Procession Towards Learning Land

Activists not entrepreneurs

 One of the key threads that seemed to be coming through the first day of the Learning Without Frontiers conference was the notion of entrepreneurial education. Ray Kurzweil most notably promoted this idea and as an enormously successful technology entrepreneur himself perhaps that was hardly surprising. Kurzweil is clearly a much more intelligent individual than me (another key theme of the conference would be that of me feeling insignificant and intellectually deficient) but nevertheless he made me deeply uneasy.

The main issue is that I struggle with the word 'entrepreneur', particularly in education. For me the word is tainted irretrievably by my having grown up in Thatchers' Scotland when 'entrepreneur' was embodied in 'me first' wide boys desperate to strip communities of services in the pursuit of personal short term financial profit. Yes, that's my personal baggage but we all are informed by our personal contexts either as action or reaction. And weaknesses can be strengths.

Supporters of entrepreneurial education might argue that the word is there to be reclaimed, to be turned to good. They might suggest that the key is in people identifying problems as opportunities and taking action. Getting things done. Making things happen.

Such an intention is splendid. But wouldn't 'Activist' be a much better word for what we describe?

I don't think it's just a question of semantics either. Language is important and in these times more than ever it's a question of taking sides. Those who would use 'entrepreneur' on the side that deifies the mythic Market and the 'activist' supporters on the side that would champion cooperation and equity over competition.

Jaron Lanier suggested that the problem with the entrepreneurial model is that few people can be at the top of that particular tree. It's a traditional pyramid of power/wealth model. If we agree with that (and I do), then if we adopt an entrepreneurial approach to education                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   are we not simply knowingly setting up young people for failure? And is that really so different to what currently exists?

Of course the notion of failure is essential to learning. Without failure we cannot learn. That's a given. But it's more than that isn't it? Isn't taking an entrepreneurial approach to education knowingly ensnaring young people in a lie? Isn't the message of "you can all be successful entrepreneurs" just another aspect of the vile X-Factor culture (what the late great Malcolm McClaren called 'karaoke culture' at LWF a couple of years ago) that says "you can all be stars"?

Doesn't such an approach continue to devalue the significance of the majority of those who make up our societies? I would argue that in our capitalised cultures the notion of entrepreneurial education is hardly disruptive or radical but is instead just a different way of maintaing the status quo. And in these days of financial instability and broken systems is that really such a great idea?

Instead, let us see approaches that promote equity and cooperation. Let's see educational activists, not entrepreneurs.

Say Something Magical. (reflections on BETT)

I visited BETT last week. I’ve been to this enormous educational technology show in London almost every year for the past eight or so. Now it may just be indicative of my increasing age and correspondingly elevated rates of grumpiness, but I admit that every year I find it less exciting and relevant; every year the thrill of finding a golden nugget seems to diminish, swamped beneath hordes of young Primary teachers excitedly stashing cheap promotional SWAG into carrier bags. But as I say, that’s maybe just my cynical age talking.

Technologically there are always new things to see at BETT. A fancy gadget here, a faster system there. There are many shiny trinkets to generate consumer passion on display. But educationally? Educationally I’m afraid it has felt suffocated and jaded for some time.

Perhaps that was why the biggest talking point this year was not any technology, but rather Michael Gove’s show-opening speech in which he announced the Government’s intention to disapply the programmes of study in ICT from September 2012. Everywhere you turned it seemed that someone had an opinion on the exciting new landscape offering opportunities for The Future Of ICT In Schools. Well, it made a change from hearing yet another tedious sales pitch about Interactive Whiteboards and VLEs. And much as I vehemently disagree with just about everything else he has said about education, I thought that in this instance Gove was pretty much spot on. 

Of course the discussions about the implications of Mr Gove’s speech continue to reverberate and develop post-BETT as ICT Subject Leaders and teachers all over England feverishly consider and discuss the question of The Future Of ICT In Schools. Interestingly, opinions seem to be split into one of two camps. On the one hand there are those (hanging around Starbucks armed with Netbooks running Windows 7) who are fixating on the delicious morsel that is Computer Science. On the other there are those (posing with iPads and asking Siri for directions to the nearest independent coffee shop) who have interpreted Digital Literacy in a more media-oriented manner and are even now smacking their lips in anticipation of teaching Year 7 how to uninstall MS Office and go and do something less boring instead. It’s going to be interesting to see how these two camps navigate the months ahead as more detailed thinking eventually emerges from the DFE (ha!). Who will prove to have made the wisest choices in the long run?

Not to say that the two camps are not finding middle ground. They do both seem to unite around the idea that youngsters might learn about programming by creating games. This inevitably leads to further disagreement of course, as camp two talk excitedly about the iOS platform and the other witters on about Flash (stop sniggering at the back).

Now I’m no gamer, but I do understand that youngsters learn transferable skills through the creation of games (and possibly the playing of some of them). I’ll even give you the word ‘valuable’ in that sentence if you want it. Indeed, I might even stretch to ‘invaluable’ on a good day. But those invaluable skills will not necessarily be in the realms of programming. They will be skills wrapped up in creative process, risk taking and imaginative problem finding and solving. The ‘code’ is just the language and you can say Nothing Very Interesting in any language you want. It remains Nothing Very Interesting. Nada Muy Interesante. Någonting Mycket Intressant. ничего не очень интересно. You get the idea...

In case you hadn’t already guessed as much, I think it’s fair to say that my own sympathies , such as they are, lie with the second of these two camps. I may pass on the Siri interaction though. Never understood why I would want to talk to my phone when it wasn’t connected to another (real) person on the other end. But again, see comments about my age in the opening paragraph.

The key here however is ultimately not whether you are in the Starbucks/Windows 7 camp or the iOS/indie coffee shop gang. It’s not whether you celebrate opportunities for exploring the science of computing or explore digital storytelling through the medium of video and/or song (for example). No, the key (as it always really was and ever will be) is about (re)designing the provision that you offer young people in your community such that they are engaged and excited about that provision. It’s about creating opportunities to investigate, create and share with the world.

Let’s not squander the opportunity. Let’s empower our young people to Say Something Magical.

No-notice inspections? Bring it on!

It would be easy to knee-jerk in response to the news that Ofsted are proposing no-notice inspections. But much as I may want to disagree with everything Michael Gove says, I actually welcome these words: “No-notice inspections, especially where behaviour and teaching standards are of concern, will provide parents and others a true picture of schools' performance.” 

I’m assuming here that the no-notice inspection would be triggered by a few parents having a (very possibly justified) whinge on the Parent View website. But really, does anyone expect anything except a few negative comments appearing on that service? It’s always the same in our society of media-driven tales of doom and gloom. The negative minority is given a voice far in excess of that of the positive majority. 

So isn’t this an opportunity for schools and teachers to show off what terrific work they genuinely do on a day to day basis? Isn’t this an opportunity to silence that nagging doubt that says “ah well anyone can deliver a good or outstanding lesson when they know they’re under the spotlight”? Isn’t this an opportunity to give lie to those negative few who insist that all young people today are feral and that all behaviour in all our schools is atrocious?

And isn’t to suggest otherwise a tacit admission of failure even before the process begins?

Confusing office with Office

I keep reading about this CloudOn app that allows you to use Microsoft Office on an iPad. I don’t understand the fuss. Are people so prohibitively attached to one software solution that it clouds (excuse the pun) judgement?

Of course I lied when I said I don’t understand the fuss. I do. It’s the question I am most often asked about the iPad: “does it have Microsoft Office on it?” I think perhaps it’s most often asked by people who also think that the iPad will be a replacement for a desktop machine (or even laptop). It isn’t. It’s a supplemental device (albeit very powerful and getting better all the time). But it does very much depend on what you want to do/create...

For example if all you use Word for is to write fairly simple documents and maybe put in the occasional picture then you don’t actually need Word at all (on an iPad, laptop, desktop or anywhere). You just need a simple word processor. I use Pages on my iPad mainly because it integrates well with my workflow on my Mac, but there are other word processor apps that work just as well and that cost less. Try some out. Ditto presentation software. Actually presentation software is one of the most abused pieces of equipment ever invented and although it is very rare that I would use Keynote on my iPad to actually create a presentation I do wonder if the rather strict limitations of the app could be seen as a positive. No more wacky flying text or embarrassing transitions. Imagine it! Bliss!

And spreadsheets? I admit I do not understand Excel. I find it the most opaque piece of software imaginable, but I appreciate that it is not really created for people like me (people who like pictures). I know that for people who see data and numbers as Very Exciting Things, Excel is the best thing since buttered sliced toast. But really, even I can see that an iPad is not something you would want to be using to create or to look at a large spreadsheet full of complex, erm, Things (you can see what a fine technical grasp I have of this). Anyway, I have found that 90% of the spreadsheets I am sent open and look fine in Numbers on the iPad. Actually 90% of spreadsheets I am sent aren’t really spreadsheets at all, they are just tables of information that require no data interrogation and would consequently work just as well for the end user as a PDF.

Having recently spent over two weeks away from home with my iPad as my only device I realised that for many things I just don’t need a powerful desktop machine or laptop. Admittedly I was, for most of that period technically on holiday, but nevertheless I could still write and publish blog posts. I could still send my photos to Flickr. I could still email my colleagues and friends and take part in interesting conversations about Christmas telly on Twitter. I could still write and edit documents for work. I could, and did, read copious amounts of books via my Kindle app and I kept up to date with the world (such as it is) via the Interwebs. I watched TV and movies in my sleepless dead of night thanks to iTunes and iPlayer amongst others. I could even have made and edited my own small videos if I had wanted to, but I didn’t think a video diary about daily trips to an Intensive Care Unit over the Christmas period would have made particularly compelling viewing.

So really of course this point about “does Microsoft Office work on an iPad” isn’t about Microsoft Office at all. It’s about those wider questions of what we actually need our technology for. It’s about those questions tied to what we need to create, to consume and to share. Only when we know the answers to those questions do we need to worry about what tools are best. And when we do ask and answer those questions I’ll bet you that nine times out of ten ‘Microsoft Office’ is not the answer.