Bullying the Bully

Alfie Kohn in what I consider to be an obvious observation goes to some length here to make the singular point that punishing the bully is nothing more than bullying the bully and that to do so has the following results: "the child (1) becomes angry and frustrated, (2) learns that you get your way in life by using your power over those who are weaker, and (3) becomes more focused on self-interest and less likely to consider how his actions affect others." The blog references a number of supporting studies but falls short of offering meaningful alternatives options unless they are somehow coded in the final paragraph.

This shift in perspective should prompt us to transform schools from “doing to” to “working with” places, to see kids’ troubling actions not as infractions to be punished (where someone must be made to suffer) but as problems to be solved — and opportunities for teaching. If we need a simple reason to support these shifts, maybe it’s sufficient that we want to make sure our actions never resemble those of a bully.

Windows 10-Open File Explorer to This PC

It was initially frustrating to discover that clicking on the File Explorer icon (Start Button) in Windows 10 sent me to the 'Quick Access' view. Trying to be helpful, annoyingly, through 'Quick Access' Microsoft is suggesting folders and files you have lately or frequently used, assuming you wish to access them again. As with Cortana and Edge, I don't need and certainly don't want Microsoft trying to anticipate or influence my needs and wants. If you feel the same way, you can readily change where File Explorer initially sends you. I prefer that File Explorer open to 'This PC'. ('This PC' is what Microsoft used to call 'My Computer' and later, just 'Computer'. Should you desire to change 'This PC' back to 'My Computer', here are the instructions.) This blog will detail the instructions for opening File Explorer to 'This PC'.

• Click the Start Button.


•  Click the File Explorer icon.


• On the view that opens, click View on the menu.


• Click Options (far right of View menu).


• One drop down choice will appear: Change folder and search options.


• Click on Change folder and search options.


• The following Folder Options window will open:


• 


• Click the down arrow to the right of Open File Explorer to:.


• Select This PC.


• Click Apply and OK to close the window.


• Close File Explorer and reopen to This PC.


• Your screen should look something like this:

History tells us what will happen next with Brexit & Trump

Reposted from https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.7323niidu

Firstly, I am a conservative, or rather, I am conservative and usually vote the Republican line. This election is different. While I do agree with some of what Trump has said, I have reservations about the person who will attempt to carry them out. I just can't help thinking about how Hitler rose to power. Not that in any way do I believe Trump to be even remotely capable of causing any like the horrific acts of the Nazis. I only fear that his presidency could move us even further away from being a constitutional republic with three equal branches than Obama has taken us.

Stone brillantly reviews current global trends through an historical lenses and give us some reason to pause and reflect. I am disappointed in his taking such a strongly biased perspective and I take umbrage to his assertion that intellectuals know better than the rest of us. My experience is that they (experts and intellectuals) may have more knowledge and education but for the most part are seldom "smarter" when it comes to judging beyond their field of expertise.

An interesting side note is the inclusion of the Timeline of Wars. When I tire of peace movements and peaceniks,  I have frequently said that there is no time in recorded history when there wasn't a war or at least group versus group murderous conflicts. Peace is not the norm yet we will continute to hope and pray.

It seems we’re entering another of those stupid seasons humans impose on themselves at fairly regular intervals.

My background is archaeology, so also history and anthropology. It leads me to look at big historical patterns. My theory is that most peoples’ perspective of history is limited to the experience communicated by their parents and grandparents, so 50–100 years. To go beyond that you have to read, study, and learn to untangle the propaganda that is inevitable in all telling of history. In a nutshell, at university I would fail a paper if I didn’t compare at least two, if not three opposing views on a topic. Taking one telling of events as gospel doesn’t wash in the comparative analytical method of research that forms the core of British academia. (I can’t speak for other systems, but they’re definitely not all alike in this way).

So zooming out, we humans have a habit of going into phases of mass destruction, generally self imposed to some extent or another. This handy list shows all the wars over time. Wars are actually the norm for humans, but every now and then something big comes along. I am interested in the Black Death, which devastated Europe. The opening of Boccaccio’s Decameron describes Florence in the grips of the Plague. It is as beyond imagination as the Somme, Hiroshima, or the Holocaust. I mean, you quite literally can’t put yourself there and imagine what it was like. For those in the midst of the Plague it must have felt like the end of the world.

But a defining feature of humans is their resilience. To us now it seems obvious that we survived the Plague, but to people at the time it must have seemed incredible that their society continued afterwards. Indeed, many takes on the effects of the Black Death are that it had a positive impact in the long term. Well summed up here: “By targeting frail people of all ages, and killing them by the hundreds of thousands within an extremely short period of time, the Black Death might have represented a strong force of natural selection and removed the weakest individuals on a very broad scale within Europe,“ …In addition, the Black Death significantly changed the social structure of some European regions. Tragic depopulation created the shortage of working people. This shortage caused wages to rise. Products prices fell too. Consequently, standards of living increased. For instance, people started to consume more food of higher quality.”

But for the people living through it, as with the World Wars, Soviet Famines, Holocaust, it must have felt inconceivable that humans could rise up from it. The collapse of the Roman Empire, Black Death, Spanish Inquisition, Thirty Years War, War of the Roses, English Civil War… it’s a long list. Events of massive destruction from which humanity recovered and move on, often in better shape.

At a local level in time people think things are fine, then things rapidly spiral out of control until they become unstoppable, and we wreak massive destruction on ourselves. For the people living in the midst of this it is hard to see happening and hard to understand. To historians later it all makes sense and we see clearly how one thing led to another. During theCentenary of the Battle of the Somme I was struck that it was a direct outcome of the assassination of an Austrian Arch Duke in Bosnia. I very much doubt anyone at the time thought the killing of a minor European royal would lead to the death of 17 million people.

My point is that this is a cycle. It happens again and again, but as most people only have a 50–100 year historical perspective they don’t see that it’s happening again. As the events that led to the First World War unfolded, there were a few brilliant minds who started to warn that something big was wrong, that the web of treaties across Europe could lead to a war, but they were dismissed as hysterical, mad, or fools, as is always the way, and as people who worry about Putin, Brexit, and Trump are dismissed now.

Then after the War to end all Wars, we went and had another one. Again, for a historian it was quite predictable. Lead people to feel they have lost control of their country and destiny, people look for scapegoats, a charismatic leader captures the popular mood, and singles out that scapegoat. He talks in rhetoric that has no detail, and drums up anger and hatred. Soon the masses start to move as one, without any logic driving their actions, and the whole becomes unstoppable.

That was Hitler, but it was also Mussolini, Stalin, Putin, Mugabe, and so many more. Mugabe is a very good case in point. He whipped up national anger and hatred towards the land owning white minority (who happened to know how to run farms), and seized their land to redistribute to the people, in a great populist move which in the end unravelled the economy and farming industry and left the people in possession of land, but starving. See also the famines created by the Soviet Union, and the one caused by the Chinese Communists last century in which 20–40 million people died. It seems inconceivable that people could create a situation in which tens of millions of people die without reason, but we do it again and again.

But at the time people don’t realise they’re embarking on a route that will lead to a destruction period. They think they’re right, they’re cheered on by jeering angry mobs, their critics are mocked. This cycle, the one we saw for example from the Treaty of Versaille, to the rise of Hitler, to the Second World War, appears to be happening again. But as with before, most people cannot see it because:

1. They are only looking at the present, not the past or future

2. They are only looking immediately around them, not at how events connect globally

3. Most people don’t read, think, challenge, or hear opposing views

Trump is doing this in America. Those of us with some oversight from history can see it happening. Read this brilliant, long essay in the New York magazine to understand how Plato described all this, and it is happening just as he predicted. Trump says he will Make America Great Again, when in fact America is currently great, according to pretty well any statistics. He is using passion, anger, and rhetoric in the same way all his predecessors did — a charismatic narcissist who feeds on the crowd to become ever stronger, creating a cult around himself. You can blame society, politicians, the media, for America getting to the point that it’s ready for Trump, but the bigger historical picture is that history generally plays out the same way each time someone like him becomes the boss.

On a wider stage, zoom out some more, Russia is a dictatorship with a charismatic leader using fear and passion to establish a cult around himself. Turkey is now there too. Hungary, Poland, Slovakia are heading that way, and across Europe more Trumps and Putins are waiting in the wings, in fact funded by Putin, waiting for the popular tide to turn their way.

We should be asking ourselves what our Archduke Ferdinand moment will be. How will an apparently small event trigger another period of massive destruction. We see Brexit, Trump, Putin in isolation. The world does not work that way — all things are connected and affecting each other. I have pro-Brexit friends who say ‘oh, you’re going to blame that on Brexit too??’ But they don’t realise that actually, yes, historians will trace neat lines from apparently unrelated events back to major political and social shifts like Brexit.

Brexit — a group of angry people winning a fight — easily inspires other groups of angry people to start a similar fight, empowered with the idea that they may win. That alone can trigger chain reactions. A nuclear explosion is not caused by one atom splitting, but by the impact of the first atom that splits causing multiple other atoms near it to split, and they in turn causing multiple atoms to split. The exponential increase in atoms splitting, and their combined energy is the bomb. That is how World War One started and, ironically how World War Two ended.

An example of how Brexit could lead to a nuclear war could be this:

Brexit in the UK causes Italy or France to have a similar referendum. Le Pen wins an election in France. Europe now has a fractured EU. The EU, for all its many awful faults, has prevented a war in Europe for longer than ever before. The EU is also a major force in suppressing Putin’s military ambitions. European sanctions on Russia really hit the economy, and helped temper Russia’s attacks on Ukraine (there is a reason bad guys always want a weaker European Union). Trump wins in the US. Trump becomes isolationist, which weakens NATO. He has already said he would not automatically honour NATO commitments in the face of a Russian attack on the Baltics.

With a fractured EU, and weakened NATO, Putin, facing an ongoing economic and social crisis in Russia, needs another foreign distraction around which to rally his people. He funds far right anti-EU activists in Latvia, who then create a reason for an uprising of the Russian Latvians in the East of the country (the EU border with Russia). Russia sends ‘peace keeping forces’ and ‘aid lorries’ into Latvia, as it did in Georgia, and in Ukraine. He cedes Eastern Latvia as he did Eastern Ukraine (Crimea has the same population as Latvia, by the way).

A divided Europe, with the leaders of France, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and others now pro-Russia, anti-EU, and funded by Putin, overrule calls for sanctions or a military response. NATO is slow to respond: Trump does not want America to be involved, and a large part of Europe is indifferent or blocking any action. Russia, seeing no real resistance to their actions, move further into Latvia, and then into Eastern Estonia and Lithuania. The Baltic States declare war on Russia and start to retaliate, as they have now been invaded so have no choice. Half of Europe sides with them, a few countries remain neutral, and a few side with Russia. Where does Turkey stand on this? How does ISIS respond to a new war in Europe? Who uses a nuclear weapon first?

This is just one Arch Duke Ferdinand scenario. The number of possible scenarios are infinite due to the massive complexity of the many moving parts. And of course many of them lead to nothing happening. But based on history we are due another period of destruction, and based on history all the indicators are that we are entering one.

It will come in ways we can’t see coming, and will spin out of control so fast people won’t be able to stop it. Historians will look back and make sense of it all and wonder how we could all have been so naïve. How could I sit in a nice café in London, writing this, without wanting to run away. How could people read it and make sarcastic and dismissive comments about how pro-Remain people should stop whining, and how we shouldn’t blame everything on Brexit. Others will read this and sneer at me for saying America is in great shape, that Trump is a possible future Hitler (and yes,Godwin’s Law. But my comparison is to another narcissistic, charismatic leader fanning flames of hatred until things spiral out of control). It’s easy to jump to conclusions that oppose pessimistic predictions based on the weight of history and learning. Trump won against the other Republicans in debates by countering their claims by calling them names and dismissing them. It’s an easy route but the wrong one.

Ignoring and mocking the experts , as people are doing around Brexit and Trump’s campaign, is no different to ignoring a doctor who tells you to stop smoking, and then finding later you’ve developed incurable cancer. A little thing leads to an unstoppable destruction that could have been prevented if you’d listened and thought a bit. But people smoke, and people die from it. That is the way of the human.

So I feel it’s all inevitable. I don’t know what it will be, but we are entering a bad phase. It will be unpleasant for those living through it, maybe even will unravel into being hellish and beyond imagination. Humans will come out the other side, recover, and move on. The human race will be fine, changed, maybe better. But for those at the sharp end — for the thousands of Turkish teachers who just got fired, for the Turkish journalists and lawyers in prison, for the Russian dissidents in gulags, for people lying wounded in French hospitals after terrorist attacks, for those yet to fall, this will be their Somme.

What can we do? Well, again, looking back, probably not much. The liberal intellectuals are always in the minority. See Clay Shirky’s Twitter Storm on this point. The people who see that open societies, being nice to other people, not being racist, not fighting wars, is a better way to live, they generally end up losing these fights. They don’t fight dirty. They are terrible at appealing to the populace. They are less violent, so end up in prisons, camps, and graves. We need to beware not to become divided (see: Labour party), we need to avoid getting lost in arguing through facts and logic, and counter the populist messages of passion and anger with our own similar messages. We need to understand and use social media. We need to harness a different fear. Fear of another World War nearly stopped World War 2, but didn’t. We need to avoid our own echo chambers. Trump and Putin supporters don’t read the Guardian, so writing there is just reassuring our friends. We need to find a way to bridge from our closed groups to other closed groups, try to cross the ever widening social divides.

(Perhaps I’m just writing this so I can be remembered by history as one of the people who saw it coming.)

Coding, iOS 10 Beta 2, & Faux Chromebook

I've been busy.

Coding: Many years ago I taught myself the BASIC programming language to the point that I successfully wrote a gymnastics scoring application. The application was used by only one person and for only one season. Well, I thought it was successful. Since then I've learned to create applications in dBase (xBase programming language) and macros (however roughly) in Quattro Pro and Excel. It's time I learned to code in the modern high-level language. I chose Python and have been at it for about two weeks. The hardest part so far was learning how to set it up to write in interactive mode and scripts. Firstly, I tried installing and using the text editor Sublime Text, the choice of most professionals I'm told. I had already downloaded and installed Python 3.5.2. To get started with the Sublime Text installation process, I downloaded Cygwin, a tool to make Windows function like Linux. Then I installed curl, git, and opens within Cygwin (having no idea why). The installation of git automatically installed an older version of Python (2.7.12) but I didn't notice it until after I downloaded and installed Sublime Text, the next step. I was then able to use Sublime as a text editor and write simple executable scripts for execution in Python. The problem was it was doing so in Python 2.7.12 and I wanted to learn to use the newer 3.5.2 version. For the life of me, I could not make Cygwin use 3.5.2. Frustration!!!! While messing around with Python I noticed that along with 3.5.2 an application titled IDLE (Python) which is an Integrated Development and Learning Environment for Python. And it's been around sometime during version 1. Duh! So that's where I'm at present and progressing slowly.

iOS 10 Beta 2: Downloaded and installed on iPhone 5. No problems and seems to work without glitches but I haven't pushed it hard or played around with new features yet. The new Home tab doesn't really interest me so I moved it into my Apple Apps (that I don't need) folder. Then I tried to download and install it on my iPad 2 (I know, old). No trouble downloading it but every time I attempted to install (Settings>General>Software Update) the following appeared: "iOS 9.3.2 Your software is up to date". After spending a couple of hours trying every trick I could find online to correct this apparently common issue, I gave up. My old iPad will just have to wait for the release version.

Faux Chromebook: Chromebooks have surpassed iPads as the go-to device for education 1:1 programs. Consequently, I thought I would try working with one. I fully understand the concept and the advantages and disadvantages of Chromebooks versus iPads but do you really know unless you try? I didn't want to shell a couple hundred dollars for a "real" Chromebook. I have a couple of older laptops laying around so I went the CloudReady (from Neverware) route and installed the CloudReady Chromium OS in dual boot mode on a Windows 10 HP laptop. The installation was laborious and lengthy, requiring preparation of an 8+ Gb USB drive. I prepared the USB drive on a different laptop than the one on which I performed the install. Detailed instructions can be found here. The first time I booted into CloudReady, everything seemed to work well. I set a few things up then later tried viewing a Youtube video embedded in an article. Nothing. Spent another three hours researching and attempting resolution without any luck. Has something to do with Java and HTML5. Still, can't play online videos. Not good. During my attempts to resolve the issue, it was necessary to reboot a number of times. Each occurrence of selecting the CloudReady option during reboot required shutting down and restarting at least twice before it booted up correctly. So I haven't had much opportunity to mess around the Chromebook way but it seems pretty simple. All executables must be online and files can be saved on the local computer, space permitting, or online. Now I need to find a way to remove the partitions to return my computer to pure Windows.

18 U.S.C. 793(f)

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Computer Literacy vs Computer Science

Since my initial encounter with technology in education in the late 1990's I have noted that the two terms, computer literacy, and computer science, are frequently confused, used interchangeably and possibly incorrectly. And rightfully so in-as-much as the guru technologists aren't in agreement regarding definitions or categorization. So I've developed a few thoughts of my own to assist me in practice to distinguish the two.

Thought 1: Computer literacy is all about the competent and safe use of computing hardware and software.

Thought 2: Computer science is all about computational thinking leading to critical thinking and problem solving, communication, collaboration, and creativity and innovation.

Thought 3: It doesn't matter because one, computer literacy, is intrinsically embedded in the other and computer science is to a great extent dependent on computer literacy.

Prior to 2007, the ISTE standards for students emphasized student computer use and safety. From a "technology integration" and teaching perspective, activation of the standards in curricula amounted to achieving the lower three levels of Dr. Ruben Puentedura's (http://www.hippasus.com/) SAMR model: substitution, augmentation, and modification. The 2007 standards move into the "redefinition" arena defined as, "Computer technology allows for new tasks that were previously inconceivable." I am certain that the 2016 standards' remake will go even further by emphasizing creating, making, inventing, developing--basically doing through technology.

The following is an excerpt from Jeff Weiner's (LinkedIn CEO) email to his employees regarding the purchase of LinkedIn by Microsoft (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/linkedin-microsoft-changing-way-world-works-jeff-weiner):

Remember that dystopian view of the future in which technology displaces millions of people from their jobs? It's happening. In the last three weeks alone, Foxconn announced it will replace 60,000 factory workers with robots, a former CEO of McDonald’s said given rising wages, the same would happen throughout their franchises, Walmart announced plans to start testing drones in its warehouses, and Elon Musk predicted fully autonomous car technology would arrive within two years.

Whether it's worker displacement, the skills gap, youth unemployment, or socio-economic stratification, the impact on society will be staggering. I’ve said it on multiple occasions and believe it even more so every day: creating economic opportunity will be the defining issue of our time. That's why I'm here and why I can't imagine doing any other job. Simply put, what we do matters, and matters more than ever.

Those few examples are "new tasks that were previously inconceivable." Technology infusion into the curriculum at the earliest ages possible at a level well beyond use and safety is essential. We are no longer becoming a technological society,.we are one. This necessitates innovating, refocusing and restructuring the learning process across genders, across age and grade groupings, across subject areas, across organizational types, and across geographical areas. Learning must become open and project-based and if not in our educational institutions, then elsewhere.

Leadership

During my stints as a senior manager or executive, I frequently used the tagline, "You should never resolve a leadership issue with an administrative action." We've all see it happen numerous times. Example: one or two employees are late to work a few times. Talk ensues among the others. Instead of addressing the issue one-on-one early on, the manager publishes a policy applicable to all employees stating hard and fast, progressively onerous consequences for violations. That's not leadership. That's not even management. That's administration. The manager has transferred the issue to HR where it becomes but a matter of counting times late, issuing stock warnings, and eventual termination. Not a morale booster.

Then, in the mid- to late 1980's along came technology and computers on each desk. I had to expand my tagline: "You should never resolve a leadership issue with either an administrative or technological action." Senior managers (school administrators also as pertains to students) desire that employees not be sending and receiving personal email or text messages, be on Facebook, or otherwise surf the web for other than organization purposes during business hours. This is akin to prohibiting personal phone calls and reading magazines at work in the pre-technology days. Common sense, given that the employer does not wish to compensate employees for time and activities not in her best interest. The non-leadership way to deal with this issue is to transfer the whole mess to the IT department. Block and filter. Ah, but employees and students are technically savvy and will find ways around the blocks and filters. So IT joins forces with HR by spying (reviewing logs) and reporting suspicious activity to HR. HR combines a restrictive administrative policy intended to curb the inappropriate usage of organizational property with the technological reports to again relieve the manager of leadership responsibility. Now we all have smartphones that are not tied to our organizational networks. At this writing, management has two options. The first is to illegally jam all cell phone signals emanating from within the confines of the organization. The second is to employ individual and group leadership.

Repost: The Arms Race of Technology Integration – Teching Out for the Wrong Reasons

http://www.emergingedtech.com/2016/05/arms-race-of-education-technology-integration-for-wrong-reasons/

Technology as Curriculum

During a recent conversation with a PK-8 principal, she asked a general question regarding which technology subjects were appropriate for which grade levels. It shortly became clear that she was referring to the teaching of technology classes separate from other subject area classes. In other words, technology as curriculum. She mentioned that when the computer teacher arrived with his laptop cart, the classroom teachers departed. I was taken back a bit. I thought we were beyond that in our journey toward achieving Dr. Ruben Puentedura's 'R' for Redefinition-"Tech allows for the creation of new tasks, previously inconceivable." A quick review of the technology position advertisements published online since the beginning of the year will show that at the K-8 level, we are not far along that path. About half ads are for a 'Computer Teacher' or some variant. In many schools, not only is technology being taught as a separate subject, technology is neither included in the subject areas' curricula nor is it being integrated into the classrooms. Even job descriptions for Technology Coordinators include teaching computer classes.

I realize that, as Lynda Ginsburg writes, "from the perspective of maximizing the acquisition of information about and competence in using specific technology applications, a curriculum focused on the computer and its applications might be desirable. Components of such a curriculum include keyboarding skills, database manipulation, spreadsheet use, word processing, desktop and Internet publishing, and Internet search skills. Hands-on opportunities to develop a comfort level with the various applications and discussions about the kinds of tasks that might be best managed with each application would provide a basis for using the technology in the various situations in which it is appropriate." (http://www.calpro-online.org/eric/docs/hopey/hopey_04.pdf) I guess I would even include digital citizenship and safety, for sure, and coding, for now.

But, back to the question, what subjects at what levels? That depends entirely on each school's grade level learner objectives. Subject area teachers and the adopted subject areas curricula should be our guides. Once students have developed an application comfort level appropriate to the grade level, technology as curriculum should ease out and true classroom and curriculum integration should begin. The learning process should progress toward achieving the 'M' and 'R' of Dr. Puentedura's SAMR model. Technology learning occurs best and is best retained when learners develop skills and experiences in contexts that are similar to those in which technology is used elsewhere within and without the classroom. For example, after a few orientation classes on the basics of word processing to the point that the student demonstrates comfort opening the application, performing a few basic editing functions, saving documents, printing, and closing the application, the responsibility for advancing word processing learning is exported to the language arts teacher/classroom. In most schools, this could occur as early as early as 1st grade.

Of course, there are curriculum development, resource, and profession development hurdles. How to work around these finance driven issues, is another matter.

iPads Out, Laptops In

Full disclosure: I own an iPad, albeit a very old one (2012, iPad 2). I tried using it to supplement my desktop (Windows) and laptop (MacBook) use at work and otherwise, going so far as to purchase a Bluetooth keyboard. I tired of trying within a few months and it is now used exclusively to play music to entertain our plants in a sunroom.

Headline: "Maine Decides to Ditch iPads for Macbooks," from yesterday's Education News (http://www.educationnews.org/technology/maine-decides-to-ditch-ipads-for-macbooks/). There is doubtlessly a K-12 movement away from tablets to laptops. Simply, iPads, even the iPad Pro, lacks features that facilitate production: mouse/trackpad, keyboard, and cursor. The Apple Pencil and Smart Keyboard go a considerable way toward alleviating shortcomings when using some apps but fall short when used with the many touch-sensitive apps designed exclusively for touch screens. One frequently needed example are the copy, cut and paste commands which can be accurately and rapidly performed on a laptop using keyboard shortcuts. Smart Keyboards are expensive (about $169) and third party keyboards although less expensive at about $99, are not as feature rich as the apple Smart Keyboard. Word processing and spreadsheet number crunching on an iPad with a keyboard are slow and difficult processes. Slightly less so with one.

How does that affect classroom use? I'm not sure. There are other considerations, of course. Cost is a major one and the iPad is less expensive than the MacBook Air by a few hundred dollars, but far more expensive than a Chromebook. iPads while not indestructible, are less subject to damage in and out of a backpack resulting in fewer repairs and replacement. There are more education-oriented apps for iPads than for laptops of any manufacturer. One teacher in a survey in Maine commented that many of the students were using the iPads as “toys” and that the devices have “no educational function in the classroom.” I suspect that both the teachers and students that participated in the survey are integrating at Dr. Ruben Puentedura's Substitution level of SAMR.

The question should be more about integration into the learning process than about production. I suspect that both the teachers and students that participated in the survey are integrating at Dr. Ruben Puentedura's Substitution level of SAMR. When used as little more than a tool substitute for the typewriter, calculator, and print copy dictionary, thesaurus, and encyclopedia, very little integration into the curriculum and classroom is occurring.  In this case, yes, laptops at all levels would be ideal. Actually, my take is that once the learning apps database grows to accommodate educational laptop demand, laptops, would be ideal for all grades and ease the transition into higher education and the work world.

You Gotta Love Peter Greene--the Value of LMS's

Regardless the subject you can count on Peter (Curmudgucation) to be reasoned and focused. While seldom concise his blogs define the writing process we so want our students to emulate: in-depth researching; critical thinking; analyzing; synthesizing; organizing; and journaling. A perfect example is his take on Learning Management Systems. Understand that he is writing from a teacher's perspective. As such he promotes local control (preferably no higher than the teacher level) and is anti-competency-based education (for thoughtful reasons).

Repost: America's High School Graduates Look Like Other Countries High School Dropouts

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/03/10/469831485/americas-high-school-graduates-look-like-other-countries-high-school-dropouts

Computational Thinking: Nothing More Than Systemic Common Sense Problem-Solving

From what I can determine, computational thinking is said by its proponents to provide a manner of thinking (extrapolated from computer science) that should be applied across all occupational and social endeavors. And that computational thinking should be taught and enforced beginning with the earliest grades. The Computer Science For Fun Site while not doing a very good job of detailing examples of how it should apply, does lay out the types of thinking inclusive in computational thinking.

Logical Thinking: Logical thinking is about deducing as much new information as possible from the little you already have - but (and this is the critical bit) not by jumping to conclusions. The new information gleaned must follow for sure.

Algorithmic Thinking: Algorithmic thinking is developing a set of rules that produce a winning or successful problem-solving strategy each time when confronted with similar circumstances. Once a successful algorithm has been built, one does not need to rethink the exercise from scratch each time.

Efficient Solutions: In computer science, efficiency is basically just about minimizing how much of some resource you use to complete a task. The resources to minimize vary but the most important one is often 'time'. What matters is usually finding ways that guarantee you get a task done in as few steps as possible.

Scientific Thinking: Basically scientific thinking is essentially not jumping to conclusions without evidence: following the Scientific Method to build up new knowledge. And the steps of the scientific method are to:

• Ask a Question


• Do Background Research


• Construct a Hypothesis


• Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment


• Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion


• Communicate Your Results

Innovative Thinking: Innovative thinking means, I think, not only coming up with unique ideas that are guaranteed to better some small or large part of mankind but to push the idea through to fruition.

Jeannette Wing, who coined the term Computational Thinking, wrote: "It represents a universally applicable attitude and skill set everyone, not just computer scientists, would be eager to learn and use. " In her article, she goes on to characterize Computational Thinking as conceptualizing, not programming; fundamental, not rote skill; a way that humans, not computers, think; complements and combines mathematical and engineering thinking; ideas, not artifacts; for everyone, everywhere.

Given the common sensical attributes of so-called computational thinking, there can be little doubt the whole thing is a bit silly and a lot forced. That we need to ball it all up into curricula and add it to reading, writing, and arithmetic as a basic as early as kindergarten, is ridiculous. Ms. Wing and CMU are garnering considerable attention with considerable fluff. It too will pass but not before we have misdirected billions to buying computational thinking as the skill of the 21st Century.

Wi-Fi Troubleshooting

Most of the time Wi-Fi works and it's wonderful! A bit slower than cable all-around yet, wonderful! However, frustratingly, at one time or another we all have Wi-Fi issues: can't turn on Wi-Fi no matter how hard or fast you press that wireless key; maybe not being able to connect to the Internet; showing only a partial connection and not being able to reach a particular site; etc. It can be mysterious. Over at Wirednot, Lee Bradman has posted a wonderful little schematic that not only depicts what all is involved with Wi-Fi but lays out the considerations that need to be taken into account during troubleshooting what appears to be a Wi-Fi problem.  It also makes very clear that once you reach the access point you're out of the wireless environment, at least locally. This is not intended to bypass standard troubleshooting steps: 1) identify the problem; 2) establish a theory of probable cause; 3) test the theory to determine cause; 4) establish a plan of action to resolve the problem and identify potential effects; 5) implement the solution or escalate as necessary; 6) verify full system functionality and if applicable implement preventive measures; and 7) document findings, actions, and outcomes. The process is fairly standard regardless of occupation or profession. Lee's little graphic puts it into a technology networking framework. As you step through the standard troubleshooting process, here's most of the stuff you need to consider.

Reasoning Ed Tech

One of the most reasoned articles on the value and use of ed tech was brilliantly written by Alfie Kohn (The Overselling of Ed Tech). Not only should educators and technologists take note but politicians and corporate heads could also benefit from this short analysis. He centers on the question, "What kinds of learning should be taking place in those schools?". He maintains that a collaboratively derived answer to that question is a prerequisite to answering, “Is tech useful in schools?”. While I agree, I can't imagine how as a nation we could ever arrive at a coherent, coordinated answer to the first question. Common Core anyone? Satisficing answers may be more attainable by returning control to the local level. As it stands now, we are just wasting huge sums of money on technology and we don't even know why.

Too Much Ed Tech Too Frequently?

The following is an RSS Feed Reader snip from the Educational Technology and Mobile Learning (http://www.educatorstechnology.com/) site encompassing but the past six days.

Your school just might be well enough funded to have implemented 1 to 1 classrooms or maybe just a legacy computer lab or two, or maybe tablet carts or four or five static tablets assigned to each classroom. Many might still be saddled with ancient slow and cumbersome desktops. (Aside note: I remember a time [the late 80's] when I lugged my "portable" 30-pound computer with two 5-1/4" floppy disk drives back and forth to work daily using a luggage carrier.) Surely whatever devices on campus, all have access to the Internet and every faculty member has a laptop, notebook or tablet device. No? Whatever the case someone or someones has the explicit, or worse, the implicit task of vetting new educational apps, websites, browser add-ons, templates, ed tech tools, hardware, and all  stuff ed tech. Considering that these 60 some educational technology "things" above are from only one website, we can be assured that every six days produces many, many more, probably thousands. Who vets, recommends, budgets and buys ed tech stuff at your institution? Is it the administrators, the teachers, the IT guys, the education-technology integrator/coordinator, the cleaning crew? Who or what group would ever even have the time to visit each website and blog then look up and read a summary about each new thing. Does anyone even care that new and fabulous ed tech stuff, eminently capable of propelling students forward by at least two grades, goes on the market every day? What criteria is used? Do the teacher-users and student-user have input to decisions?ed tech tools, hardware, and all stuff ed tech. Considering that these 60 some educational technology "things" above are from only one website, we can be assured that every six days produces many, many more, probably thousands. Who vets, recommends, budgets and buys ed tech stuff at your institution? Is it the administrators, the teachers, the IT guys, the education-technology integrator/coordinator, the cleaning crew? Who or what group would ever even have the time to visit each website and blog then look up and read a summary about each new thing. Does anyone even care that new and fabulous ed tech stuff, eminently capable of propelling students forward by at least two grades, goes on the market every day? What criteria is used? Do the teacher-users and student-user have input to decisions?

Personalized Learning; Competency-based Education; Distance (On-line) Education

The buzzwords Personalized Learning, Competency-based Education, Distance (On-line) Education have become increasingly popular since the 1990's. In some circles, these are pejorative terms which when enacted to an extreme through the conduit of technology are perceived to threaten teachers and the teaching profession. Technology is often seen as the cause and by reference, technologists are therefore at fault. Here is an excellent article by Jennifer Carolan that rehashes the history of Personalized Learning and adds some reasonable perspective regarding the role of technology. Her last paragraph capsulizes the theme.

But personalization does not mean isolation, and it doesn't mean sitting our students down in front of laptops all day. Personalization is a strategy that allows us to adapt to the needs of all children, preferably after giving them a powerful, shared learning experience that motivates them to dive deeper. The best schools and ed-tech companies understand that technology and personalization are not the ends of education, but that they are merely means to help achieve higher goals—goals on which the health of our society and democracy depend.

Implementing an EdTech Learning Model

Too often learning models pontificate at the theoretical level leaving practitioners to ferret out the "How To". SAMR is a good example. Conceptionally, the model makes sense with the goal being



to advance from substituting a newer technology for an older technology to using technology to create a new, previously inconceivable technology. Putting the process into practice is less sensical. As in any planning process, the first step is to define where one is, assuming a continuum along the path within each unit. While the model depicts four graduations, there are, in practice, infinite graduation possibilities making settling on a "Where I Am" a bit difficult. The next step would be to define where one would like to be--discovering the gap. Questions begin to arise. What if I am not convinced that "infusing" any amount of technology into my lessons is the better approach to learning? What if I'm perfectly satisfied with where I am? Wait, technology is ubiquitous and is the future I'm told. Am I obliged to teach subject matter and technology? Or just to teach subject matter while using technology and assigning tasks that require students to self-learn and use technology in task performance? Should I leap directly to the Redefinition level? I would have to come up with technologies that were "previously inconceivable". What that hell does that mean? Enough.

The Internet is rife with SAMR specific examples. Google it. Most are well-intended, however, just plain make-work, even silly. Here are few examples of the Redefinition level from a recent blog (http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/) at the "Emerging Education Technologies" blog. Also, see https://arlington.instructure.com/courses/50558/pages/redefinition-ideas?module_item_id=1138005.

A Handwritten Paper: Redefinition: Instead of a written assignment, students convey analytic thought using multimedia tools.

Geography and Travel: Redefinition: Explore the locale with Google Earth; seek out and include interviews with people who have visited the local.

Understanding Shakespeare: Redefinition: Answer the Question, “What did the culture of the time have on the writing of Shakespeare’s plays” by using a Concept Mapping tool and constructing a mind map demonstrating key elements through words and images.

An Assessment Exercise: Redefinition: “A classroom is asked to create a documentary video answering an essential question related to important concepts. Teams of students take on different subtopics and collaborate to create one final product.  Teams are expected to contact outside sources for information.”

Art/Painting: Redefinition: Create Artwork Collaboratively using a Collaborative Online Whiteboard (like Twiddla or one of these other tools).

Email Etiquette: Redefinition: Students watch the guidelines video, then assess examples of Email Etiquette ‘violations’ and indicate which guidelines should be applied to correct/improve on the examples.

Learning Fractions: Redefinition: Use a Fractions App instead (here’s a handful of examples for iOS devices).

Phys Ed, Learning to Hit a Baseball Well: Redefinition: Students watch video examples and practice the techniques, then the coach/teacher videos them hitting balls and provides feedback about their technique.