Pop coding .... can drag and drop be too easy

I read this interesting article by Idit Harel and it started me thinking, especially now that New Zealand has given the green light to the year 0-15 Digital Technologies curriculum.

I am a huge fan of 'Scratch' and all the other drag and drop coding apps there are out there - marketed well and connected to the current pop culture and interest of children. Yet I also recognise that Idit makes a valid point when she refers to "pop computing" the "light and fluffy version of computer science" as being "a superficial response to the increased need for coders in the workplace."

Idit draws a distinction between "coding tutorials" and "computer science" and notes a difference to "playing with coding apps" rather than "learning to design an app using code." As she points out "building an app takes time and requires multi-dimensional learning contexts, pathways and projects" .... and "it can't be done in an hour or two, with a few simple drags, drops and clicks."

The concern is understandable and real. Knowing how to use 'Scratch' or 'Tynker' is not knowing how to code ... it is a beginning .... and a very engaging beginning which has transformed the role and the popularity of coding but in itself it is not computer science. Too often I hear teachers express that their students ... "know how to use 'Scratch'".

Seymour Papert (Mindstorms, 1980) identified the need for programming languages (used in educational technology) to have a 'low threshold and high ceiling (LTHC)'. This refers to making programming languages easy to get started with but also flexible enough so students can create increasing complex projects as they progress. 'Scratch' also included the term (in addition to low floor and high ceiling) of having wide walls so that a wide range of projects can be created to include all learning styles and interests. 

There is no doubt that drag and drop is an essential tool in a teachers' computing 'tool-box' but not if the original intent from Papert of having a high (or no) ceiling is not embedded in teaching and learning programmes. It is important that, as teachers, we don't let ourselves, or our students, sit inside a comfort zone where they can make an app or game as a simple linear process that may only take one lesson.  Instead we need to push that ceiling as high as it can go, allowing our students to fail and learning from their failures, and including the whole process of prototyping, identifying and solving problems, collaboration and critical and creative thinking - regardless of whether drag and drop or text-based languages are being used. 

Don't Google the Answer ... Think First

I enjoyed this as it really challenged my reflex to pull out my phone and 'Googling' to find the answer about anything. I think Chris really has a point when he refers to our instant reflex to Google the answer when we want to know something. It is sort of like knowledge as fast food. A bit of a lazy way to get the answer quickly and correctly but it can be devoid of any process of any interest to make that happen. Usually we may not even try to think what the answer might be before we just refer to the ultimate volume of knowledge. And considering I am always promoting the importance of creativity and curiosity I feel like maybe I am behaving like a bit of a hypocrite. So next time I want to know something or figure out something I am going take up Chris's suggestion and do some thinking, however creative that might be, first. 

Factors that impact on teacher innovation

Even in 2015 educational leaders are still often frustrated as to why digital devices have not changed practice in many classrooms, and haven't led to a culture of innovation with many teachers. Yong Zhao, Kevin Pugh and Stephen Sheldon conducted a study (Conditions for Classroom Technology Innovation) to explore this issue by examining the practice of more than 100 teachers.

From this came 11 salient factors, that need to be considered to support technology innovation in the classroom. These eleven can be grouped under three main headings: 

1. The teacher or innovator; 
2. The innovation or the project and
3. The context. 

The teacher/innovator factors were the one that seemed to have the most impact on the adoption of technology innovations. With regard to the teacher/innovator factors there are three sub-factors:

1. Technological proficiency - this has to do with the confidence and capability of the teacher - it is understandable that the greater this is, the more likely technology will be used in innovative ways;
2. Pedagogical compatibility - this refers to the level at which the pedagogical beliefs of the teachers fit (or don't fit ) with the technology. Again it is understandable if the technology doesn't support how a teacher teaches it is not likely to be used and
3. Social awareness - the more aware a teacher is of the school culture the more likely they are to adopt technological innovations. As teacher have greater social awareness they are more able to access such things as support and positive feedback.

With regard to the innovation/project there are two overarching factors - distance and dependance.

1. Distance refers to the distance of the innovation from the school culture - the more the innovation deviates from existing school practice and culture the less likely it is to be adopted. There are three sub-factors to consider: distance from the school culture, distance from the existing practice present in the school and distance away from other technological resources.
2. Dependence refers to how much the use of the innovation relies on other people or other resources, especially ones that are out of the control of the teacher/innovator. It is understandable that the greater the dependence, the more likely use of an innovation will fall over as there are a greater number of variables that have to be achieved for use of the innovation to be successful. 

The third domain to have a strong effect is the context in which the innovation takes place - the actual school itself. Three factors were identified that are relevant: 

1. Human infrastructure, which includes the human support systems both technological support and other teachers who can help develop the innovation and help to provide timely professional development and ensure there are supportive policies;
2. Technological infrastructure which includes technological support, hardware and software as well as connectivity and 
3. Social support which refers to the degree to which other people in the school provide support (or otherwise) to the innovator. 

While the domain of the innovator/teacher is the strongest domain in predicting technology innovations the other factors should not be ignored - especially when looking at the scalability and sustainability of the innovation. 

So how can this information be used by leadership in schools to ensure there are people who are teacher/innovators and there is the necessary support required for these people to flourish. The first two factors with regard to the innovator/teacher domain can be impacted by well-considered professional learning and development. This professional learning and development should be less about using the technology (unless this is an area that is severely lacking) but should focus more on building capabilities across a range of technologies in ways that support future-focused pedagogy. 

Barriers in schools with regard to technology innovation need to be identified and minimised as much as possible. Technological support (including technicians) need to have the role of enabling teachers to act on innovations rather than putting more barriers in place. Give the power to the teachers not the technicians. Networks must function and access to technology must be seamless. Teachers have enough to contend with to ensure technological innovations are used in pedagogically effective ways. The hardware/software and network issues need to be so much in the background that teachers don't even have to be aware of them. 

Teacher/innovators need to be celebrated and supported both with regard to the social structures of the school and the technological structure. Celebrate a culture of (considered) risk taking. Students need teachers who are early adopters and at the leading edge of technological developments. Lastly, even though I personally am often frustrated with the slow rate of change, and my gut instinct is for more of a revolutionary approach where drastic changes are made, the evolutionally approach, taking small steps, in the constantly desired direction will be more effective in the long run - or as said by John West-Burnham,  "keep the herd moving west."

Participatory culture ..

Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture - Media Education for the 21st Century

Henry Jenkins describes a participatory culture as being one "with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing creations, and some type of informal mentorship whereby experienced participants pass along knowledge to novices. In a participatory culture, members also believe their contributions matter and feel some degree of social connection with one another (at the least, members care about others’ opinions of what they have created)."

Being able to participate successfully in this culture will have an influence on our students' lives. Many students are already part of this culture - and being able to navigate this culture successfully will impact on their success. So the question for educators is, how can we harness this, exploit it for the benefit of our students and ensure that there is equitable access to this for all students? Alongside this we need to explore how, in this environment we can ensure out students develop critical thinking so the don't just accept popular culture without critiquing it from a variety of perspectives. Helping students to develop an awareness of how media shapes the world they live in, empowers them to be less susceptible to the power of popular culture.

1. Ethics - understanding of ethical issues around the participatory culture is essential as they well might be making, creating and sharing forms of digital media without any background understanding of the ethical issues involved. 

While the ever increasing access to new technologies is great if we don't learn to use these tools in ways that work for us there is the potential for us to be overwhelmed - and the tools to rule rather than the way we want them to work for us. Social media is an example of this - strategies for use - need to help children develop these. We need to support young people  to develop the skills, knowledge, ethical frameworks and self-confidence needed to be full and responsible participants in contemporary culture, and in a range of digital environments that are often not well understood by adults. 

The days of teaching 'safe surfing' are well are truly gone. The issues for young people now are a lot more complex. The need to be guided to take an active role in developing the online participatory culture of which they are a part of, and using this in a positive way both to enhance their learning and their development as people. Children need to be guided in their development of critical thinking and ethical norms in a casual and organic environment which is free of many of the controls and ethical norms that are part of the non-digital world.

New digital literacies do not replace the traditional literacies of being able to read and write as students still need to be able to read and right before they can take their place as part of the participatory culture. It is not a matter of replacing old skills with new, but of supplementing them and enhancing them with the additional media literacies and critical thinking that will enable them to navigate the un-policed environment of the digital world.

In a participatory culture the new digital literacies are also social as they enable people to be able to negotiate the digital world and communicate and create effectively in this environment, identifying what is important and meaningful to them, from the vastness out there.

There is no doubt that the challenges are vast, and as teachers we are teaching for online environments that many of us are unfamiliar with. Yet, it is important we don't let our lack of understandings of these environments create a situation where we ignore the potential educational benefits for our students. 

Transmedia storytelling

When beginning reading "Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Cultures" by Henry Jenkins the term 'transmedia' sent me off on a journey of thinking. Does anyone else do that ... you start reading something and then, find something that catches your interest and before you know it you are miles away, on a journey you didn't intend to take, but one that has really captured your interest. And then, sometime, later you realise you haven't taken any of the journey that you intended to take? And, does that matter?

This new journey, exploring 'transmedia', got me really thinking about the role of literacy, the more familiar term multiliteracies and also National Standards of Reading and Writing - not much in the way of 'transmedia' there. (Transmedia and National Standards will be a later post.)

As transmedia (or transmedia storytelling/transmedia narrative) is a relatively new term there are a range of definitions but for the purpose of my thinking transmedia storytelling it is more than just retelling a story in lots of different ways, using different media such as traditional text, movies, games etc. Rather it is a lot more complex and uses different media to communicate unique parts of a story which are linked together and explored as part of a participatory culture. Many books are turned into movies and as such explore transmedia to some level - Disney is a perfect of example of this. They take a story, create a movie, songs, games and a multitude of other media. But, the journey for the consumer is still linear, the orientation is around product and there is are clear lines separating the creator and the consumer. And lets be honest - the purpose is not really to engage readers in stories but to create entertainment franchises.

Transmedia explores the idea that all our personal media network is connected, - Fb, Twitter, Blogs, Instagram, traditional television, books, posters, comics and even worlds such as Minecraft. Traditional storytelling tends to have a linear plot and the reader is a consumer. But what if the plot wasn't linear, and the reader participated, giving feedback to the characters and interacting with them via social media and this impacted on the storyline. The focus then becomes process orientated rather than product orientated and this in itself changes the whole nature of storytelling.

I have to admit that thinking about this new paradigm for storytelling is challenging. The control of the story moves from the writer or creator and the whole story becomes a lot more organic, immersive and participatory. Throughout time the latest technologies have changed the ways stories have been told. The oral tradition moved to the written tradition then came along the age of the movie, games and now, with the connected nature of the Internet being a conduit between a variety of media types, rather than a single entity on its own, how stories are constructed and develop allows us to totally reimagine the process of storytelling.

Storytelling itself though, still has core elements: a great plot, well developed characters, conflict, resolution, quality language, imagery etc. As an educator my challenge is to explore how I can involve students in transmedia approaches to the creation of stories, while still ensuring they get to further develop their understandings and experiences of storytelling core elements. My gut instinct is that these core elements will be able to be explored in a much deeper way through a transmedia approach, but the nuts and bolts of how this will happen still requires much thought on my part.

Schools as Organic Systems

I am just thinking about the importance of having an education system that is organic, adapting and changing to the needs to the students. Stimulated by this video - cheesy though it may be.

Reflecting back over the rapid technological change of the last 20 years it is worthwhile to explore the nature of schooling as a system, that is organic and changes (or not) according to the changes in the environment. There is no doubt that the technological changes that have happened in the last 20 years are massive. Yet, most futurists agree that the technological changes that will happen over the next 20 years, will make the previous 20 years seem tame in comparison. Digital fabrication and robotics alone will change the environment we live in. Artificial intelligence will help to merge the virtual and the real and data will become so big that the power will be in asking the right questions, rather than getting the answers. For children that are starting school now, at 5 years old, in 20 years time they will only be 25 - not far off having finished their formal education - if that still exists.

          

How can schools take an organic approach and adapt to the needs of the environment, rather than tend building walls and keeping out the outside changes (or at least the technology developments that have come with it). Remember, in the 'real world' those that don't adapt die ... or at least go out of business. 

Change is not easy at the best of times, and often there is the desire to cling onto what is familiar because of our fear of the unknown. Even when we know the familiar is not the best it is 'safe' and we may not want to venture out of that safety zone.

Yet schools are systems, and they should be complex and dynamic systems that live and change and respond to the environment. To survive they need to receive and act on input from the environment and change their output as required. We have reached the stage in education where there is a collision between traditional methods (supplemented with technology) and new demands. How do we enable learning for our students to meet the demands of the future while maintaining traditional structures - is this possible? Rather than continually trying to reform education, it might be time to transform education. To quote Einstein, "You cannot solve the problem with the same kind of thinking that has caused the problem."

So what does this look like in practice?

• Believe that schools are organic organisations that are capable of continual learning, change and improvement.
• Develop a culture of learning and adapting - all teachers and students must be learners and schools need to promote the conditions for learning.
• Ensure schooling is lead by a moral purpose - the values and purpose of education (preparing students for the future) doesn't change, it is the 'how' and 'what' of that that does change.
• Celebrate flexibility and new ways of thinking - because something has always been done that way is not a good reason to do anything (neither is it a reason in itself to change it!);
• Connect inside and outside the school - all systems contain sub-systems that function together to achieve a purpose and these need strong connections to work together effectively. Avoid the piecemeal approach.
• Systems also need to be connected with their environment (social, cultural, technological and physical) so they can adapt and change as necessary, to ensure their quality survival.
• Address the root core of the problem not the symptoms. Managing symptoms does not facilitate sustainable change for improvement.
• Explore the rigid schedules and structures and challenge them - are they still necessary and do they lead to improvement achievement and engagement for students?
• Avoid the discipline-by-discipline approach - explore transdisciplinary approaches rather than siloed curriculum areas.
• Think outside the box (explore moving beyond the boundaries of the existing system)