Educating the Dragon

Please excuse my somewhat disjointed notes about the keynote:

The Place of Most Potential

What does it look like?

Kevin Rudd  is just throwing digital whiteboards at secondary schools, this is a good thing. But so much is dependent on the teachers involved. Some boards are going to be used well, some are going nowhere. It has nothing to do with the board and everything to do with school.

Some research stated (could find the source sorry) that ‘Technology made NO difference to student learning’ . Peter said that if we as educators are going to challenge this statement then we must address 3 key issues:

People.

Video- Escaslator. The biggest constraint is what people think they can and cannot do. We need to invent the new teaching. Those who invent don’t get stuck on the escalator. Blockers in a school are not blockers but they which remain unconvinced. We must not label people blockers, they are interested in teaching and want to know how technology is going to help them. They are the ones which challenge our own thinking, causing us to justify why we do what we do with technology.

Pedagogy.

How we are doing the teaching and learning. If a kid is going to read then they read. If a teacher is going to use technology they need solid blocks of time to USE technology.

NSW Quality Teaching ,

Productive Pedagogies,

Principles of learning,

Authentic Pedagogies.

Can we generically describe both inspired and terrible teaching- technology is simply an amplifier- good GOOD, bad BAD.

Quality discussion- Teacher asking questions of the students, Students questioning teacher and student to student- How you get this is to give incomplete information- make them ask questions. High level of ambiguity . Raising significance. Content can move around and be more child centred (everyone is interested in themselves) Personalizing the learning contexts, and Differentiation.

Technology.

What technology we use? IWB are the place of most potential. IWB are the bridge to make other technologies to work in the classroom setting.

Paradox of choice

My school is part of the Sitech Champion Schools programme. As part of that programme the staff here have been involved with a professional development model that appears to be working. Hardware and software have been purchased for the school and the company has provided many hours of training and professional development in it’s use in the classroom environment.

Private provision is an interesting situation, company’s vary in there product and support available. I would be interested to know of any strategy or framework which guides this aspect of school provision. As the product and support varies from company to company the experience of both staff and students also varies along with the development of ICT within the school. Is this a good thing, or bad?

Perhaps the diversity of provision is advantageous in Early Childhood and Primary phases but I would surmise that as students’ progress through Secondary and onto Tertiary national parity would be more desirable to ensure an ICT literate workforce.

Sitech Learning Zone

Chrissy has a point where in New Zealand is there that is big enough? Core Education, or whoever organises stuff like this does their best I’m sure but I missed lunch after my presentation and the following breakout because of the positions of the various venues.

I feel like I’m moaning, but really I’m not. Honest. I’m just making the point that Chrissy has a point. Perhaps its just that venues that big and broad are just not needed, except twice a year Learning@Schools and ULearn?

But then I can’t believe that ICTPD is the biggest conference in NZ.