3 Reasons Scaling Up Open Educational Resources Should be the Next Step

Open Educational Resources (OER) have been with us for over 20 years. The world wide web revolution made them accessible to anyone with an internet connection. The move in schools to 1 to 1 devices is making it possible now to rely on OER to replace curriculum companies. I believe that this is the time to scale the use of OER and move our schools boldly forward. I believe that the movement has matured enough to move from the periphery to the center of the education process. Here I outline the three most important reasons to do so.

1.  It is democratic. Well vetted OER breaks the hold that publishers and some states (Texas, CA, NY) have had over the creation of materials. The use of OER allows districts, and potentially even teachers to exercise their professional judgment in curating the curriculum without having to create everything themselves. This will help build the professional capacity of educators to make decisions that fit the students and communities they are serving. The challenge here is tackling the potential for dealing with overabundance and the paradox of too much choice. To make this reality, a vetting process should be added to OER, so teachers have a sense of quality. Such curation is visible on sites such as OERCommons and ReadWriteThink.
2. It is flexible. OER can be updated and corrected in real time without lengthy editing processes. In effect, we can use a Wikipedia-like process with super-editors who help maintain the integrity of the process. The value of OER is, therefore,  based on the quality of the original and the willingness of users to keep the resource updated and commented on. The use of crowdsourcing to determine the quality and maintain the "freshness" and accuracy of the information can be invaluable.
3. It is (almost) free. Resources saved by not buying textbooks and teacher materials can be turned to making sure that schools have adequate technology infrastructure, adequate device distribution and most importantly- turn most of the savings into professional development that makes sure that teachers are well positioned to take advantage of the opportunity afforded by OER.

Now and Next in Ed

"Maison tournante aérienne" by Albert Robida

I spent some time at the Early Childhood Summit this week. It was an excellent opportunity to hear some innovative research. Quite a bit of the research presented was incremental, based on past assumptions and deeply linked to education as it used to be. In a sense, I find that the incremental advances in much of the work are too tied to 20th-century conceptions of education. The problem is, as Berliner noted that much of educational research is related to context and time. Once the context has shifted significantly, it becomes irrelevant.

This led me to think about the now and next in education. The NOW includes two changes:
The shift towards individualized or differentiated instruction. Technology is poised to make fully differentiated instruction possible since it decouples curriculum delivery from its dependence on the teachers thus freeing teachers to focus on guiding students and managing complex information systems needed to support students moving from different starting points. This process is far from over. In fact, I would say that we have only begun. There is, however, an emerging consensus that this is the right direction. This consensus allows teacher education, curriculum providers, and professional development efforts to focus on the task.
The second shift is towards Open Educational Resources (OER). I have spent the better part of the last decade trying to promote these practices from the bottom up. Now with federal support and some states buying in it feels like this tide has turned as well. We can produce quality curricular materials that will be accessible to any teacher and student making the proposition of differentiation affordable for any school. The shift in costs can help education agencies focus on the development of teachers and their ability to deliver differentiated instruction.

The NEXT is linked to assessment. Our current assessment systems are slaves to pre-information-age technologies. In the past snapshot in time assessment technology was the only one available. We simply did not have the technology to capture student performance in-vivo. We had to resort to a weekly spelling test and annual achievement tests. We have perfected these snapshots and now use technology to better and more efficiently capture them. In essence, we are still captive to this thinking- there has to be an assessment event that counts, that we prepare for and then celebrate. Technology and big data have opened the door on a completely different assessment technology. One that captures everything our students do and can measure it in real time. The need for snapshots has passed. If my students writing is captured electronically, then every teacher can get a report of their students spelling without a need for a special event. Instead, they can know how their students are spelling when they are writing authentic texts. Real performance for the real world.

I know that charting potential does not guarantee it will happen. I just hope that researchers and funders and eventually schools can move beyond the practices of the past to recognize the shifts in technology go beyond a more efficient snapshot to describing authentic performance across academic tasks.

Apple's Folly (in Education)

The news from LAUSD (see here) who is suing Apple and Pearson has made the news and is probably hurting the chances of a large district buying iPads in the near future. Apple is an iconic company and I believe that it has exceptional products that work very well in k-12  and higher ed environments. You can see my reasoning in this short YouTube.

HOWEVER

The fail in LAUSD has to do with two major problems. The first is not directly up to Apple, but instead to the partner Pearson education who offered up a not fully developed product to a large district. The second was the lack of preparation of teachers to meaningfully use iPads in the classrooms. These are common problems that are seen in a lot of tech integration including districts I work with. Adding to LAUSD and other district woes are restrictions on student and teacher uses through management software that prevents students and teachers downloading or accessing certain features. Notice that most of these problems are not directly linked to the Apple product but rather to the way it was rolled out.

It's easy to give advice, but given the PR that Apple gets from failed implementation (definitely at the scale of LAUSD), I have radical suggestions about how Apple may prevent implementation nightmares. I suggest that Apple can use its position to insist on having certain pieces part of any sales contract and be brave enough to walk away from contracts that do not include them. I believe that such an approach actually fits with the way Apple image has been projected- no compromises, we know what is good for you and will insist on it!

Remember this ad?

I believe that the same approach is needed here. Walk away if implementation is doomed (yes I know easy for me to say).

Here are the three elements that I think Apple should insist on when selling in Education:

1. Insist on a reasonable professional development for teachers that goes beyond a single event. Part of the contract needs to be a reasonable plan for supporting teachers for at least one year. This can be part of Apple services (they do it extremely well in some places) or internal to a district or school, but insisting on a funded well designed PD is a must for successful integration (and good press, and renewed contracts). We all know what it should look like (if you don't watch out for our next publication).

2. Insist on minimal or NO management software. The management software has repeatedly failed, updated and still falls short of the quick agile response that people expect from personal mobile devices. I will argue that it will never work because our expectation from mobile devices is inherently different from other devices. Students and teachers are perfectly capable of managing devices like iPads. Insist on the personal freedom to make decisions and learning to be a good digital citizens without external control (rewatch the video). I cannot express how many frustrated teachers I meet during PD that describe in exasperated tones how long it takes to use a new app that we just talked about and will take 3-4 weeks to get to them (if not more). For example an description from a teacher I worked with:

"As easy as it may sound when someone says “oh, that’s easy, there’s an app for that”, when working with public school property, it was definitely not easy to just download the apps I wanted.  After several frustrating, failed attempts at trying to download from the app store, I found out that despite having an apple ID to purchase, download, etc., from the app store, that does not carry over to School owned devices.  There was a protocol for getting an app put on a device that was owned by the district.  Unbeknownst to me there were several steps I needed to follow in order to get a single app downloaded to just one device, and there were three.  I could not simply ‘get an app’ downloaded within minutes like a personal device.  Nor could I just delete one that I didn’t like.  One of the biggest barriers so far was not being able to put the apps on the devices when I needed them. "
 

If you want teachers to use devices and give the product a good name (and repurchases) insisting on full access (even if just to free apps) would be priceless. The note to districts is always the same. If we trust teachers with the lives of 20 priceless six-year olds I think we can trust them with devices. 

3. Make a push for OER (Open Educational Resources). The device gets much cheaper when it is coupled with an excellent free curriculum. OER is on the rise and may very well be a major part of the new No Child Left Behind Act. The move to OER can also pay for the aforementioned professional development. This last bit is not a must in my mind but a strong suggestion that will help use of the great aspects of the device such as iBooks, iTunesU etc.

I love Apple products and think they have great promise in the classroom. That would be my roadmap.

The NEA Foundation and Talking Ginger- Moving National Meetings to the 21st Century

My son, now seven, had a wonderful time with the Talking Ginger app last year. The app allows him to talk at Ginger the cat and Ginger repeats his phrase with a distorted high pitched voice. It also creates short movies based on actions and phrases created by the user. A few weeks ago I took a look at my YouTube channel and was surprised to find that he had uploaded about 50 videos he created to YouTube. To my chagrin his videos had more hits than mine, but I digress.

Last week I spent two days with the NEA Foundation in DC. The convening had exceptional organization, great speakers and quality content. It was also decidedly a 20th century affair. We had paper books, paper feedback sheets, paper poster boards, our tasks and responses and reports were also text and paper heavy.

There we sat creatures of the 20th century discussing 21st century education innovation in 20th century ways. Nobody created a movie a prezi or a piece of art, music or a storybird. We discussed globalization without global connections and just one global speaker. We discussed curriculum without open source ideas. We discussed ways we use technology on paper and reported orally- not a single image, collaborative product (say mural.ly) or a link was shared. Groups that complained about culturally insensitive curriculum didn't share any alternative- none have realized that with the advent of the Internet and online mostly free resources there was no reason to keep sticking with curriculum companies. The 21st century gave us ways to stop complaining and start acting.

Do not misunderstand ,we all had devices, iPads, iPhones and other smart devices. It was clear that as individuals we have entered the 21st century. But as a group we collectively act in 20th century ways. As a group we are not digital immigrants- we are still on the boat dreaming of the old country pretending we are still there. How can we lead change for students that have already uploaded 50 youtube videos of Talking Ginger?

Five suggestions for a meeting:
1. Have each grantee create a short 2-3 minute video describing what they do. Suggest some styles but let creativity reign. It could be a narrated prezi or ppt or a flash documentary
2. Have a Twitter back channel and share it on a video crawl
3. Have group products created digitally
4. Make the digital curriculum choices especially Open Educational Resources (OER) a major point of discussion
5. When discussing globalization connect globally in real time into group discussions
plus a simple one:
6. All materials should be available in apps/ live websites and paper should be shared only with those who request it (greener too!)

I could go on for quite a while...