ICTs and leapfrogging development

Uruguay gives laptops to every public primary school student

Uruguay has completed their plan of equipping every student in the country's public primary schools with an XO Laptop computer. The final count of the computers was 396,727 laptop computers. The project is not completed because not all of the schools have connectivity yet and teacher training is still ongoing.

With this achievement Uruguay pulls far ahead of other countries, including the most developed, in equipping its schools to make effective use of information and communication in technology.

One of the remarkable things about Uruguay's achievement is that the total cost, including the laptops, maintenance, connectivity and teacher training amounts to only 5% of country's education budget.

Broadband access becomes a legal right in Finland

Finland recently became the first country in the world make access to highspeed Internet a legal right. International institutions like the UN hafa promoted access to communications technology as a human right at least since UNESCO's MacBride Report (Many Voices One World) was published in 1980. Several countries have indeed defined access to communications technology as a human right, such as France and Estonia, but Finland is the first to legally mandate access and to go as far as requiring broadband access, as opposed to just any old technology. Hooray for Finland!

Educational change is cultural change

George Siemens, at the Connectivism blog, has written an interesting article that highlights several of the difficulties associated with open approaches to education. Siemens focuses on the policy changes needed to make open resources viable for education. There are especially two points that Siemens makes that I think are most relevant and I agree with entirely. First is the systemic nature of education, and especially, that education is made up of complex systems within systems. Second is the need for more future oriented thinking in education. This latter point is one that I highlighted in a recent post, although I put it more in terms of the tendency for reactive policy making in education. Siemens' point (at least one of them) is that change in education tends to be incremental because these two points are seldom addressed.

I am in total agreement with Siemens regarding the issues of the systemic nature of education and the need for future oriented policies. However, I think there is another equally important issue that Siemens misses and that is often left unmentioned, especially in discourse about technology and educational change. This is that policy making is a very difficult process and changing educational policy even more so because education is so closely tied to society, culture, and individuals' value systems. Siemens says, "When trying to change a complex integrated system that includes numerous stakeholders - such as universities - a seat is required at the power table." This is certainly true, but I would argue that in the case of education, especially when significant change is involved, a "seat at the power table" is not enough. The type and level of change we can expect to achieve will also depend on the social values of the broader stakeholders, which in the case of education includes the general public. Before we can expect considerable change in education, we have to ensure that those changes are consistent with society's values.

Ensuring consistency with social values can take at least two routes. The first is that expectations for change are modified. This is the most common process and usually results in lesser expectations. The second is to change the value system. This can be a lengthy and complicated process but is most likely to result in significant change. There are, however, some successful examples of the latter. One of the most talked about (and that I tend to mention a lot) is Finland (See for example Hargreaves, 2008). Finland has radically transformed their educational system over a couple of decades. What I think are a couple of the key developments in Finland that have facilitated these changes. First, the social status of teachers was raised considerably to one where they are a trusted authoritative voice on educational matters. Second, educational policy is closely integrated with several other policies that have to do with social change and economic growth. Thus, they have created a society that values and promotes change and is able to bring about change fairly rapidly based on expert authority.

Many people point out that a country like Finland has it fairly easy in this regard because it is a largely homogenous society. This is certainly a viable point, but I still think that the Finnish experience can provide valuable lessons for any society, including multi-cultural societies. True, it'll probably be more difficult, but it's still a reasonable goal.

Hargreaves, A. (2008). The coming of post-standardization: Three weddings and a funeral. In C. Sugrue (Ed.), The future of educational change: International perspectives. (pp. 15-33). New York, NY: Rougledge.

Why are we slow to adopt technology for education?

For the past year, I've been researching the integration of technology in education, and most recently the use of cell phones, as I mentioned in a recent post. What I have seen is that the use of communication technology in education is more driven by reactionary responses to technology than proactive. There are a number of things that contribute to this tendency; gaps in teacher training, parents' assumptions about education and technology, students' assumptions about education and technology (yes, students themselves are often just as skeptical about technology in education as the adults around them), and unclear or misinformed policies. What we end up with are educational systems where the use of technology is always at least one step behind what's happening outside of the system. My question is, can we formulate policies that accommodate rapid responses to technological changes?

A very good example of technological skepticism in education is the cell phone. Cell phone ownership and cell phone use has spread all over the world at a phenomenal rate. According to a BECTA report from last year, cell phone ownership among 12 year olds in the UK is almost universal and there is little reason to think that other developed countries are any different. One would think that this would be an exciting opportunity for learning, which is essentially a communicative activity. But, no, instead they are most often treated with suspicion and skepticism, labeled distracting, and very often banned. Yet, for students these devices have become one of their primary means of exchange and transfer of knowledge and opinions. The educational system, however, seems determined to encourage the belief that these exchanges using accessible technology are inherently inferior to the exchanges that go on within the classroom, and students seem very prepared to accept these beliefs.

An anomaly in all this is that many in development circles have been quick to point out that cell phones may be the transformative technology that will bring education to parts of the world where opportunities for learning have been few. Why this difference in attitudes toward cell phones in developing countries? The only response to that question that I can think of is that it takes a dire situation for cell phones to be seriously considered as a learning technology.

The few and limited experiments that have been carried out using cell phones in education show that educational systems have already missed out on an exciting opportunity and will have a lot of catching up to do. While they are catching up, technology will continue to develop and they will likely fall behind in regards to those as well.

One way that educational policy can perhaps address this issue is by formulating clearer policies regarding the relationship between formal, non-formal and informal learning. Many policies already do address these different arenas of learning, but the do so in a manner that keeps each seperate, i.e. there's one policy for formal learning, one for non-formal, etc. What is needed is a more holistic view of learning that incorporates all of these learning arenas into one systemic vision of learning that views the classroom as an open conduite for the flow of information and knowledge from a range of sources. Perhaps the reason that cell phones have received more attention in the context of developing countries is that in many regions traditional classrooms haven't existed and education is more closely integrated within the community as a whole (I really don't know - this is pure conjecture). Whether or not this is the case, it might suggest that a more open approach to educational institutions could be helpful.

At this point, it's probably best I stop with the guesswork and refer back to a previous post on "Opening Up Education".

Cell phones in education

I'm preparing a 1cr. workshop on the use of cell phones in education to be offered through the Leapfrog Institute here at the University of Minnesota this fall. I thought I'd share the bibliography so far. At least some of this will probably be of interest to readers. If you know of more interesting literature, blogs, etc. on this topic leave a message in the comments. Click here or "Continue reading" below for my annotations.

Exam students can 'phone a friend'. (2009). Ananova. Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_3391974.html

Coopman, T. M. (2008). Toward a pervasive communication environment perspective. First Monday, 14(1). Retrieved April 9, 2009, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2277/2069

Costabile, M. F., Angeli, A. D., Lanzilotti, R., Ardito, C., Buono, P., & Pederson, T. (2008). Explore! Possibilities and challenges of mobile learning. Paper presented at the CHI 2008.

Edweek.org (2009). Cellphones as Instructional Tools Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=lobby.jsp&eventid=154461&sessionid=1&key=F6D1D2D288709C1B15A12F74A57B0660&eventuserid=26731318

Hartnell-Young, E., & Heym, N. (2008). How mobile phones help learing in secondary schools. Nottingham, UK: Learning Sciences Research Institute - University of Nottingham.

Kolb, L. (2008). Toys to tools: Connecting student cell phones to education. Washington, D.C.: International Society for Technology in Education.

Librero, F., Ramos, A. J., Ranga, A. I., Trinona, J., & Lambert, D. (2007). Uses of the cell phone for education in the Philippines and Mongolia. Distance Education, 28(2), 231-244.

Prensky, M. (2005). What can you learn from a cell phone? Almost anything! Innovate, 1(5).

Teens and social networking

Social networking researcher danah boyd (yes, she likes to have it without caps) has shared some questions that she has gotten from people on US teenagers and their use of social networking sites and her responses. Her very short and concise answers are surprisingly informative and thought provoking.

Wolfram|Alpha "computational knowledge engine"

For people that may have missed this despite all of the recent buzz, the Wolfram|Alpha "computational knowledge engine" is supposed to be launched sometime this month (May, 2009). Wolfram|Alpha is a search engine that will take various types of input and, drawing on data available on the Internet, will present, contextualize and perform computations on that data. This will be an incredibly valuable tool for researchers. Here is an introduction to Wolfram|Alpha that illustrates some of the things that it will do.

National standards in the US - No way out?

In the newest issue of Time Magazine there is a curious (mostly for its remarkably one-sided treatment of the issue) article on national educational standards in the US. The author, Walter Isaacson, is a clear advocate of the most rigid forms of standards and assessment, i.e. "this" is what should be learned and we test to the gills to assess it.

Included with the article is a brief interview with education secretary Arne Duncan. He has some interesting ideas about how to solve the US education problems. First, he thinks students should spend more time in school; lots more time. He wants longer school days, a longer school week, and a longer school year. One might even be led to believe that he would like most for children to simply move into schools at a tender young age and stay there until they're ready to graduate. Secondly, he supports "alternative routes" for teacher training, i.e. suggesting that current teacher certification requirements are too rigid.

The comical part of all this is that on the page before the Duncan interview is a table ranking countries by their outcomes in international student surveys in math and reading (not included in the online version of the article). Topping both lists is Finland. In Finland, students start school later than in the US, their school days are shorter, and the school year is roughly the same. There are national curriculum guidelines but not the incessant standards based testing we find in the US. Teacher certification requirements are very demanding. Master's degrees are required and only the best of the best are accepted.

So, here it is, sitting right under Duncan's nose, that more time in school need not make a difference. Rigid standards and assessment need not make a difference. What makes a difference is that teachers are highly qualified and have the flexibility to do what is needed to help their students learn (Duncan suggests that "teachers give students knowledge" - I don't think so).

The Finnish example suggests that there are other, potentially more effective, ways of achieving the educational goals we strive for. For example, one way would be to standardize around teaching processes. Rather than testing the students to death, we could use a sort of "total quality control" formative evaluation to ensure that teachers do everything they can to meet students' learning needs.

Before anything like this can happen in a country like the US, there needs to be significant change in the underlying system. In the US it seems like education officials have become so engrossed in standards and standards based assessment that they can't even entertain the notion of even slightly more radical change. But, I think there's another reason for this. US educational institutions (and this probably goes for many other countries as well) are so resistant to change that the only possible reforms are incremental. They've launched themselves onto the standards and assessment path and can't change course. To get around this hindrance we need firm and decisive leadership. I'm getting the sense that Arne Duncan might not be it.

Encyclopedia Britannica will open up - just a little bit.

Encyclopedia Britannica (EB) seems to have decided that the general public might just be a useful resource for gathering the knowledge of the world. Several years ago they were none too happy with Nature's evidence-based claim that Wikipedia was no less reliable than their expert authored and peer reviewed encyclopedia. At the time they outright rejected Nature's claims and demanded a retraction of the article on Nature's study.

EB's approach will be very different than Wikipedia's. Hardly surprising since EB is not Wikipedia and does not want to be Wikipedia - and rightly so. It will certainly be interesting to see what sort of effect this has on EB.

Meanwhile, more and more educators are finding ways to use Wikipedia. Here's an interesting article on one educator's experience. A lot of the experiments of this type that I've been coming across involve higher education students. I see no reason why this couldn't be done with others, including elementary, upper-secondary students, and especially students (at all levels) in developing regions. This is an exceptional and very real way to develop an understanding of the social aspects of information and knowledge development.

Opening Up Education - Free collection of excellent articles

Opening Up Education: The Collective Advancement of Education through Open Technology, Open Content, and Open Knowledge is a timely and relevant collection of articles about the need to, and ways to, integrate formal and informal learning. The book has been released on the web, in its entirety, under a Creative Commons license. Although the book focuses on "openness" in a general sense, there is a strong emphasis on the impact and role of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in facilitating the open environments and processes that affect today's learners.

Given the emphasis on the impact of ICTs on learning and education, some may question the relevance of this book for educators in parts of the world where access to ICTs is limited, if it exists at all. In fact, I think it may be even more relevant for educators in those parts of the world because the authors approach education from a very non-traditional point of view. We have learned that development of education is most successful when it conforms to the needs and expectations of those whom it is meant to serve. The approaches covered in this book do just that by looking at the ways that learners learn in their daily lives and what formal educational institutions can do to support those activities.

In his foreword titled "Creating a Culture of Learning", John Seely Brown covers a wide range of topics, as do the articles included in the book. His case for open approaches to education hinges on what is to be expected given the book's title, free-flowing information, learners' engagement in communities of practice and the socially constructed nature of knowledge. He also highlights some interesting novel issues that should be of concern to the modern educator. One is the concept of "immersion":

"Immersion comes from being surrounded by others talking and interacting with us and is furthered [sic] facilitated by our deep desire to interact, be understood and express our needs."

As we see more and more deeply engaging activities supported by ICTs, such as role-playing games, this is a very interesting and relevant point.

Another interesting, and somewhat provocative, point that Seely Brown makes is that, "... no one pedagogical or technical approach is the answer to ensuring that students are engaged and prepared." (pg. xiv). The alternative is then a shift of focus to the ways that individuals learn in various informal and formal settings, or what is referred to in a broad sense as "learningscapes".

I don't know why Seely Brown chooses to use the term "learningscapes" (and elsewhere "learning landscape"). I don't think this term captures the emphasis on processes which, nonetheless, I think is his main point. His concept of "learning ecologies" would have made much more sense here.

Lastly, Seely Brown tells a very thought provoking story of his exchanges with an associate provost of the University of Michigan. He suggested that, despite offical enrollment of approx. 40,000 students, UM teaches approx. 250,000 students each year because of students' involvement in widespread social networks.

I think the Finnish systemic approach to education is illustrative of at least some of what the authors of the articles in this book are talking about. See for example:
Interesting video about how ICT is integrated in the Finnish classroom
Robert B. Kozma's very informative paper on ICT & education in Finland, Singapore and Egypt (note how Singapore is following Finland's lead)