The State of Web 2.0, School 2.0
Since I was a participant in this year’s NECC (the last one, as the conference in Denver next year will be called “ISTE 2010″) as an observer and presenter, I thought about what I saw, what I read about in the program, and what I picked up and learned.
First, I have to say, the learning never stops. I still need to go back and download presenter handouts, follow links, and put all the pieces together.
Second, I realize I really need to participate next time in the un-conference, where so many people are making significant connections. To save money this year, I arrived too late to take advantage of the learning on Saturday.
Reflection: it seems that so much is/was focused on “web 2.0.” My colleague who attended said she was sick of hearing all of this 2.0 jibberish, including school 2.0 and I chose to both agree and disagree with her. As someone who has capitalized on the “2.0 lingo,” I have to be careful not to shoot myself in the foot.
I took pains in my book to define “Web 2.0,” and I feel, after these many years already, still the need to articulate what it means (to me, at least) because it’s being used in so many different ways.
- the read/write web refers to blogs, wikis, twitter, microblogs, and the like where “prosumers” have replaced “consumers” in easily-updated communications media
- web 2.0 refers to sophisticated websites and web applications that mimic the functionality of desktop application software (Google Docs, Mobile Me, Flickr, etc.)
Of course, there is overlap, and that’s where the confusion sets in. NECC this year dealt with both of these and they were both referred to as “Web 2.0″ things. When I speak in the next paragraphs about “Web 2.0,” (in quotes) I’m referring to the mixture of both terms, as I saw them at play at the conference.
I led a session on teacher blogging best practices, clearly something in the camp of “Web 2.0.” Roughly half of my attendees were already blogging educators. The other half, as I polled, were “considering blogging” or “getting started.” I told them blogging isn’t for everyone. It takes determination and a comfort with writing to make your blog a successful blog. But I also told them that to understand the power of blogging that you have to be a participant, either through active commenting, blogging, or both.
Which reminds me of my father, who recently, identified himself as a “blogger.” He doesn’t have a blog, but finds himself posting comments on political blogs. “I’m a blogger.” I told him not so much, but I found it intriguing that someone who does so little writing finds interest in communicating with others online.
With so many sessions at NECC focused on “Web 2.0,” it is definitely something of interest. For some, it’s been around long enough to be “old already,” and folks are looking “for the next thing.” Which lends itself for us to be asking what “Web 2.0″ is doing for us in our schools. If you’re looking for the next thing, and educators are still trying to grapple, assimilate, and help students achieve with this new class of online communications tools, then what’s the state of the educational technology world right now?
We’re still figuring all of this out.
There are so many great examples of neat learning that are taking place with students and teachers both online as participants on the Web. My colleague Bea Cantor led a poster session on H.E.A.T.-rich (hot) lessons this year from our schools. Many involved the creation of things like podcasts or videos. One married student learners from two schools via a wiki. Another used 3D software to develop a house the class designed, room by room. We have begun embracing some “Web 2.0″ things and her examples demonstrated that. I can’t say that too many of our examples were unique. It was easy to find other teachers and students doing similar types of projects from schools across the country, and beyond the U. S.
There are two major issues holding back the adoption of “Web 2.0″ tools in schools. The first is giving up teacher control, issues of online safety, and issues of online behavior. It’s that fear of what kids will do with communications media. You can hear swearing in the halls between classes. Is it going to shock you to find similar language in blog posts, wikis and podcasts? The second issue is around pedagogy. Okay, these tools exist to serve other uses, but some can be used to engage students in some interesting learning opportunities. Some aren’t so hot. Let’s take one “Web 2.0″ poster child, Voice Thread. On its own, it probably isn’t going to do a whole lot of good. You can picture teachers everywhere using this tool, proclaiming its virtues. Gary Stager, Ph. D., in his address in the ISTE-sponored debate, mentioned this tool as something kids could “belch into,” presumably to create nothing of value.
Voice Thread presents pictures and video with auditory commentary from multiple users. Word is a sophisticated word processor. Excel is a spreadsheet application. Firefox is a Web browser.
Described by their basic functions, all software could be used to showcase figurative “belching” by teachers and students both. What some of the buzz about “Web 2.0″ at this year’s conference was about was the pedagogy involved. As ever, good instructional design is critical to getting results with any software package.
In other words, I like Voice Thread. I think it has potential for some great learning. But it’s simply a tool. It doesn’t create scholars on its own. Like any tool, it’s the design of instruction that should be the focus of our attention.
That’s why my mind shifts over to this concept of School 2.0. How are we going to change the ways schools work to be more effective? Using technology is but one piece (whereby I refer to these Web 2.0 tools). The School 2.0 website and toolkit begin to convey what’s meant by this term. I have the poster hanging outside of my office. I put it there because I feel it is practically senseless to refer to it myself, but also essential that others than me actually see what the concepts are all about.
It takes building principals, the superintendent, the school board and the community to really ignite the changes needed to upgrade to anyone’s idea of a second version of schooling in America. And then beyond them, it takes the state and federal governments to participate too.
I got the sense at this year’s NECC that so many of “technologists” are ready and waiting to bring School 2.0 online. But ultimately the conversations, professional development, and guide changing has to happen outside our little family and be extended to a wider reach of stakeholders. Where technology, and especially the technologist becomes critical, is in their understanding and support of quality pedagogy using the available gamut of digital tools. A school or district won’t be effective if they don’t include the technologists at the head table.
I look forward to going through my links, my handouts, and my experiences from NECC 2009 even more in the coming weeks. But I am already looking forward to a future venue (Denver, or perhaps elsewhere) where I can wholly devote my time towards the better design of instruction for the adults and children I serve. This takes partnerships and risk taking together of folks like myself with other administrators, lead teachers, and curriculum specialists. For me, this interaction and cooperation is really at the heart of what “School 2.0″ means to me. I am confident that no matter what the wizards of the Web cook up in their latest versions of apps and collaborative websites under the heading of “Web 2.0,” that enough of us are more than ready to apply the best class of these tools.
This was a long blog post, but thanks for getting to the end. I had fun this year volunteering with the technical support team at NECC, hanging out in the VSTE room, visiting the VSTE ITRT pavilion, and chatting with friends old and new. I got to meet some eager educators who had purchased my book, and I even found time to try some gourmet cuisine in our nation’s capital.