Lightning in a Bottle

As a science teacher and ed tech person, I’ve always been enthused about the use of technology in teaching science. More to the point, I’ve been excited about kids using technology to do science. After all, real scientists do!

Still, I haven’t seen as much activity in this area as I would like. Part of it is that science-oriented peripherals (Digital microscopes, probeware, etc.) are specialized and somewhat expensive. Part of it is also that integrating these tools is more complicated than, say, adding word processing to writing instruction or web-based research tools to a social studies class. Science data-collecting equipment and software is more complex, and managing a lab-based instructional environment is even more complex. (And I suppose a big part of it has been that science isn’t on the accountability chart. Yet. But it’s coming!)

That’s why I was pleased to read about the Sand Diego School District’s grant project. The press release hasn’t got a lot of detail, but what I see I like. In particular, there is a real emphasis on teacher training and the development of professional learning communities. That’s going to help regardless of whether or not technology is put to use. (It also sounds a lot like our No Limit math and technology grant. Great minds think alike!) I hope to track down more information as to the kind of technology and activities they have been using so far, and what they see using in the future. I’ll post what I find here. (via TechLearning.

I’m trying to decide if I should be worried or excited about the impact of this year’s 10th-grade WASL on technology use in schools. On the one hand, finding out that almost half of our students don’t make the standard for math would seem like a great opportunity to direct people to research-proven technology tools that can help kids learn more effectively. (The best are listed at the Metiri “Technology Solutions that Work” webpage. This is a for-fee site with login required, but has been licensed for Washington state educators. Contact your district technology director for access. If he or she doesn’t know how, send them to your local ETSC director.) Particularly with the significant financial resources that are being directed to students that didn’t pass, it would be possible to invest in some of these systems, equipment, and methods without needing to dip into already-stretched budgets.

Unfortunately, I don’t expect to see that happening. Part of it is that the people who will be making the decisions on how to address this challenge are probably largely unaware of the technology options available. (This is natural, as we still seem to have a significant divide between the Curriculum and Ed Tech cultures in many of the schools. That in itself is a long discussion.) Another part is that many people under pressure will stick with what seems like the safest choice, which is also natural. In many places, will probably mean more extensive, intensive application of the current curriculum and teaching techniques.

Dave Thornburg had an interesting response to this approach. He said “If the medicine you are giving the patient makes them sick, why would you think that giving them more would make them better?” I know that’s a glib metaphor and can be easily argued against (the problem might be that the patient is sick not because of the medicine, but not enough medicine, etc.), but the bottom line is that we have to be willing to look at new options. For many of our students, the current classroom model isn’t working. I hope in at least a few places we can take this challenge and use it to encourage more innovative approaches to helping our kids, rather than pulling back.

There is an article in the online version of The Oregonian about the success of and controversy surrounding a new online charter school. Demand is outstripping the school’s capacity, despite heavy reliance on parents being the student’s “learning coach.” What probably ups the controversy is the fact that the school is run by a for-profit company from Baltimore named Connections Academy. They are now running 11 schools nationwide.

60% of the families currently signed up for the Oregon Connections Academy were already homeschoolers . (The school has a really cool acronym -ORCA. We’d be stuck with WACA. Better than Colorado, though - I’m not sure how many parents would sign up their kids for COCA. But I digress.) I have been saying for a number of years that technology is going to provide parents with many more options for homeschooling, and I’m sure programs like this will only add to the trend.

Whether online schooling is good or bad isn’t really important. If parents and students perceive that it’s good, they will take that opportunity. We can provide it through public education and maintain that connection with our community, or leave it to private schoools or for-profit companies and become increasingly irrelevant to larger numbers of constituents. I don’t see a postive outcome to the latter choice.