March 28, 2007

How Low Can You Go?

When Chubby Checker sang "How low can you go?" in his 1962 hit record, "The Limbo Rock," he was talking about dancing, but it's just as appropriate to ask that question in relation to technology. Most teachers encounter technology in their courses by way of what is often called "technology integration." This can mean that technology is used in various mainstream subjects such as English or Social Studies or that it exists as a standalone subject with the goal being to teach students to apply technology to their other classes.

As software gets more powerful and computers get cheaper and more widespread, the temptation is to use the "highest" technology available. This often means using business-oriented software in the classroom. Microsoft Office is the prime, but not the only, example. The theory seems to be that the goal of technology instruction is first and foremost to "prepare our students for the workplace." I hear this from parents, technology teachers, and of course from software vendors. Since many businesses use Office, the theory goes, we need to teach today's students to use Office, otherwise they won't get good jobs. The proof of the fallacy in this argument is that none of today's office workers used MS Word when they were in sixth grade. It didn't exist back then, at least not in it's current incarnation. Similarly, there is no justification for teaching students to use business presentation software such as PowerPoint so they can use it later in their careers. There may be some good educational applications of PowerPoint, but getting them ready to work isn't one of them.

So what is the reason to teach technology in a secondary school, and what is the best software with which to do it? Those are two of the key questions of technology education. I believe that the answer to the first one is that we should teach technology so that students can become more effective at learning. Technology should enable their ability to think, analyze, express, organize, research, understand, and create. Any time spent learning to use the technology is actually at the expense of these skills. There are only forty-five minutes in a class period, after all. If the technology takes too much time, it's in the way.

This runs counter to what many technology teachers think and practice, however. The computer geek in us wants to be able to own and operate the Ferrari of technology--the fastest, most powerful tools available. Most often, however, a Ford Fiesta more than does the trick. Unfortunately, that may not seem like good job security to the technology teachers among us, so we build our curricula around learning advanced programs even though they have little practical benefit in the classroom. Simple software is less intimidating, has a shallower learning curve, and is easier to master.

The second question--What is the best software with which to teach technology?--is a little easier to answer. Although there is no specific list that will satisfy everyone, I believe the guideline should be "err on the side of simplicity." Lets go back to word processing for an example. Students should use a word processor when it facilitates their writing. Sometimes the best means of expressing an idea is a paper and pencil; if so, put the laptop away. Too often I've seen students working at the computer trying to complete a writing assignment. They type the title page; choose the font, then the color. They use the advanced features of Word to twist the title so it's more "attractive." They change the color of the title to a different shade. Twist the text in another direction. Elapsed time--ten minutes, maybe fifteen if they get into more of the "advanced" features. As teachers we should be asking ourselves and our students what this actually has to do with the writing assignment. The answer, of course, is probably, "very little." Yet it's easy to fool ourselves into believing that their technology here is really worthwhile.

MS Word is so powerful and has so many features that students can be overwhelmed with the possibilities, or they just practice "work avoidance" by trying out one option after another. Google Docs (or any other simple word processor that you may prefer) does all of the necessary functions that you need from a word processor. Plus, there are fewer choices, the learning curve is not as steep, and there are fewer opportunities for distractions. Will this guarantee better writing? No, of course not. But it will facilitate better writing. It's up to the teacher to take it from there.

Here's another example. PowerPoint is the most widely used presentation software in the world, yet it has many more features than necessary and generally teaches bad presentation habits to boot. Err on the side of simplicity and choose something better. Consider large sheets of paper and some markers (I'm not kidding.) Or just have the students write on the board. That may be too low tech for some of us to stoop, but give it a try before you laugh at the idea. If the presentation requires an electronic medium, try a simple word processing document with a large font. Microsoft has an excellent program called Photo Story 3 that you can download for free at the Microsoft website here. It's not identical in function to PowerPoint, but it is much more intuitive to use, and students can be more creative because they aren't locked into the five-by-seven-inch-bulleted-slide format that PowerPoint users create ad nauseam.

There are many more examples I might give, but the point is this: Once you've decided that technology will assist your students in a particular lesson, try to pick the simplest, easiest-to-use application. Rarely will you find that it is too underpowered for your needs. If it is, you can always advance to the next higher level. Remember that the point of technology integration isn't to teach technology as an end in itself; it's to teach students to use technology as a means to an end. And when you're looking to use technology, remember the words of Chubby Checker in "Limbo Rock." Ask yourself "How low can you go?"

Next: My Favorite Things

March 14, 2007

Trust, But Verify

There were very few statements that Ronald Reagan made during his presidency with which I agreed. One of them was "Trust, but verify." Reagan famously used it when referring to negotiations with the Soviet Union, but it's appropriate in reference to validating information on the web as well. The knee-jerk reaction of my students (and most of the rest of us) when researching a subject is to go to Google or Yahoo and perform a search. We search, read, and believe.

The problem is that, just because something is on the web, doesn't make it true. So, how do we teach our students to trust, but verify? And what, exactly, does it mean to "verify"? Not only is the web full of truths and lies, but it also has a full range of opinions on just about any subject you can imagine. Is a moon-landing denial website merely one person's opinion, or an outright refutation of an accepted fact? That's the first problem; the viewpoint of the writer isn't necessarily the same as the reader. We need to teach students to be able to differentiate.

One difficulty with search engines such as Google and Yahoo is that they overwhelm you with information. Search "iPod" on Google, and you'll get more than 230 million hits. A lifetime of verification wouldn't be long enough to check out the veracity of that many websites. Unfortunately, search engines don't have a "truthiness" algorithm to help you decide which ones are valid, and the ranking doesn't necessarily put the accurate websites at the top of the list. That's the second problem that students face--too much information without an automated method of sorting it out.

Some websites present a different problem. They give the appearance of truth with no guarantee of certainty. The most frequently noted culprit is the online encyclopedia that everyone either loves or hates--Wikipedia. Unlike traditional encyclopedias such as the Encyclopaedia Britannica whose writers and editors are experts in their fields, anyone can contribute to or edit an article on Wikipedia. If you read something on Wikipedia that you believe is not correct, you can go in and edit it. Despite the obvious potential for abuse, Wikipedia works quite well. And it is an incredible resource for current information and trivia that never makes it to the more mainstream sources.

Want a history of Pokéman? Don't bother with the Britannica; you won't find it there. However, you can find everything you've ever wanted to know and more here on Wikipedia . If you're a Pokéman expert, feel free to add whatever else you know. Wikipedians seem devoted to keeping articles current. For example, within twelve hours of the rock group Van Halen's induction into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame on March 12, the Wikipedia article had been updated with the details. Printed material such as a traditional encyclopedia is disadvantaged by a much longer publishing cycle.

Critics of Wikipedia claim that, since anyone can edit an article (even your sixth grade students), then all articles are suspect. That's true in theory, but a recent study by the scientific journal Nature, comparing scientific articles in Wikipedia and the Britannica, found that each had about the same number of errors. There are high-profile exceptions, but generally, the self-correcting nature of Wikipedia's open-access approach seems to work.

The problem with using Wikipedia is not that it contains some inaccuracies--all newspapers publish corrections to their previous day's articles yet we keep reading them every day. The problem is in relying on Wikipedia, or any source, as the only source. This is another hard truth that we need to teach our students. We need to help them to become critical researchers and critical thinkers. Too often students submit research papers with only Wikipedia sources. The Boston Globe recently reported that the history department at Middlebury College has banned students from using Wikipedia as a source. Middlebury professor Neil Waters says, "Wikipedia is an ideal place to start research but an unacceptable way to end it." This should be true for everyone from college on down. Interestingly, some colleges assign students to write or edit articles for Wikipedia. Obviously then, there's a commitment by those institutions to using Wikipedia and making it better.

So how do we teach students to evaluate the accuracy of information on the web? My school's librarian and I recently did a project on library research with my grade six technology class. First, she presented information on evaluating websites using some of the excellent materials from CyberSmart! After a discussion in which she talked the class through the characteristics of reliable and unreliable websites, we had the students evaluate a site using a Site Evaluation Form. Not only did this help lead the students through a step-by-step evaluation procedure, it set the stage for a discussion on the difficulties of evaluating sites. After some analysis we concluded that there are telltale signs of an obviously unreliable site.

The difficulty is that even the most reliable sites don't always have the characteristics that one would expect. For example, although a sign of an untrustworthy site is a lack of an author, many reliable sites don't list an author either. In any case just having a name doesn't guarantee that there is a real person behind it. Again, the conclusion that you shouldn't rely on one site for your information became apparent. There's strength, and truth, in numbers.

After using the Site Evaluation Form we moved on to the second part of the lesson in which students evaluated one of several sites from a list that we gave them. These were all sites that had none of the obvious signs of unreliability. They were all bogus, but we didn't tell that to the students. They all meet most or all of the criteria of a valid site. Here's the list.

Albert Einstein -- A Biography for Kids
Solar System Information: MARS
Dog Island
Mankato, MN Home Page
Whale watching in Kenosha
California's Velcro Crop Under Challenge
Save The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus
Republic of Molossia - Official Website
POP! The First Human Male Pregnancy - Mr. Lee Mingwei


Each student had to review at least one site and write a commentary in his blog discussing the validity of the information. The essential question was, "How does one determine the reliability of a website?" Without prior knowledge, it isn't easy. Even a resident of Minnesota may not know that Mankota is a fictional town. The idea was to lead the students to the conclusion that the best practice is to verify information by cross-checking with other sources. These could be other websites, printed material, human beings, and common sense. Although none of these four categories is one-hundred percent reliable, in combination they are a useful means of verifying information. In the end, the lesson to the students was that determining veracity is as much an art as a science. It takes practice, but it's something that is a necessary skill of a good researcher. So, "trust, but verify" is as important in website evaluation as it is in Soviet negotiations.

Not one to give Reagan any more credit than he deserved, I verified that he was not the first to use the "trust, but verify" line. That honor goes to the American writer, Damon Runyon. I found it here in Wikipedia.


Next: How Low Can You Go?

March 07, 2007

Worth More Than a Thousand Words

"Why do we take photographs?" That's the question I pose to my seventh graders at the beginning of the semester-long technology course I teach. After some discussion we arrive at the answer: "To express ourselves." Of course, that's also the reason we write. Photography and writing may seem like two disparate activities that don't mix well in the classroom, but I've found that in combination, they create a powerful synergy. After our discussion, the students begin to see a natural connection between the two activities too.

Many of my students are not native English speakers. I've found that through photography they can express themselves more easily and more comfortably than in a writing assignment alone. With a photograph, they can convey an idea without words getting in the way, and when writing about a photograph that they have taken, they have an anchor with which to express their thoughts and ideas.

The trick with photography, as with all technology in the classroom, is to keep it as simple as possible so that the students don't get bogged down in the technological details on the way to your objective. I do this by using simple digital cameras and simple software. If you have Adobe Photoshop or Photoshop Elements on your computers, leave them alone. Instead, download Google's Picasa if you're using Windows or use Apple's iPhoto if you're on a Mac. These two programs have more than enough power to allow students to edit their photos quickly and accurately. My school has a set of three-megapixel cameras (enough for each student to use one). These have sufficient resolution for what we're doing and just enough options and controls so that the students don't waste time fumbling around with superfluous controls. If you have fewer cameras, the students can work in teams of two or three.

There's no one right way of using text and photography in the classroom so feel free to improvise on these ideas. The key is having projects that combine the expressive nature of photography with that of writing. Wendy Ewald's excellent book, I Wanna Take Me a Picture, Teaching Photography and Writing to Children, is a great resource. Here are three projects with which I've had success in the seventh grade.

  1. The Best Part of Me. Have the students decide on one part of themselves that they think is their "best part." They photograph it and write some text (a poem or several paragraphs) that goes with the photograph. The text should be more than just "I like my eyes because...." It should complement the photograph and go beyond a mere description of it.
  2. Emotions. Students choose one emotion and then make a photograph expressing that emotion. They also write a poem or several paragraphs that refers to or describes the emotion.
  3. Dreams. Students represent, in one photograph, a dream they've had. They write some accompanying text that supports the photograph.

In each case, students place the text on the same page as the photograph itself. They write it by hand, print it on a separate piece of paper and glue it on, or print the text from a word processing document. This last option can be a bit trickier because it usually requires printing twice--once with the photo and then again with the text. Lining up the text and photo takes a few trials. Usually we make the photographs 5x7 inches, so there is plenty of room for text on an 8.5x11 inch page. You'll also get good quality prints at this size even if you're using lower-resolution cameras.

The specific details of each project aren't important nor is the grade level of the students. I've done some of these projects with third graders using one-megapixel floppy disk cameras and a laser printer in a ninety minute session. I've been equally successful with high school students using better cameras, a high-quality ink-jet printer, and several hours of class time. Although quality is important, the main focus (no pun intended) should be what my seventh graders identified at the outset as the most important aspect of photography--self-expression.

The natural inclination of students is to grab the cameras and go. Instead, I require them to do some initial investigation. For example, on the emotions project we discuss the definition of "emotion"--what is and what isn't an emotion. We create a list of emotions. Then they research the dictionary definition and create their own definition of the word and choose the emotion that they are going to photograph. I have them write all of this in a blog. We then discuss the design of the photograph. What are the technical issues? Who will be the subject of their photograph? We consider lighting, composition, other aspects of photography as well. I make them previsualize their image by making a rough sketch. They write about this in their blog too.

Now it's time to begin photographing. If the students really have put some thought into the previsualization of their photos, they generally come back with some good results within 30-45 minutes. They download the photos and begin editing on the computer. They also write about the creation of their photos in their blogs. Part of the create step is writing the text that will appear on the photo itself. I have them write drafts and show them to each other and to me for comment and correction. They also make test prints of their two or three best photos. We discuss these, and they choose one "finalist."

After they have completed the editing of the photograph and their text, we make the final prints, and place the text either by writing, cutting and pasting, or printing directly on the photographs. Then I have the students sign their work. The final step is a self-evaluation of the entire project. How did it go at each of the steps? What could have gone better? What would they do differently next time? They describe this in their blog as well.

Those teachers familiar with the International Baccalaureate's Middle Years Program will recognize this as the design cycle that is at the core of the technology subject area. However, you need not limit it to a technology course. The idea of a project methodology fits well in any discipline. I find it helps the students by providing them with a structure that keeps everyone focused and on track. The writing assignments, whether in the blog or for the photograph itself, are short enough that they don't overwhelm even ESL students.

Our last activity of the project is to sit around a table and briefly discuss the students' photographs. I usually start by asking each of them to discuss his own work. We then move around the table and keep the comments constructive; everyone learns a lot from this activity. It also reinforces the concept that each student can improve by helping and learning from the others. This last "exhibit" provides a good closure on the project.

There are many variations on the theme I've presented here. Try one, experiment with it, and adapt it in a manner that works for you and your students. Their ability to express themselves will surprise you and them.

Next: Trust, But Verify