Beyond banning — what are schools to do about social media?’

In Education

Shooting Azimuths — Knowing where you are, where you need to be and how to get there

As a linguist, I find certain words fascinating. Azimuth is one of these fabulous words. Although I had come across this word as a student, I had parked it at the back of my mind for the best part of 20 years. I was recently reminded of azimuth. It looks exotic, it sounds exciting and its meaning is of great consequence, especially if you’re trying to navigate your way from A to B in the wild with just a compass and your life depends on it.

Azimuth is the horizontal angle or direction of a compass bearing, usually calculated in relation to a celestial object or a static feature in the landscape. Like many other astronomical terms — such as zenith, nadir, and even some of the best known stars in the night sky, like Betelgeuse, Aldebaran or Vega — the word azimuth came to English from the Arabic. We shouldn’t be surprised, many common English words, especially in maths and science, trace their roots back to Arabic: admiral, ambassador, algebra, alchemy, algorithm… and that’s just a few of the ones beginning with ‘a’.

In overland navigation shooting an azimuth means climbing to a height, sighting an object on the horizon in the direction you’re travelling, and adjusting your compass heading to make sure you’re still moving in the right direction.

The elements that shape your intellectual abilities lie to a surprising extent within your own control. Ultimately, the responsibility for learning rests with every individual.

Great teachers and successful learners know that metacognition, which is the ability to evaluate and make decisions about your own learning, and self-regulation, which is the ability to manage your own motivation towards learning, are two of the most important factors in ensuring academic success. But there are no shortcuts to success and the best way to ensure you get there is to put yourself in the driving seat. The elements that shape your intellectual abilities lie to a surprising extent within your own control. Ultimately, the responsibility for learning rests with every individual.

Becoming self-aware to your learning needs, thinking about what you know and don’t yet know; recalibrating your compass by taking stock of where you are, where you need to be and how to get there turn out to be the hallmark predictors of successful learning. This works as well for teachers as it does for students. Knowing how to shoot an azimuth may save your life in the wild, but it can also be an essential tool to help guide your continuing learning.

Remember. Azimuth, what a fabulous word.

Sources:

Brown, Peter C., Henry L. Roediger, and Mark A. McDaniel (2014) Make It Stick. London: Harvard University Press

The Education Endowment Foundation Toolkit

Photo credit

In Uncategorized

Their own devices — Getting your school ready for a mobile device deployment

I have recently rolled out one-to-one tablet computers in my school. It was a tiring, logistically challenging but immensely rewarding experience. Now, having been through the process, I can share my experience for the benefit of others. Here’s how to know if you’re ready for one-to-one iPads and what to do if you are.

Why?

The main question any school considering whether to implement a one-to-one strategy for tablet computers should ask is “Why?” If the answer is anything other than to support teaching and learning, then your strategy is likely to be self-defeating and will probably flounder.

It is also worth bearing in mind that one-to-one deployments in schools have so far shown, rather predictably, that tablets aren’t magic bullets and that spending a few hundred thousand pounds to give every pupil a shiny slab of aluminium and glass does not, in itself, raise attainment.

Does this mean that learning with tablets holds no educational value? Of course not. Attempting to measure the impact of tablets on educational outcomes without considering the other factors that make up the complex school context is like trying to find your keys at night under a bright streetlight even though you know you dropped them further down the alley.

So it is essential to take context into account before deciding that you are ready for such an initiative. Below are some questions to help you gauge if your school is ready.

Is improving the quality of teaching and learning a priority?

If so, how many of your lessons “require improvement”? Bear in mind that tablets will not make mediocre teaching great, nor will they suddenly turn the average child into an exemplary pupil. Tablets have been shown to have a great impact on raising attainment but only when they are part of a wider strategy focused on maintaining high-quality teaching and learning.

Have you considered the pupils?

Is the atmosphere in your school supportive and collegiate or is there rampant bullying? Is poor behaviour a big issue in your school? If the answer to the above two questions is yes, then the introduction of tablets will not magically erase these problems. If anything, it will probably exacerbate them.

Schools that have successfully adopted tablets understand that if a child uses a tablet inappropriately, it is probably a symptom of an existing problem rather than a problem caused by the tablet.

But in the right school environment, children will use their tablets at school and at home to communicate and offer each other help and support with, for example, homework tasks. At my school, cases of tablet-enabled bullying are fortunately few and far between.

Have you considered the teachers?

Will you be able to provide them with the time and resources required to undertake technology-related professional development? Are the teachers on board with the concept, or do they think it’s someone’s vanity project?

Where tablets have been adopted successfully, there is seldom a uniform level of adoption. At my school, teachers are allowed to engage with the project at their own pace and using tablets in lessons is not a requirement. This encourages the development of a culture that values experimentation and risk-taking above one of box-ticking and blame.

Are parents and governors supportive of the initiative?

Do they understand how tablets will be used for academic purposes, or will they think that the school is giving in to “edutainment” and abandoning all that makes for a good, old-fashioned education?

Whether you think their fears are groundless is unimportant: what matters is that the school addresses and allays any concerns (real or imagined). You need to communicate your vision to parents frequently and consistently to ensure that you paint over the graffiti of YouTube, video games and social media with a masterpiece of learning and academic achievement.

Communicate this vision to parents relentlessly and, instead of them contacting you about their concerns regarding tablet use, they will start asking why Sophie needs to carry so many textbooks now that she has a tablet, or how quickly her broken iPad can be repaired so that she is not disadvantaged in her learning.

Have you considered the cost implications?

Have you thought about insuring the tablets? Or getting cases to protect them? Will you buy outright or lease? You will need lots of tablets. Hundreds. Maybe thousands. And they don’t come cheap.

In addition, tablets require a reliable and robust network. Your school will probably have to update the existing network and it is likely you will need more wireless access points to cope with all those devices trying to hook up to the internet. Your IT support team will probably need training to operate beyond the comfortable and familiar Microsoft Windows paradigm. And in larger deployments, a mobile device management system will be required. It’s a long list. And it goes on.

Once you have the finances covered, you can start thinking not only about the cost but also about the opportunities that tablets will bring to teaching, learning and general pupil development. You may even reach the conclusion, as we did, that you can’t afford not to do this.

It is very likely that ploughing ahead with a tablet deployment without being able to provide satisfactory answers to questions covered above will not have a favourable outcome. Above all, you need to get the educational basics right first.

How?

So, having been through that process, do you still think your school is ready to take it on? If so, excellent. The next step is to appoint a person in charge of overseeing the project. They needn’t be a computer geek or an ICT specialist. In fact, most of the successful one-to-one projects in the UK (and the number is growing) are led by specialists in English, modern foreign languages, physics, PE or history rather than ICT or computing.

These folk typically have middle leadership management roles, are expert practitioners and have shown through their own practice how technology can support and impact positively on teaching and learning. In terms of clout, this person needs to sit above heads of department or curriculum leaders, preferably within senior leadership.

Set up a core group of trained teachers

Start with a small group of teachers who will represent a cross-section of the school. Order each of them a tablet and train them extensively in the use of that device for teaching. After a term or two, you will be in a position where you can roll out tablets to the remainder of staff, safe in the knowledge that you have a skilled group of teachers who can assist you in providing frequent opportunities for training and development.

In my experience, a termly compulsory Inset session and twice-weekly voluntary walk-in sessions covering tablet basics offer teachers the right balance of support and autonomy. Don’t force anyone to use tablets.

Pilot with pupils

Pick one or two year groups, depending on the size of your school, for an initial roll-out. Call this a pilot if you like, but it is really a systems test. This will allow you to identify and iron out any technical deficiencies — is your wi-fi robust enough? Do you need more bandwidth? During this initial period, staff training opportunities need to remain frequent and their focus needs to move from using tablets to using tablets with pupils.

Don’t make the mistake of assuming that children will naturally know how to use tablets for academic purposes. In my experience, they are generally clueless about how to use tablets beyond YouTube, Minecraft, FaceTime or Agar.io. Assemblies, form time and even PSHE sessions will need to be devoted to making sure pupils are able to perform the most basic of functions, from hooking up to wi-fi to sending emails, from word-processing to saving their work to the cloud.

Full school roll-out

Two years on from those initial pilots with staff and students, you can start the full roll-out. At this point, some of the teachers will be confident, most will be comfortable and the remaining few will at least be tolerant of tablets.

You will also have a hundred or so students using tablets as if they’d always been there, and you will have been able to demonstrate to parents and governors that tablets do not, in fact, turn children into mindless zombies but instead can be a valuable tool for learning.

This piece was originally published in the TES on 15 January 2016

In Digital Strategy, Education, Educational Technology

Why the behaviour argument against mobile devices in schools is flawed —And what to do about it

Research published by the London School of Economics suggests that students at schools with a mobile phone ban achieve higher grades than pupils at schools without a ban. The study claims that “mobile phones can be a source of great disruption in classrooms, as they provide individuals with access to texting, games, social media and the internet”.

The idea of prohibiting mobile devices in school may appear attractive, and a ban could be the right call in some circumstances. But suggesting that “all headteachers worth their salt” should ban mobile devices — as Sir Michael Wilshaw, head of England’s schools inspectorate Ofsted, did recently — does not really address the challenges and opportunities that the devices present to schools. Forcing students to enter an alternative reality every morning where the mobile internet doesn’t exist is probably not the answer.

Few advocates of mobile devices would suggest allowing children free rein to text each other, play games, interact on social media or roam the internet gathering data on the true size of Kim Kardashian’s, er, ego.

Yet the assumption that this is all children do, or are capable of doing, when they are permitted to use a device is what fuels calls for bans in schools. Ah, the soft bigotry of low expectations…

How it should work

When mobile devices are allowed or indeed supplied by a school, there is no such thing as free rein. Students use their devices for specific purposes, as and when they are instructed to by their teachers. The idea that children spend an entire lesson in front of a screen getting up to unsupervised mischief is inaccurate.

If a device is required in a lesson (note that all-important “if”) this is typically what happens: the teacher delivers content and explains the task; the teacher instructs the children to bring out their mobile devices; the children perform the set task; the teacher instructs the children to put away their devices. This process may or may not be repeated in that same lesson. The teacher never says, “Hey, kids, do whatever you like on your phones.”

Some tasks lend themselves to the use of mobile devices. For example, smartphones and tablets are great for multimedia: children may be asked to photograph what they are learning; to make a sound recording of a musical performance or a conversation in a foreign language; or to film a practical demonstration or experiment. This may be just what is required to further their learning.

It is perfectly possible to implement a strict behaviour policy that allows the use of mobile devices in certain circumstances. If a child does not abide by the rules, he or she should face the agreed consequences. And this policy ought to apply to everything, whether or not technology is involved.

To make sure mobile devices are used appropriately, schools must set high expectations with clear rules and sanctions. Then, when a pupil misbehaves (and they will), teachers can deal with the behaviour, not the technology.

Whether they opt for a total ban, a more relaxed approach or merely asking students to use their devices to make a note of their homework, headteachers should base their decision on the school’s specific circumstances and context.

Governments and schools inspectorates should indeed contribute their findings and views to the debate about mobile devices and behaviour. But, at the end of the day, what works in schools and the reasons why tend to be highly contextualised. So we should all refrain from making sweeping statements that any headteacher worth their salt would know to ignore.

This is a section of a featured article published in the TES on 25 September 2015. To read the full version, a subscription to the TES is required.

In Digital Strategy, Education

Headache tablets? —What if schools are doing technology wrong?

In the debate about technology and education, it is expected that you are either a crazy-eyed zealot or a complete and utter Luddite. So, when people meet me, they tend to find me quite confusing. As part of my role as an assistant headteacher at a secondary school, I study how technology can support the processes involved in teaching and learning. So, of course, I must be the type of person who kneels at the altar of ed tech. But when people actually talk to me, I tell them that one of the most important lessons any teacher can learn about technology is when not to use it.

The reaction I get is symptomatic of what the ed-tech debate has been reduced to. Since it is much easier to disagree with people if common ground is removed, the debate surrounding technology in schools has become predictably, depressingly binary. For evidence of this, you need only look at the Twitter rows resulting from a recent Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development report on technology in schools and from discussions on the issue of mobile phones in the classroom.

Battle lines are drawn across the virtual and physical staffroom, where conversation is dominated either by technology evangelists or by those who still think it’s OK to say that they “don’t do technology”. The majority of us, who are somewhere in between, keep our heads down for fear of being conscripted to either cause.

Identifying the problems

We need a way out of this impasse. Schools need to have sensible and informed debates about the place of ed tech, but first they must recognise the obstacles standing in the way.

1. The myth of fear. When dealing with staunch opponents of technology, it’s easy to claim that they are afraid of it. But, in my experience, few teachers are actually afraid of technology. In fact, most will happily give it a try if they are given the right encouragement and opportunity.

Look around your staffroom and you’re just as likely to see teachers using digital technologies to plan and deliver lessons – researching on the internet, putting together an interactive whiteboard flip-chart or preparing a worksheet – as you are to see them wiggling their pens.

Students already find technology an appealing and effective addition to their learning toolkit. Whether you approve or not, technology is deeply woven into the fabric of our schools and it is here to stay.

No one in schools really fears technology. Saying they do complicates the debate: it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and forces people into defensive positions.

2. Lack of support. Teachers rarely have time to learn to use technology more effectively. This can lead to several issues: they are anxious about being made to use technology beyond their comfort zones; they fear it will not be reliable enough to use in lessons; and, above all, they are disappointed because technology seldom brings transformational change on the scale promised by its more fervent proponents.

If teachers aren’t supported, they are less likely to use technology effectively. If technology is not used effectively, the value it offers to teaching and learning is diminished. If schools see little value, they are less likely to support teachers to use technology. And so the vicious circle goes round and round.

3. The shadow of failure. Even when we have all put the effort in, technology sometimes doesn’t work. Over the years, there have been many examples of technology as a top-down intervention proving nothing short of calamitous. Even when it does work, its impact can be less than compelling.

Analysing the problems

It’s easy to blame the technology for any issues that arise. If it “worked” then teachers would not fear it, it would be easy to use and it would transform our teaching. Yet, as our knowledge and appreciation of its role grows, an alternative view is beginning to emerge: what if schools are simply “doing” technology wrong?

For too many of us, using technology means sitting pupils in front of Linguascope, Mathletics or a word processor for an hour while we get on with a bit of marking. We feel we need to stop teaching to use technology, and we stop using technology to start teaching.

So it’s no wonder that when we compare the use of technology with more traditional teaching strategies, technology always comes across as the grossly overpaid but inept assistant the boss is having an affair with. The comparison is not a fair one.

Many problems stem from a lack of information. Research by the Education Endowment Foundation and the Sutton Trust, among others, shows that technology is most successful when it is used to plan and deliver lessons effectively, to promote meta-cognition and self-regulation, and to deliver feedback. This information rarely makes it down the line to teachers.

Technology is also not questioned enough. Teachers don’t just need to be better informed – we need to ask better questions. Many schools experimenting with mobile devices still expect magic to happen when they give children shiny slabs of aluminium and glass. It doesn’t. They must first ask questions such as: “When everyone has mobile devices, what will they do with them?” The answer is not as straightforward as it may seem.

Critiqueing the reasoning behind the use of technology makes us more realistic about its potential and more discerning as users. If we are dealing with tablets, for example, many of us assume that the choice of apps provides teachers and students with an smorgasbord of opportunities to conjure up the biggest and most coveted C in education – creativity.

In reality, although there are some laudable exceptions, a proper look at these apps reveals that most are actually terrible, or, at the very least, ill-suited to classroom use. There is no app for good teaching.

Finding the solutions

If we are to move from problems to solutions, first we need to change the mindset in education. Let us take it as truth that, given the right conditions, technology and teaching can complement each other. By studying what currently works and does not work, we can develop a clearer, more realistic, evidence-informed framework for technology adoption. Here’s how it might look…

Grant teachers freedom to explore

Teachers should be permitted to use their professional judgement to introduce as much or as little technology as they feel is appropriate. After all, we shouldn’t impair the quality of someone’s teaching by forcing them to use technology.

Teachers who think technology is just a gimmick, or that it is distracting, are not likely to change if they’re forced to use devices they are uncomfortable or unfamiliar with. It would be much better if they were allowed to learn and experiment at their own pace, with effective support provided when they require and request it.

It may seem counterintuitive, especially to school leaders but it is only when teachers have this combination of freedom and support that they begin to explore more sophisticated ways of using technology than just sitting children in front of computers for an hour or clicking their way through a PowerPoint. It’s only when we nourish this culture (think of it in the biological sense) that the cells begin to grow and multiply. To paraphrase Goodhart’s law, greater use of technology when it adds value to the learning ought to be the outcome, not the measure.

Empower teachers to make judgements

Another valid question is: how do we know when technology adds value? We are all biased, of course, but I’m not going to suggest that everything you know is wrong or that your teaching practice is built on a myth.

Instead, I’m going to be bold and assert that if you are a trained teacher and think something has added value in your specific context, it probably has. If you are still a trainee teacher, find someone who is more experienced and whose judgement you trust and ask them. But feel free to disagree, because even if they are more experienced, you may be more knowledgeable about the use of technology.

You can only pass judgement on what you know and understand. And if you don’t know much about how technology can be used to enhance teaching and learning, you will be a poor judge of it and an even poorer critic.

Analyse the pros and cons

At my school, I am currently piloting a mobile device programme in which every child and teacher will eventually be issued with a tablet computer.* One of the most common criticisms is that the money spent on tablets would be better spent on other things, such as textbooks. This is commonly referred to as a problem of “opportunity cost”.

But microeconomic concepts such as opportunity cost can only take you so far in discussions about education, because they are often used to justify subjective and normative stances. If you suggest that the money spent on tablet computers ought to have been used for textbooks, you are making a normative statement, because you are expressing a value judgement and describing what you think ought to have happened.

This approach does not work in the case of technology in education, because it does not compare like with like. Tablet computers and textbooks both have a cost, and the financial cost of one is much higher than the other. Leaving aside the fact that cost is never restricted to the financial, the opportunities that books can offer are different to those offered by tablets. Textbooks never run out of battery, for example. On the other hand, they can’t access the internet or record science experiments in high definition.

The opportunities lost need to be balanced against the opportunities gained. Which is why, when investing in technology, it’s so important to invest in staff development too, so everyone understands the new opportunities. Only then can people make accurate comparisons between what may be lost and gained.

Create your own ‘truth’

It’s clear that there is no one-size-fits-all approach when it comes to technology. It is down to every school to carefully implement the strategies they feel will contribute to improved teaching and learning. The specific challenges and opportunities that might arise from greater use of technology need to be considered within this wider context.

Acknowledge how far we’ve come

Let us remember that in most schools, teachers are already imparting knowledge and delivering content in effective, creative and engaging ways, supported by technology. Interactive whiteboard flip-charts, PowerPoint presentations and web-based multimedia resources have been features in our classrooms for years.

However, the success of lessons is almost always down to the quality of the teaching, with technology cast in a supporting but nevertheless important role. Teachers could deliver the same lessons without any tech at all, but they probably wouldn’t want to. Technology helps to engage students. And it helps them to learn.

screenshot_100115_031130_pm

 

Photo credit

*At the time of writing the article, the tablet computer roll-out was being piloted with two year groups. The pilot was a success and all staff and teachers now use a tablet computer when required and when it adds value to daily business of teaching and learning.

This article featured in the TES on 25 September 2015. 

In Educational Technology

What is technology’s impact? —How technology supports teaching and learning

Technology in the classroom has had a long and chequered history. Traditionally, the debate around its utility has been dominated by bouncy edtech evangelists in one corner, promising technology-fueled educational transformation, and by staunch technology sceptics opposite, reminding us all that, as far as they can see, said transformation is yet to manifest itself after decades of digital technology use.

The resulting, often acutely polarised debate usually ignores altogether how technology is actually used in our schools to support the daily business of teaching and learning and how teachers and learners continue teaching and learning using whichever tool gets the job done, because, for most of us, technology is neither the problem nor the solution, it is just an option. And so, the more subtle, pragmatic, mundane and almost invisible application of technology that supports teachers and students on a daily basis seems to get lost in the hubbub and is not always taken into account when evaluating the impact of digital technology.

Whilst there is relatively little research that shows unequivocally that greater use of technology will result in improved educational outcomes, which are often measured exclusively using examination results as a proxy, research suggests that there is a strong correlation between the effective use of technology and improved outcomes. It also suggests that role of technology in supporting the processes involved in teaching and learning needs to be more clearly identified in order to better understand its role and measure its impact more accurately.

So, what does research suggest works? Are there any ‘best bets’ that we can use as a starting point to evaluate and improve our practice? And how might a 1-to-1 mobile learning project contribute to such improvement? According to the Education Endowment Foundation’s Toolkit (from here on EEF) and the Sutton Trust’s most recent report on what makes great teaching, these are some of the elements of teaching that research suggests contribute to improved outcomes, accompanied by ways in which mobile technology might, on occasion, help along the way:

1. Quality of instruction

The Sutton Trust spells it out early on in their report. If we are to raise attainment, we need to improve the quality of instruction. Some of its key findings in this respect are:

The most effective teachers have deep knowledge of the subjects they teach, and when teachers’ knowledge falls below a certain level it is a significant impediment to students’ learning. As well as a strong understanding of the material being taught, teachers must also understand the ways students think about the content, be able to evaluate the thinking behind students’ own methods, and identify students’ common misconceptions. Includes elements such as effective questioning and use of assessment by teachers. Specific practices, like reviewing previous learning, providing model responses for students, giving adequate time for practice to embed skills securely and progressively introducing new learning (scaffolding) are also elements of high quality instruction.

According to this research, effective teachers display strong subject knowledge and deep understanding of how their students might interact with the content they deliver. In schools where technology is used most effectively, teachers understand that pupils’ interaction with content can be facilitated and encouraged by technology and that content can be delivered via a variety of media both during and outside lesson time.

In a 1-to-1 environment, tools such as iBooks, online content management platforms and iTunes U help create digital learning spaces that complement their physical counterparts and support teachers and learners in delivering and accessing content when and where it may be required, exploiting a dimension to teaching and learning that generally remains otherwise unexploited by all but the most technologically adventurous teachers.

Even if we set aside the fact that mobile devices are, well, mobile — and thus can be used inside as well as outside the classroom — and focus exclusively on the learning that takes place during a lesson, it is still perfectly possible to conceive of effective ways in which pupil access to mobile technologies can support classroom based learning.

Take, for example, what research suggests about testing. It turns out that, perhaps counter-intuitively, frequent testing may be more effective at generating long-term recall than presenting materials to pupils over a period of time and only then testing their knowledge and understanding, as many programmes of study have traditionally encouraged. The implication is that frequent testing may be more effective at helping with the learning than with the assessing. Take a minute or two to chew on that.

This means that in classrooms where pupils are equipped with their own mobile devices, the teacher can also use testing and quizzing tools such as Socrative or Quizlet to generate frequent and memorable learning events, as well as to assess levels of understanding. Not only does habitual quizzing turn out to be pedagogically sound, but also the resulting automatic data collection can be hugely beneficial to both teachers and learners, who can then exploit it to inform future practice and learning.

2. Classroom climate and management

According to the same report by the Sutton Trust, another element that is essential to foster achievement is classroom climate and management, which covers:

[…] quality of interactions between teachers and students, and teacher expectations: the need to create a classroom that is constantly demanding more, but still recognising students’ self-worth. It also involves attributing student success to effort rather than ability and valuing resilience to failure (grit). A teacher’s abilities to make efficient use of lesson time, to coordinate classroom resources and space, and to manage students’ behaviour with clear rules that are consistently enforced, are all relevant to maximising the learning that can take place.

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that skilled and effective teaching is key to engender an environment in which learning and achievement can be maximised. In addition to more traditional classroom management techniques, mobile devices open up a whole new toolkit to help teachers engender such an environment. Although there are superb apps, such as Class Dojo, that are specifically designed to foster positive classroom behaviours, mobile devices can be used to manage your classroom in more subtle ways.

Take for example the fact that mobile devices allow pupils access to a wealth of teacher approved resources. With greater understanding of mobile technologies, comes a greater appreciation of the need to provide pupils with relevant, appropriate and carefully curated content (just access to the internet in its full but bewildering glory is not good enough) that will remain available to be tapped into whenever required, which may sometimes be during a lesson.

In practice, this means that children who finish a task early can continue working on other materials seamlessly. Similarly, children who need extra support with a topic are able to help themselves in the first instance more easily if support materials are always only a couple of taps away. I have found that interruptions to the flow of the lesson caused by the inevitable I-don’t-get-it or I’ve-finished-what-do-I-now are significantly minimised when appropriate classroom habitudes regarding the use of mobile devices are instilled in children.

A single tablet in the teacher’s hands can also contribute enormously to sustain a scholarly environment during lessons. For example, with tools such as Explain Everything, tablets can be put to excellent use in lessons as portable interactive white-board input devices. Wireless projection of the tablet’s screen to the front of the classroom frees the teacher from having to be anchored to the board when teaching a lesson. Being able to stand anywhere in the classroom when interacting with the whiteboard or projector allows teachers to spend less time writing at the board with their backs to the pupils, thus providing teachers with new, effective vantage points from which they can react to developments in lessons and, in doing so, contribute positively to sustaining a productive learning climate.

In a sense, a tablet puts a Swiss army knife in the hands of the teacher, and the humble camera has turned out to be one of its most effective tools for many of us. When combined with wireless projection and annotation tools, a tablet becomes a portable visualiser, so not only can teachers explain concepts and introduce new content using their tablets from anywhere in the classroom, but they can also quickly snap shots of pupils’ work and use the annotation tools to unpick the finer points of the lesson and model answers to the whole class. In a mature 1-to-1 environment, pupils can also wirelessly project from their own devices and instantly share workings out or present their projects to the rest of the class.

In an unexpected turn of events, teachers in 1-to-1 environment tend to find that interactive whiteboards only become truly interactive when they step away and allow themselves and their pupils to interact with them remotely.

3. Metacognition and self-regulation

According to the EEF, metacognition and self-regulation strategies can boost learning by up to eight months, highlighting this as one of the most important and impactful interventions to raise achievement. So, what it is and what does it do?

Meta-cognition (sometimes known as ‘learning to learn’) and self-regulation approaches aim to help learners think about their own learning more explicitly. This is usually by teaching pupils specific strategies to set goals, and monitor and evaluate their own academic development. Self-regulation means managing one’s own motivation towards learning. The intention is often to give pupils a repertoire of strategies to choose from during learning activities.

Mobile devices are often criticised for being a distraction in the classroom. However, this criticism often overlooks the fact that tablets also put in the hands of every learner a set of powerful tools to help them manage their own learning and that teachers can minimise such distraction by establishing and implementing clear rules and expectations. Indeed, effective 1-to-1 environments are predicated on a culture that views mobile devices as robust scholarly tools, not just games consoles. Contrary to popular belief, classrooms exist where mobile devices are used for academic purposes instead of being filled with children playing videogames or sending messages to each other on social media.

From scheduling, calendar and planner apps to note-taking tools and more sophisticated curation apps that can be used effectively for scholarly purposes, such as Evernote or Pocket, mobile devices routinely and demonstrably support this kind of self-regulation, thus probably contributing to improved learning outcomes.

However, it must be said that there are no simple strategies to achieve the levels of independence, understanding, evaluation and ownership of one’s own learning that are required for these meta-cognitive approaches to truly bear fruit. It is down to every school to carefully implement whichever context-dependent strategies they feel can contribute to greater independent learning and self-regulation. The challenges and opportunities of mobile learning and a 1-to-1 environment need to be considered within this wider context.

4. Homework

In terms of progress, research examined by the EEF suggests that homework can put pupils up to eight months ahead, though they are careful to qualify it depends on its quality:

There is some evidence that homework is most effective when used as a short and focused intervention (e.g. in the form of a project or specific target connected with a particular element of learning) with some exceptional studies showing up to eight months’ positive impact on attainment. Benefits are likely to be more modest, up to two to three months’ progress on average, if homework is more routinely set (e.g. learning vocabulary or completing problem sheets in mathematics every day).

Research clearly encourages us to think carefully about what homework we set so that it is effective in supporting learning. Otherwise, what is the point? Teachers in settings where mobile devices are employed find that they have a wider repertoire of homework tasks available to them. The fact that students can word-process and research online is often what comes to mind first when we think of technology-aided homework, but the added ability to easily record and edit sound and video, for example, will allow students to produce digital artifacts that help them document their learning and help their teachers assess and evaluate progress in ways that would have been inconceivable without access to mobile devices. But this all depends on the quality of the teaching and the ability of the teacher to set clear, purposeful tasks. No amount of technology will help children learn with homework that was poorly set in the first place.

The concept of flipped learning with easy access to multimedia resources (or, perhaps more accurately, flipped teaching) is one of these new possibilities in the more varied homework repertoire available in the 1-to-1 environment. Essentially, it involves pupils being introduced to topics or concepts outside the classroom, typically involving access from home to material — often videos — that is produced or curated by the teacher.

In a good lesson, the teacher usually explains a concept or topic, guides initial practice, provides feedback and then allows for independent practice. However, more often than not, this crucial independent practice is relegated to homework, when the teacher is not available to intervene when pupils become stuck. In a flipped lesson — and I am not advocating a permanent flipped state — students have already studied the topic independently and the teacher is at hand to tutor students when the knowledge they have recently acquired is required to be applied in practical tasks, arguably when the teacher’s help is most useful. I personally find this approach effective but I can’t say it works well with all topics. Professional judgement is, as ever, required.

5. Feedback

Our fifth and final element that, according to research reviewed by the EEF, contributes enormously to great teaching and learning is, of course, feedback. The EEF summarises:

Feedback redirects or refocuses either the teacher’s or the learner’s actions to achieve a goal, by aligning effort and activity with an outcome. It can be about the learning activity itself, about the process of activity, about the student’s management of their learning or self-regulation or (the least effective) about them as individuals. This feedback can be verbal, written, or can be given through tests or via digital technology. It can come from a teacher or someone taking a teaching role, or from peers. Providing effective feedback is challenging. Research suggests that it should be specific, accurate and clear (e.g. “It was good because you…” rather than just “correct”); compare what a learner is doing right now with what they have done wrong before (e.g. “I can see you were focused on improving X as it is much better than last time’s Y…”); encourage and support further effort and be given sparingly so that it is meaningful; provide specific guidance on how to improve and not just tell students when they are wrong; and be supported with effective professional development for teachers. Wider research suggests the feedback should be about complex or challenging tasks or goals as this is likely to emphasise the importance of effort and perseverance as well as be more valued by the pupils. Feedback can come from other peers as well as adults.

Tacit teacher knowledge and understanding about the important role of feedback is confirmed by a solid evidence base. And once again, technology cannot magically make poor or average teaching great, as it is how currently-available technology is used that is the key variable when it comes to formal, school-based teaching and learning.

Having said that, there are a number of tablet-friendly tools that support the effective delivery of feedback and the establishing of teacher-pupil conversations, generating virtuous circles of knowledge and understanding that inform both teachers and pupils as to how to proceed in their respective roles. We have already mentioned Explain Everything as a portable interactive whiteboard, but one of the tricks that Explain Everything has up its sleeve is the ability to record explanations. Whilst we normally associate explanations with the delivery of new content, my colleagues and I have experimented very successfully with recording feedback that is delivered to students in video format. Here is an example.

In addition to this, two other very useful tools that I have seen employed to great effect in improving the frequency and delivery (not the quality, that’s up to the teacher!) of feedback are Showbie and Edmodo, both of which support the setting of tasks, collection of work and delivery of feedback, thus supporting every other evidence-based element of teaching and learning in this non-exhaustive list, not just feedback.

Caveats about this research

One final consideration must be to what extent do we consider that this research provides a full and accurate picture of what makes great teaching and learning. For example, Professor Sandra Nutley from the University of Saint Andrews suggests that kite-marking schemes such as those propounded by the Sutton Trust and the EEF need to be “complemented by other forms of evidence, such as qualitative research and survey evidence if we want to know, not only how something works, but also whether it’s right for this particular group of people”. Similarly, Professor Biesta of the University of Luxembourg suggests that research is often limited to “questions about the effectiveness of educational means and techniques, forgetting, among other things, that what counts as ‘effective’ crucially depends on judgements about what is educationally desirable”. In short, when reviewing the available evidence, it pays to keep the whole wood in sight, instead of focusing on just one or two of the trees.

Caveats about the application of technology

I have deliberately taken a very pragmatic approach in this article to how mobile technology can support school-based teaching and learning. However, I am certain that, as the application of mobile technology matures beyond its infancy, we will begin to use it in ways that have not yet become apparent to most of us. I suggest that building confidence among parents, pupils and teachers in the technology’s ability to support forms of teaching and learning that they recognise is an essential first step before more radical or transformative methods can be formulated.

Suggested further reading

Education Endowment Foundation Toolkit

Sutton Trust: What Makes Great Teaching?

Visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn

The Impact of Digital Technology on Learning

Decoding Learning: The Proof, Promise and Potential of Digital Education

What the Research Says: iPads in the Classroom

Why “What Works” Won’t Work

Cover image courtesy of Surbiton High School.

Originally published at www.educate1to1.org on March 22, 2015.