Lighting the Path For Our Students and Teachers (part 1 of 2)

[Sean Nash]

A personal focus of mine for the NECC 2008 this past month was to harvest as much input and conversation as possible about two crucial acronyms (NETS & TPCK). The first of these is NETS- the National Educational Technology Standards. These standards are developed by the International Society for Technology in Education, (ISTE). There are three further divisions of these standards: NETS-S (student standards), NETS-T (teacher standards), and NETS-A (administrator standards).

In my opinion, the articulation of technology standards into these three roles is very helpful. An important thing to note is that these standards go through a rigorous "refresh" cycle. The student standards were last updated in 2007 at the NECC in Atlanta, the refreshed teacher standards were unveiled two weeks ago in San Antonio, and the new standards for administrators will be unveiled at NECC 2009 in Washington DC.

One of my first workshop experiences at “the neck” (NECC), was a short seminar devoted to identifying NETS-S standards from video of kids at work. I posted a short summary of this first workshop while onsite at the conference. There you will find a couple of very helpful links to the videos we reviewed as well as to a short course for review of the standards.

It seems to me that our integration of technology is quite shallow to date. When looking at the NETS-S, the only standard we seem to be plugging away at is: #6 "Technology Operations and Concepts", and this has been relegated to a specific set of practical courses in our high schools. The application of technology within business and IT courses is obvious. Take a look at the student standards and see for yourself where you think our students are operating on a typical day at Benton High. I would propose that we very solidly keep technology largely within the "technology-related courses" and see little true integration elsewhere. We do see it, but to this point it has been spotty and only appearing in places where teachers have developed a certain comfort level with technology on their own.

A quick look at the new teacher standards will cast a pretty bright light on several of the goals of our tech integration cohort. As teachers, we are expected to model digital-age work and learning, promote and model digital citizenship and responsibility, and engage in professional growth and leadership as it related to digital tools and practices. Think about our exploration as a cohort even at this early juncture. Think about the environment we have created to foster growth toward the goals mentioned above. Think about where you were personally in relation to these goals even as late as last May.

The remaining two goals relate to the design and development digital-age learning experiences and assessments, and facilitating and inspiring student learning and creativity. Those two goals are of course the linchpin of the teacher standards. These are the goals that connect the digital-age learning of professional teachers to the student standards. It will be relatively easy to assess our growth in standards three through five. I think we are making gains here already. Assessing our growth in the first two goals will be more of a challenge. However, I would argue that these are the two that matter most.

The error made by so many institutions in the quest for technology integration is a rush to focus on student learning goals. With rigid state and national standards in place, and NCLB requiring a certain level of technology integration, I can see why this tendency exists. Nonetheless, a jump in focus to student standards in technology integration, without a solid focus first focus on NETS-T #3 through #5, is a grave error in approach.

Start by looking at this graphic on the use of digital social media. Think about the age of our staff and run your finger down the graph though each type of usage. It is clear that folks our age are just not the folks with whom the digital world has evolved. Making some sort of a jump in asking for student integration of technology in their quest for content knowledge is putting the cart before the horse in a big way. Asking for student integration before allowing the adults within the building to develop personal digital learning habits and networks is just silly.

I think our approach is still on track. As a cohort, we immerse ourselves in emerging technologies, figure out how they work for us, how they can help us learn, network, etc. Then, as we make the shift toward student outcomes, we do so with an increased comfort level with new and innovative approaches. I'll say it again, the reason we have very little integration present in our classrooms now (besides kids text-messaging below the desk during a lecture) is that we have not fostered the professional growth and development of ourselves first. We are now doing this. In order for us to understand a constructivist approach, we must be able to immerse ourselves in something worth deep study, explore in deep and real ways, and figure out for ourselves how this is "going to look". If we cannot commit to exploring something new and uncomfortable without being show a clear procedural map, then how can we expect our students to engage in such a constructivist manner.

I am terribly excited about where we are headed as well as the gains I have seen in so many of us so far. We need to continue to pull together into the future as we have begun to as a community within a community. We need to be brave in the face of uncertainty. Look at the goals ISTE has set out for the future of both student and teachers. We have the destination. We have the tools in terms of both gadgets and a job-embedded development plan. We have solid committed professionals. Continue to have fun. Continue to work hard. Continue to immerse yourself in the emerging power of digital tools for learning. I think you will ultimately be quite impressed with yourself when you begin to make the switch from learning in the digital age to teaching in the digital age.

Next up: TPCK, or "technological pedagogical content knowledge". This is another framework that makes sense of how crucial technological knowledge is in the development of a teacher.