Comments on: All Play and No Work Makes a Jack a Dull Boy

By: The iPad is the iDeal Classroom Tool | Stick in the Sand

The iPad is the iDeal Classroom Tool | Stick in the Sand — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:55:38 +0000

[...] in the cloud (and everyone should be.) At Island Pacific School, where I work, I’ve divided web tools into five categories: research, production, publication, discussion and time and task management. I also try to use Alan [...]

By: Predictions for K12 Education in 2010 | Stick in the Sand

Predictions for K12 Education in 2010 | Stick in the Sand — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:55:22 +0000

[...] and liberal experimenting, mostly by teachers. But at the end of the year, we have enough data to classify web tools and, more importantly, to draw a reasonably coherent picture of the potential change these tools [...]

By: Ed Tech in Review | Stick in the Sand

Ed Tech in Review | Stick in the Sand — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:55:06 +0000

[...] their way onto my laptop and iPhone. But twelve months later, I believe I have a good framework for organizing the web tools for middle school [...]

By: Student Blogs as Thinking Tools | Stick in the Sand

Student Blogs as Thinking Tools | Stick in the Sand — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:54:32 +0000

[...] students and I have come to see a blog as a place to think out loud. It’s a discussion tool. I rarely specify length for a blog post, preferring to let the students write until they feel [...]

By: Phil

Phil — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:34:28 +0000

Thanks for sharing these thoughts Brad. I like the way you have broken the tools up into categories by function and I have spent some time staring hard at those categories trying to see how they would fit into a lesson; specifically into the MYP Design Cycle, but no clear picture is emerging (could be I’m exhausted).

My guess is that the biggest frustrations are all to do with the Discussion tools. I agree with your comment below, I think the issue isn’t just with the confusing array of technologies that we are throwing at them but that we are asking them to do things with these technologies that they don’t do naturally face to face, namely share and actively engage in process, not just product.

By: Brad Ovenell-Carter

Brad Ovenell-Carter — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:54:53 +0000

I wasn’t being clear enough. Or maybe I overstated things. I completely agree–there needs to be purpose; and I try my best to give the kids meaningful work–I think it morally wrong to give them busy work. But, on the other hand, it’s hard to know what a tool can do just by looking at it. See Dorothy Sayers wonderful essay, The Lost Tools of Learning. She’d say we need both: an opportunity to noodle about with tools, and as we’re noodlin’, we might as while noodle on something worthwhile. John Seeley Brown also talks about the great value of tinkering–that’s his word for it.

In any case, I think my students see the prupose, or at least trust me that a purpose is there.

But now that I think more on it, I wonder if I’m not hitting up against some deep structural problems. Schools are essentially market economies–students trade papers & projects etc for grade. Morevover it’s an economy of perceived scarcity, rather than abundance, and the competition in this market is so fierce that students, even by the age of 11 or so, when we take them in, have an every-man-for-himself way of working. Last year, for example, I ran an experiment in collaboration: I divided the class into two groups and told them to write an essay. They were to write the best possible answer they could to a a question–I can’t remember what it was at the moment. The passing grade was 95%, but they were allowed to use any resources they wanted: books, internet, parents, me, any expert they could find, each other etc. Despite the opportunity and the assurance that they could not be accused of copying (so long as they atttributed) as they were allowed to borrow freely, both groups guarded their work jealously for fear the other group would “steal ideas” or “do better.” The point of all this, is that I think students’ habit is to wrorry about their performance, rather than the creation of knowledge and understanding.

If this is the case, then the collaboration platforms would seem strange, maybe even threatening. It would explain the “Why would we want to share?” response I frequently see (and not just in my students, I might add.)

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:07:09 +0000

Perhaps its a question of doing real things with tools. I can give you an amazing hammer but if you have nothing to nail, or no need to use it, why would you bother. And if what you really wanted was a baseball bat, then the hammer isn’t too enticing.

Similar to our conversation about community engagement: people will show up when the tools are there to do stuff they need to do. So what about thinking more deeply about purpose. What overwhelming need do these students have to use these tools? What about reviewing games?