What’s the point of a day?
There will always be critics. And I wonder sometimes, are we too critical? Is there such thing as hyper-criticism? Then again, perhaps I’m too sensitive. I need thicker skin to make it, perhaps.
Last Wednesday, February 6, I had the opportunity to participate in Digital Learning Day in Washington D.C. In one way or another all fifty states, nearly 25,000 teachers, and millions of students participated. I had the opportunity to be a part of a panel of four educators (here are my slides) to kick off the event at the Newseum. It was then followed up with a group of educators sharing some innovative ways in which they are engaging students, through technology, and providing more meaningful learning experiences in their various K-12 classrooms. We then all moved downstairs to the big studio for the digital town hall. All in all it was memorable experience. I was able to connect with dozens of educators from across the country, see first hand what they’re doing, and share ideas on how to improve our practice.
The days leading up to Digital Learning Day were filled with tweets and links and blog posts (many of which were retweeted by me). Along with that came the critics. There were also a few comments made the day of February 6 and some following up the days after. I believe in discourse and sharing. We all learn far more about others (and ourselves for that matter) by asking questions than by assuming answers. So I decided to ask some questions. Here is how it started…
I’m not sure if you read that entire 72+ tweet-versation that we had, but I invite you to. There were a lot of great questions asked.
And let me say this now, the point of this post isn’t to point out what ONE individual is doing, but to ask what’s the point of this so called Digital Learning Day; is it necessary; and are we asking the right more important questions about learning.
If you had a chance to look back through the tweets, you’ll see Will and Jon both ask (essentially), why have a “day” devoted to all this? They question its purpose, focus, and relation to “regular old learning.” Will continued to press. His questions were/are important. He reiterated that all teachers need to be teaching with technology. That’s a given. But why a “day” for all this?
Well, why do we give a “day” to anything? Why do we take moments in time to reflect and focus on something? My good friend Rachel told me, “Change comes from deliberate and attentive focus. And actions.” We need days like this that provide us an opportunity to refocus.
I think change comes in phases. I look at educational technology. It could be a cycle. Most everyone one starts with an infatuation for a tool or a device. They are distracted by the bright shiny object. It’s cool. It’s novel. Then that novelty begins to fade into utility. We see the tool or device as a means to an end. We begin to share with others how we are using it professionally and how we have began to implement it in our classrooms. It’s no longer bright and shiny, but covered in finger prints and smudges.
And honestly, that is where a lot of teachers stay. The tool helps them do a lot of the things they were already doing, but digitally (which is what I believe is one of Will’s concerns from our conversation). Why do we get stuck here, though? What keeps some educators from moving beyond using the technology to merely digitize our “old ways”? I think. I think it is because we don’t all have people around us asking the more important questions — this could be a segway into PLNs and all that, but I’ll spare you. We need those people. We need Wills and Jons asking, “Why?” It makes sense, but only when we begin to listen to those questions and search for answers. Hopefully light bulbs begin to turn on and we start to rethink our practices and ask ourselves what’s most important.
Then comes the next part of the cycle. We realize that it isn’t so much about teaching or the tech (which Will points out). It is about learning. The teacher shifts from worrying about how they will “deliver” a lesson to how they will provide a space in which learners can self-direct and create meaning from what they are learning. The tool is no longer seen as a means to an end, but a means to support us along the way. The process becomes our focus.
Now I may have left out a few (read: many) nuances that we go through in this cycle/process, but I think you get the idea. My point is, not all of us are at a place where we are as reflective and thoughtful about the tools. We need people asking those questions, the more important ones, along the way. We also need a place to start, however. So that is why I say we need days like Digital Learning Day. We need opportunities to see the bright shiny objects being used in more meaningful ways by teachers AND students–most importantly the students.
I appreciate the tweet-versation that I had with Will and Jon, and the many others that supported and pushed back (again, make sure to read the tweets). The one thing that stood out the most to me was Will’s emphasis on the idea of learning. That should be our larger question. What are we doing to improve student learning in our schools? It makes me think of something Thoreau said about technology,
So what are we doing to improve that end? What are the bigger questions that need to be asked?
(skip down to TECHNOLOGY AND PROGRESS).
Featured Image — cc licensed flickr photo shared by rwentechaney
Thanks for these thoughts, Jeremy.
I think the key passage in the above is this: “The teacher shifts from worrying about how they will “deliver” a lesson to how they will provide a space in which learners can self-direct and create meaning from what they are learning.” And the thing is, that DOESN’T require technology at all.
The key here is agency. And the way we define learning. For most, it’s still transfer. But as Seymour Sarason writes, productive learning is that which gets the learner to want to learn more. That means the learner has choice, has agency over the what, the when, the how.
I’m all for teachers using technology in their classrooms to transfer agency over learning to their students. That article set me off because there’s none of that type of transfer going on there. It’s all “Oooooh shiny” and now with DLD, we have a reason to celebrate that, especially with the way the people in that school define “learning.” Just saying we need to clarify the term and raise the bar at the same time.
Thanks for continuing the conversation. It’s a much needed one to have.
Thanks for the comment Will. I like the word agency. I’ve used it before, but I usually get eyes rolling when I say it. Since your comment, I’ve shared your comment from Seymour Sarason as well. I completely agree with you.
My question, however, is — How do we get teachers all to this point, where the focus is on the learning and the learner? Can we/should we expect teachers to just be able to “get it” when the time comes?
We both agree that it is a given that teachers should be using technology. Having worked with teachers, I see a lot of them struggle to NOT focus on the tool at times. They don’t know how to use the tool ubiquitously (like Chris Lehmann puts it). Early on for many it almost always becomes the focus of a lesson as opposed the content and learning.
I feel that what you are advocating for requires a bit more time and exposure. I make no excuses for teachers here, but not everyone’s learning curve is the same when it comes to learning something new, especially when that something new can/will/should effect the learning of others.
That’s a reason I support something like DLDay. There has to be a start for a lot of our teachers. We need to help them see what is available, what others are doing, and ask those more important questions along the way. As someone who contributes to DLDay, I will continue to ask those questions to the Alliance and the educators that put on this day each year.
It got teachers thinking about new methods. It got students involved. Will it/did it have lasting impact? I would like to think it did. It’s a step. But like any other step that is meant to lead to somewhere, it has to be followed up by others steps. And I think this was a step in the right direction.
Thanks for writing and posting this, Jeremy! I did in fact real all 72 tweets – many of them in real time.
I’ve found that even with really phenomenal teachers and leaders it’s hard to separate the “ooh shiny” from the learning because the “ooh shiny” is such a big part of what is different. The differences in the teaching and learning wouldn’t be happening without the “ooh shiny.”
Further I have heard a lot of teachers say that what gets them started, the gateway drug as it were, is the “ooh shiny” factor. You said this in the blog – we just have to make sure it doesn’t stop there.
Our goals for DLD are to raise awareness about the power of the “ooh shiny” to change learning, and we believe that people have to know it is happening if they are going to support it. Parents have to demand it. Teachers have to demand it. And teachers and leaders alike have to see that this is something that is already happening, and if all these other schools/districts can “do it” then so can they.
We try really hard here – really, really hard – to keep the focus on the teaching, on the learning, on the teacher, on the student. To do that you HAVE to talk about the tools at some point – but then our goal is ALWAYS to bring it back to the learning.
Was that article cited kind of like a commercial? Yes, but you have to remember – we don’t know that teacher. We don’t know how she’s changing teaching and learning for her students. For all we know she could be doing amazing things. That’s where you get into the issue of the need to educate journalists and writers. That’s always a challenge, no matter what aspect of education is being discussed.
I think the time has come for a new hashtag: #oohshiny
Thanks for the comment Terri.
I think that as DLDay evolves each year, it will (hopefully) begin to be a lot less shiny. Perhaps it won’t even be called “Digital” Learning Day and simply be a day we celebrate learning and students.
Being a part of DLDay was a great experience and I hope to continue pushing the Alliance to look at and begin to answer some of the bigger questions regarding learning and the learner.
Something that Will said that stuck out to me was that a lot of what was shared was focused more on the “teaching” and less on the “learning”. To an extent I agree with that. What will make DLDay (or just Learning Day in the future) more meaningful and transformative is focusing on what the students are doing/learning/creating/sharing AND then share what the schools are doing to facilitate those kinds of things.