One of the problems that all of the productivity suites have is the level of complexity for the younger students. Many adult users do not come close to the full capacity of their productivity suite and students particularly in the younger years certainly wont.

So imagine my suprise when this morning Miguel Guhlin and Julie Lindsay both posted in there blogs about OOo4Kids – open Office for Kids.

This is great. Its still in Beta, but the screenshots look excellent and I have downloaded the Beta to trial.

The layout is simplified, the icons larger and clear and better suited for the younger learners. The removal of the majority of the buttons makes its more applicable (see below). I am looking forward to this coming out of Beta and into Gold.

So it suits younger users, is free, small download, is ethical (you are not pirating it). Excellent

http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page

Download – http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Download

Video demo – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJkyPcP-TeU&feature=player_embedded

Accessing recreational sites during classes and while at work is an issue facing employers [3] and schools alike. The cost, in dollar terms, can be huge and in lost productivity, is significant. Various strategies are employed to manage this but these are often ineffective, draconian or dictatorial. How can we manage this issue better?

The digital world we live in provides us with ample opportunities to work any where and conversely play anywhere. We often see our students sitting in the corridors, on the edge of wireless connectivity, web surfing during their break times, lunch hours and before and after school. The ubiquitous connectivity that modern devices presents us means that essentially we are online anytime. This is both a blessing and a curse.

Recent articles in ITNEWS[2] and the New Zealand Herald [1] have highlighted the cost that universal connectivity can bring to industry. IT News reported that as much as 40% of the companies bandwidth is used for non business related web activity.[2] The New Zealand Herald reported that this level of activity cost the New Zealand economy 2.7 million dollars a day.[1] At work, unlike school such activities can have huge repercussions for the work including dismissal [4].

As teachers, we must prepare our students for the world they live in now, but also for the world beyond the walls and boundaries of our institutions. This includes when it is appropriate to surf and when it is not.

The Digital Citizen [5] has an understanding of when and where it is appropriate to use the internet and online resources for recreational purposes. They know what time it is!

As teachers and administrators, we can help to develop and scaffold the self management skills and attitudes of our digital citizens. These will stand them well in the wider world beyond our gates. We do this, not by having restrictions, rather by gradually removing them; by encouraging an ethical approach to the use of technologies rather than applying draconian measures.

So how can we educate our students? Is it appropriate to unleash unfettered internet access on Middle School students? The answer is no. Students, particularly those in the middle years live in the now. They are in a period of great change, growth and are often experimenting and pushing boundaries. Here we need to provide guidelines and restrictions as they are often morally and ethically immature.

But as the students enter into the Senior School, it is appropriate to shift the focus of control from the teachers to the students. This is not to say “its all open, of you go” rather it is appropriate to gradually release the controls and shift the onus of responsibility on to the students.

We need to have clearly established guidelines for what is and is not acceptable, and we also need to be able to justify why these are not acceptable. For some aspects this is easy. For example surfing pornography is unacceptable for a number of reasons ranging from the legal to the ethical and moral aspects of it being an industry founded on abuse, portraying an unrealistic and inappropriate view of relationships and sex.

But what about facebook, myspace and other social networking sites? These are not fundamentally unethical. Often schools will block these sites as they are potentially opportunities for cyberbullying. But this strategy will not stop them being used for this rather it drives the practice underground and after school.

A better and more constructive approach to social networking sites (and other recreational sites) is to set clear guidelines for their use and make them available. Informing the students that the use of computers in class is strictly for educational purposes and other activities are detracting from their learning, sets the foundations for this. Informing them, Senior Students, that they can in their own time (before and after school, interval and lunch) access social networking/recreational sites, as long as their behaviour is appropriate and acceptable, brings the use of these sites from the realm of proxy tunnels and hidden activity and into the open. Student surfing and accessing social networking sites during learning time are suitably dealt with, while appropriate use in their own time is rewarded by continued access.

This style of approach prepares students for a world where the consequences of inappropriate activity are far more severe and potentially far reaching. We, as educators facilitate appropriate behaviours and chastise those that fail to reach these. The students who use technologies that bypass our restrictions are obviously accessing sites that are deemed unacceptable and inappropriate, rather than just trying to access their social networks or email.

The traditional approach of blocking just drives the behaviours underground and away from school environments. These approaches, blocking and banning do reduce the incidents at school but are hardly a holistic approach. Where as a partnership, based on trust and understanding, supported by the six facets of digital citizenship [5] makes the use of these site open, manageable and transparent. Students develop the skills and attitudes that will stand them in good stead beyond our gates, in the world of employment and further education.

References:

1. Hart. Steve, Saturday Jul 19, 2008 Slackers hurting net result http://www.nzherald.co.nz/employment/news/article.cfm?c_id=11&objectid=10522283
2. Williams Ian, Feb 11, 2009 IT Managers losing control of the network http://www.itnews.com.au/News/136844,it-managers-losing-control-of-the-network.aspx

3. staff writer 11 September 2007 facebooks costs businesses dear http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6989100.stm

4. staff writer Saturday, 25 April 2009 ‘Ill’ worker fired over Facebook http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8018329.stm

5. Churches, Andrew. The Digital Citizen. http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/The+Digital+Citizen

While the “software for schools” deal does provide a basic productivity suite for computers in schools and an OS it is a very limited selection of the tools that many learner need and use regularly. Here is my list of some of the tools that I use: (NB some require registration, and others like Comic life will require purchase but are well worth the investment)

The clip shows the students engaged in various actvities using their OLPC’s as the report wanders around. Its great to see and it raises a number of questions/statements for me.

1. Why are we not seeing more of this? I would love to see more examples of OLPC’s being integrated into schools. The OLPC site has a link to countries with the programme embedded – its a google map. If you look at the list of countries utilising this its not that extensive. They include: Peru, Uruguay, Mexico, haiti Rwanda, Afganistan, Nepal & ethiopia and some others – there are (excluding the USA) 27 countries.
2. While many third world countries are unable to provide such facilities and rely on charity, why are we not seeing more 1st world nations embedding portable technology programs?
3. Some people are adopting these programs and on a wide scale – New South Wales announced its Netbook program.  200,000 units to every year 9 student in the state. WOW! This is a great start, but I started to read some of the fine print on this and I did have concerns with the hardware spec and the software pack. A Netbook with 1Gb Ram Running MS Office and The Adobe CS4 suite. These are serious software packages. This raises the questions for me about suitability. With my students I teach them to design products that are

• suitable for the audience
• suitable for the purpose

Is the hardware they have selected suitable for the software they have choosen? Don’t get me wrong on this. I am very pleased that NSW has taken this step!. Each product is a winner in its own right, but I wonder if its abit like giving the kids a single lane mountainbike track (a netbook) and providing them with a high performance road racing bike (The software). The two seem mismatched.

4. Another NSW Question.  What were the educational goals and objectives defined for this program and how did the Netbook  with this software load match these drivers? I would hate to see a paradigm breaking program like this damaged by technical barriers.

The two strands of this post are tied together really with this question of suitability for audience and purpose. In both the OLPC and NSW Netbooks there is a need that is being met or attempting to be met. Each component is in its own right educationally powerful, enabling, transformative and useful. But I do wonder about the selections being made. With the OLPC the software is selected and deployed with a focus on cost and functionality. With the NSW netbook, the software selected is not, I believe well matched to the hardware platform. I would hate to try Photoshoping an image on a netbook with only 1Gb of ram or working with multiple documents and embedded images and media. or…

“Using this software, students will be able to create videos, edit photos and make presentations for class assignments and projects,” Rees said. “Students and teachers will also be able to set up video conferencing and collaborate on assignments using the built in Web cameras and software within the department’s secure network.”  Source: http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/297696/nsw_education_drops_150m_267_000_school_notebooks

I have to say OLPC gets a tick the netbook with Office and CS4 gets a X. Each in their own right is good but together…well….

The first use was the classic lecture style idea of taking notes and the second category or use was the broader perspective of including text processing and also data processing, media communication and collaboration and internet access.

The students were provided with the opportunity to investigate the following technologies:

• Laptop (Lenovo R400)

• Tablet PC (Lenovo X61)

• Netbook (Asus EeePC)

• HP IPAQ PDA

• iPod Touch

• Livescribe Pen

The students first considered the use of the technology in processing text, in the premise of lectures etc.

The Students ranked the assembled technologies as follows:

1. Tablet PC

2. Livescribe

3. Laptop

4. Netbook

5. PDA

6. Touch

The students had a clear preference for the stylus as a mode of data entry and the link between the audio and the written text in the livescribe was very powerful and attractive for the students.

When the students were asked to look at the broader picture of use, they considered not only functionality, but cost, reliability, durability processing power the results were interesting.

1. Laptop
2. Tablet
3. Netbook
4. Touch
5. PDA
6. Livescribe

With Livescribe the race was unfair so it is no suprise that it came into place, but the distance between the top three (laptop, Tablet and netbook) and the other three was huge (touch, pda and livescribe).

The students quickly discerned that the hand held devices lacked the performance and power that the students required and wanted. They would like one but not as there primary tool.

The Netbook came a distant third to the laptop and tablet. The laptop was considered by most of the students to be the prefered selection even with the obvious and very well liked advantages of the stylus entry mode. They valued the processing power, price point and feature set (particularly the optical drive built into the laptop) of the laptop over the tablet.

An interested exercise.

As to the Apple vs Windows debate, the senior students can bring in any device they like to school and the proportions are 1/3 Apple and 2/3 Windows. Many comment here about the cost/price point of Apples compared to a Windows machine.

An interesting exercise from a learning perspective and also from a broader management perspective too.

Most of us have met them. If we teach in independent schools, higher decile schools or teach in more privilaged areas they are becoming increasingly common. Even the more short sighted of teachers can see them increasing as our future becomes increasingly electronic. Whether we call them Digital Natives (Marc Prensky), Digital Children (Ian Jukes), Neo-Millennials (Dieterle-Dede-Schrier) or 21st Century Learners (Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach ) they are increasingly becoming the future of teaching.

So what are they?

Well they are students who are shaped by there environment. The environment they are exposed to is media rich, immediate, fast, engaging, dynamic and instant. Its electronic and digital, Its a communication medium with instant gratification. Marc Prensky, described the array of media the students are exposed to in his papers on Digital Natives I & II .

This obviously has a huge effect. Digital Natives, those students who, through consistent exposure to these factors and access to a variety of digital media, are engaged and motivated by the use of digital technologies. They are adept in the use of digital medium, and as Dieterle-Dede-Schrier and Marc Prensky wired to used these tools.

So what is a Digital Native, a Digital Child, A Neo-Millennial or 21st Century Learner?

It helps perhaps to look at a digital native in reference to someone we are familiar with: A teacher, who is moer often than not as Marc would describe them, a Digital Immigrant. (source: Educational Origami )

These changes in prefered method and mode of learning are changing and shaping the way we teach (21st Century Teachers), how we design and build our classrooms (21st Century Learning Spaces) and how we are resourced (facilitating 21st Century Learning or taking a measure of ICT integration). For teachers to engage and educate, to facilitate and motivate, our methods of teaching must match their methods of learning; our teaching spaces must reflect their learning spaces; our teaching tools and resources must support their learning strategies. There must be in short, a paradigm shift in education . Teachers must become 21st Century learners and more.

(The posts refered to above have been incorperated into the educational origami wiki. If you would like to contribute to these please become a member of the space and add to them .)

Resources:

Educational Origami – http://edorigami.wikispaces.com

• 21st Century Teacher
• 21st Century Learning spaces
• Facilitating 21st Century Learning
• Digital Children
• Neo-Millennial learning styles
• Bloom’s Digital taxonomy
• Traditional practice and digital alternatives
• ICT and learning style

Have our classrooms really changed that much?

Essentially ACU  – Abilene Christian University – has issues students with iPhones as a standard part of their University stationary (the details and costs are not mentioned, neither are the security arrangements). They then use their iPhones for:

• RSS feeds – personal (facebook) and academic – podcasts and classmaterials linking to iTunes
• course calendar
• address books
• Campus events
• online payments
• voice recorders
• txt alerts and messages from teachers & the school
• timetables and schedules – including changing classes

They have built in some very cool functionality, like a 3D campus map with GPS tracking to show you where you are an how to get to class (I presume its GPS or perhaps triangulation from cell towers). Auto “in class” busy on the phone when you are scheduled into class, linking to VLE etc.

Watch or download the movie here -

This is for most of us a dream, we don’t have the relationship and support of a major player like apple or the finances to implement this scale of concept – particularly given the cost of iPhones and connection.

However, on a achievable scale, we do have almost ubiquitous access to cellphones. Most of my students have atleast 2 cellphones. They have optimised their calling plans and have one on each provider. While many of the features that we see in the iPhone are not available, many of the simple features are, particularly in WAP enabled phones -

• text alerts and messaging,
• calendar synching and updates,
• pod and vodcast,
• voice recording,
• Cameras and video camera
• internet access
• easy communication with teachers, mentors, administration, coaches, peers etc
• reminders even RSS feeds to tell students they have updates, new posts etc.

The potential of these tools is huge. Are they a disruption? I have not found them to be. My students know that if their phone rings in class, with out a legitimate reason, there are consequences for interrupting and interfering with the learning of the other students. Do I ban them – No, its not worth the effort. Do they self manage – Yes.

Watch the video – wish you had the ability to do what they have done – its neat and a vision of the future.  Read the vision they have.

• Convergence and the 21st-Century Classroom:
• Envisioning the 21st-Century Campus:
• Solutions for the 21st-Century University:

The examination system is geared to hand written scripts, inspite of the fact that most people do not use pen and paper in their work. When was the last time you received a hand written letter? I must confess that I did use pen and paper the other day – I was trialing an OCR pad which has a standard paper pad, a ink based battery powered pen that links to a slate underneath the pad. This converts (with a good degree of accuracy too) my handwritten notes into digital text.

This is a drawback to ICT integration, but with most assessment systems including increasing volumes of assignment and internal assessment bases components, the opportunity to integrate ICTs into assessments is increasing.

Teachers often will ask the question “why should I do this when I have been successfully teaching for 20 years and achieving good exam results” . This is a valid question but one that also has valid answers. Here are some that I can think of.

• Our role is more than just exam preparation it is preparing our students for life long learning which will contain vast and ever increasing volumes of ICT
• To go Prensky or Jukes for a moment – Many of our students are digital natives, even those who have not had wide exposure to computers have a digital component by their exposure to high paced and high speed media like television (Neo Millennial Learning styles). They thrive on rapid information access, moving images and sound, they stagnate on the static. (digital Natives I & II)
• Our students do not learn in a “one size fits all” or “Chalk and talk” model. They are Visual, Kinesthetic, Auditory, read/write or multimodal learners, and further this changes from class to class and teacher to teacher(VARK)  As teachers we MUST provide them with variety to maintain their attention and touch their preferred learning style. ICTs provide a mechanism for this.
• There are a vast array of resources available via the digital medium that are not available in a chalk and talk model. We all would love to have field trips to areas and places we study but this is limited by time and financial constrains but we can do this virtually. Can we easily visualise and manipulate atomic particles or DNA on a blackboard, but we can with learning objects. Look at the selection of videos on
  • teacher tv
  • Youtube
  • Teachertube
  • google video
• Collaboration, communication, debate and activism is often limited to the confines of the classroom or perhaps the school in a traditional model, but with the use of ICTs we can converse with fellow students  in their language and they in ours via video and audio conferencing. We can debate social and ethical issues, current affairs and events. We can participate in global events, not from the  sideline of a News article or newspaper report but from the leading edge of action, contribution and involvement.
• Key to the use of ICT in the senior school is motivation, engagement, involvement, captivation and enjoyment. Do our students enjoy these tools, does the use of ICTS (and I am talking of more than word processing) motivate,  engage, involve and captivate them. YES. Does a happy, motivated, engaged, involved and captivated student learn more, retain more, understand better, take ownership and internalise concepts and processes. Yes.

But what is the cost? Will they lose some of their hand writing skills – Possibly? Financially can schools afford it? Can they afford not to provide an education that is relevant and current? Will students vote with their feet and leave? The emergence of the OLPC, Intel classmate, Asus Eee do provide an alternative model to labs. They may lack the power to do high end multimedia but for word processing, brain storming, collaboration, mind mapping, image editing, internet access, presentations, media viewing, data processing and visualisation, blogging, emailing, discussing, debating, twittering, basic desktop publishing, authoring, searching,  contributing, podcasting, printing, entertaining, social bookmarking and networking they are fine.

 “One size fits all” is a model for ICT support that is prevalent in many schools in New Zealand and overseas. “One Size fits all” is capably aided and abetted by Operating systems that have an All or nothing rights model, by technicians who were employed because they were cheap and are grossly overworked and by out sourced support where the focus is bang for THEIR buck rather than partnership and education.

 So what is “One size fits all”? Its where all users in a school environment are provided with identical setting, rights and restrictions (usually more of the latter than the former) regardless of their ability, role or capacity. More often than not with the limited model provided by Windows it is a locked down computer. I know of schools where the staff can not even see C: Drive let alone be able to install a printer or connect at home to the internet.

 Our children are our hope

 In a system that should be encouraging innovation, creativity, adaptability and experimentation this model represents the arch nemesis of all these things. In a country with a focus on the becoming a “knowledge economy” this represents a hurdle before our hope even reaches a position where they could shape the knowledge economy.

 So what causes this tragic and preventable disease to linger and persist? Why hasn’t a vaccine been developed to inoculate us from this infection? The causes are to be honest easy to see:

• Out sourcing companies with out true partnership with the school for education
• Technicians that are so overwhelmed they restrict use out of self defense.
• Technicians selected for budgetary constraints rather than experience, expertise and adaptability
• Operating systems that are woefully inadequate in delivering distributed rights
• Lack of vision or appreciation of the teacher role or of any innovative process
• Management who endorse by inaction, lack of vision or lack of understanding a one size fits all policy

 For the out-sourced ICT support provider, this is a simple case of economics, reduce the support needs and calls, minimise my imaging variations, maximise my return and profit by locking down the computer so tightly that nothing breaks because nothing works. These suppliers need to spend a day in the shoes of a teacher and develop a true partnership for education not a one sided one for profit.

On site staff, the technicians, are as often as not selected because they fit into a limited salary slot rather than for their expertise or ability. The old saying “pay peanuts, get monkeys” applies here. Does your school offer a salary package that will induce IT professionals to leave their high 5 figure paying job to come and work in a school with the myriad of challenges this environment presents or do they offer a $30K to $40K package and complain about the poor service?

In self defense, these technicians, often working at a service ratios of over 100 computers to 1 technician lock the machines down to survive. A heavily restricted machine is so limited in what it can do that and  because it does nothing it doesn’t break.

 The lack of vision and appreciation of the teacher role goes beyond the out sourced company or the on site technician, it also reaches school management, many of whom have not been in a classroom for years. How do they know how to use and adapt these technologies? How do they know what works on the web and what doesn’t?

 
Strangely enough I do see hope from a strange source – The Warehouse – recently I was wandering the aisles looking for something and I asked a staff member, packing shelves, for assistance. I was surprised when I read the name badge that this was the manager of the store. Curious, I asked why she was here, and her reply was simple, straight forward and incredibly useful – ALL staff, whether they are accountants, managers, HR , whatever must spend 1 day a fortnight (I am pretty sure it was 1 per fortnight) working on the shop floor. What a difference it would make to a school if the principals had to teach a class, a regular, scheduled, you can’t miss it, nothing is more important that this, you have too be punctual class.

One size fits all approach too ICT does a number of things:

• It brings everyone down to the lowest common denominator
• It places control in the wrong hands
• It stifles creativity
• It limits innovation
• It halts experimentation
• It increase frustration

 I have seen teachers so passionate about ICT that they have bought their own laptops to avoid the draconian measures enforced in many schools. They paid for these themselves so they could have the freedom to experiment, the room to innovate, the opportunity to create and the chance to adapt.

Does your school have a policy about encouraging creativity? Does this policy end when ICT begins? Does your school’s ICT policy support early adopters, innovators and god forbid MAVERICKS? Is creativity and imagination limited to standard, uniform software and hardware? Do your management team and IT staff actively support innovation by allowing freedom for early adopters and mavericks?

Could people like David Warlick, Seymour Papert, Gary Stager, Wesley Fryer, Derek Wenmoth, Will Richardson and the other leading and cutting edge pioneers of ICT integration have done this if they had been restricted to operating certain approved and “safe” programs, being unable to install software or hardware, being unable to connect to the internet at home or a cybercafe.

 Kelvin was right – things have to change and I am one of the lucky ones. At my school there are several sizes.

As teachers we must seize the moment as it arises. Computers in a lab are often unaccessible when the need arises, so computers in the classroom are a huge improvement. But in a state school with 20 to 35 students in a classroom, 4 computers at the back of the room leads to a whole heap of passengers.

We know that students doing has a better retention and learning outcomes (75% retention) than watching (10-20% retention).

Pods of laptops often have similar problems to those of a lab availability, booking, lack of spontaneity, but pods of laptops also have other consideration:

• cost - while the cost has come down so to has the reliability. The $1000 laptop you buy from the warehouse will not be as robust or reliable as the $2500 machine supported with a SLA
• Liciences – this is often a hidden cost, but MS or Apple liciences, software etc soon add up
• Reliability – laptops have moving parts and unless you buy a toughbook they need care and reaslly don’t appreciate the knocks
• load times vary but they do take time boot

Enter the OLPC, Intel Classmate, Asus Eee and co – they are cheap (the Eee is $599 from Dick Smith retail) tough – no moving parts and solid state memory makes them more resistent to knocks, have a long battery life, fast load time and cheap liciences as many run on OSS software.

Its worth considering the use of these technologies as an alternative to classroom computers or laptop pods. For the price of a good laptop (lets say $2000) you could buy 3 Asus Eee or similar machines and buy memory keys to act as personal storage for the students work. A laptop pod of 10 machines which realistically is a 2 or 3 to 1 ratio in the classrooms becomes a 1 to 1 classroom.

Alternatively, one pod of laptops could easily become 3 pods of OLPC’s or similar.

The question of performance is really a red herring, what do our students need to do. For the most part their needs are internet access, text and data processing, graphics manipulation, simple web publishing and multimedia viewing. More complex actions Will require better equipment, but for most common activities these machines will surfice.

I consider that tablet computers represent the next evolution in laptops. Multimodal input using keyboard, pointing device, voice recognition or stylus allows flexibility not available in the traditional keyboard mouse arrangement. I look forward to seeing a tablet style version of the OLPC. They can be created in a smaller form factor like this one

The Tango Nano Touchscreen. This is an interesting development as well. I am not sure if it has full tablet functionality or if its price is comparable with OLPC, Classmate or Asus Eee, but its interesting never the less. Can we get a tablet OLPC, Classmate or Eee?