Search Results For ownership | 127 Results

Search Results For "ownership"

Are You Asking Enough of the Right Questions?

Dwayne Harapnuik — November 20, 2018 — Leave a comment

A few weeks ago I had the opportunity to spend some time with my boys and their friends at a biking industry party at a local bike shop that sponsors my boys and other professional racers. I took advantage of this time to ask a racer who my older son raced with earlier in the year in the Enduro World Series (EWS) races in Chile, Columbia and Whistler… what was the biggest lesson he learned this year on the EWS circuit? He stated that he the noticed that fastest racers didn’t always take the fastest line down the mountain—they seemed to take the most fun line or the line that allowed them to flow down the mountain. Instead of hitting the hardest and fastest lines they seamed to be having the most fun and were simply flowing down the course. He also stated that it took him the full season to finally accept this and it wasn’t until this last race that he stopped trying to go the fastest and simply went out to have some fun and enjoy the day. When you race for 6-7 hours each day its is foolish to try and run at 100%. You not only destroy your bike you destroy your body. He argued that when he stopped looking for the fastest line and simply went out to find the most efficient or most fun way to come down the mountain he ended up being much faster at the end of the day and posted his best results. It wasn’t until he started looking at the bigger picture and started asking different questions that enabled him to look at his racing different that finally led to his best results. His major regret was that he didn’t come to this realization and start asking a different questions until his final race of the season. He also wished that he would have learned this lesson many years earlier.

Asking enough of the right questions isn’t only a challenge in professional EWS racing it is a challenge in our educational system and more specifically in our learning environments. In the words of Ken Robinson, our educational systems are all too often focused on finding the right answer, which is usually at the back of book, and that we shouldn’t look at. Robinson is using humor to lesson the devastating foolishness of our practice and to spur us onto to acknowledging that we have a serious problem. If we just go along with the status quo and accept that our systems of education are primarily focused on conditioning students to find the right answers for the exam then we are missing the fact that our students are not learning because learning is not about finding the right answers it is about asking questions. Learning is the process of making meaningful connections and we can’t make those connections without asking questions— lots of questions from different perspectives. If we only focus on finding the right answers Clayton Christensen argues we will trap ourselves into marginal thinking because someone can’t be taught until they are ready to learn. Asking questions is how we open ourselves up to learning. Christensen argues that:

Questions are places in your mind where answers fit. If you haven’t asked the question, the answer has nowhere to go. It hits your mind and bounces right off. You have to ask the question — you have to want to know — in order to open up the space for the answer to fit.

Unfortunately, as I have stated above and pointed out in the post Foster Inquisitiveness Rather than Rebuild It our educational system focuses on right answers as opposed to starting with the pursuit of questions. I am not along in my assertions. In his book, A More Beautiful Question Warren Berger points to fact that our education systems reward rote answers over challenging inquiry. Berger uses research data to that shows that our children are filled with curiosity prior to going to school and by the time they are in their teens they have little curiosity for anything to do with the curriculum. He points to the correlation between the ages that children lose their curiosity and a number of questions that they ask.

Why have we created an educational system that quenches our learners curiosity and creativity? While the answer to this question is much more nuanced than I can deal with in this post but it is fair to suggest that our current system of education addresses the question of how we prepare large numbers of students to meet the needs of the industrial age. The problem we face is that we have moved beyond the industrial age into the digital information age and we are still operating on a educational system that asks questions related to problems from an earlier era. We have to start pushing educators to start questioning conventional or industrial age thinking about teaching and learning, the educational system, their schools and classes, and their process and methods so that their minds are opened up enough to the point that they want to know how to do things differently. To explore these idea further check out the video or podcast in the post Are You Preparing Your Learners for Life or for the Test?

We need to create significant learning environments that will help to open up spaces in our educators minds for new ideas to fit. If we don’t purposely design our learning environments to address the questions and problems of the digital information age we can easily remain mired in marginal thinking and the status quo. It is very easy to maintain the focus on standardized testing, on covering the content, on checklists masquerading as rubrics, and the need to regurgitate the right answer. Maintaining the status quo is much easier then creating a significant environment where giving learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities will lead to making learners struggle with the anxiousness that comes with facing the challenges of deeper learning. We have to remember that authentic learning has never fundamentally been about spouting off the right answer; it has always been about making meaningful connections and to make those meaningful connections you have to start with the questions. The type of questions that open up the spaces in our thinking and motivate us to want to know and to make those meaningful connections—only to have the whole process start over. This is learning—this is life.

Perhaps we need to start asking:
Are You Preparing Them for Real Life or Just the Test?

References
Berger, W. (2014). A more beautiful question: The power of inquiry to spark breakthrough ideas. New York, NY: Bloomsbury USA.

Fried, J. (2012, September 25). A Conversation with Innovation Guru Clayton Christensen. Retrieved September 7, 2016, from http://www.inc.com/magazine/201210/jason-fried/a-conversation-with-innovation-guru-clayton-christensen.html

Robinson, K. (2010, Oct 14). RSA ANIMATE: Changing education paradigms. Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/zDZFcDGpL4U

In 21st century learning, Authentic Learning, Learning authentic learning, choice, COVA, CSLE, Learning, ownership, Voice

Why We Are Wasting EdTech Dollars?

Dwayne Harapnuik — October 30, 2018 — Leave a comment

If you ever wondered how scarce educational dollars are all too often wasted on foolish technology purchases all you need to do is continue to not look at the research. As soon as you read above statement you immediately thought I made a mistake and should have stated that all you need to do is look at the research. You would be right from a grammatical perspective that I meant to say “look at the research” but the emphasis I am trying to make is that there is overwhelming evidence that almost 90% of educational leaders are making technology purchases without looking at the research.
Dr. Michael Kennedy, an associate professor at the University of Virginia along with a team of thirteen researchers at the Edtech Research Efficacy Symposium in 2017 asked 515 educational leaders from 17 states the following question:

When making purchasing and/or adoption decisions regarding a new technology-based product (assume for academic instruction) for your district or school, how important is the existence of peer-reviewed research to back the product?

It is important to note that the survey participants were categorized as, 24 percent district technology supervisors, 22 percent assistant superintendents, 7 percent superintendents, 27 percent teachers, and 10 percent principals. Equally important is that 75 percent of this group were directly responsible for EdTech purchases for their school or were consulted on purchase decisions.

Only 11 percent of these decision-makers listed research being in place to confirm the efficacy of the product they were planning to purchase. In contrast what was rated “extremely important” or “very important” were the prioritized factors of ‘fit’ for their school, price, functionality, and alignment with district initiatives. This should be extremely concerning to parents, most teachers, and taxpayers who are funding our educational system. If technology supervisors, superintendents, assistant superintendents, principals, and select teachers are making decisions on what technology to purchase that doesn’t include support for its effectiveness in the learning environment then they should be held accountable when it doesn’t work.

Unfortunately, the research which so many of these leaders are willing to ignore shows that that technology all too often doesn’t make a difference or worse it can hinder learning:

…students who use computers very frequently at school do a lot worse in most learning outcomes, even after accounting for social background and student demographics (OECD 2015, p. 5).

This not new research. On the contrary, we have known for a very long time that just adding technology to the classroom does not have any significant impact on learning. In the early 1990’s Thomas Russell and several other researchers pointed to the results of a meta-analysis of the research into technology use in distance education and found that there is no difference between technology-based instruction or classroom instruction (1999).

I must be very clear that I am not opposed to using computers, smartphones, tablets or any other technology to enhance learning. I would challenge you to find a bigger user and proponent of the effective use of technology to enhance learning. The key is to focus on the learning first and then look to technology to further enhance and amplify the learning environment and the learning experience. We also have to be careful that we don’t just try to bolt technology onto an antiquated classroom that emphasizes the 19th-century information transfer model of standardized curriculum and testing which research as also shows doesn’t enhance learning. That OECD (2015) report I referred to earlier also suggest that:

Technology can support new pedagogies that focus on learners as active participants with tools for inquiry-based pedagogies and collaborative workspaces. For example, technology can enhance experiential learning, foster project-based and inquiry-based learning pedagogies, facilitate hands-on activities and cooperative learning (p. 6)

The OECD (2015) report also pointed to John Hattie’s research into what contributes to student achievement and confirms that:

Computers were more effective when they are used to extend study time and practice, used to give students control over the learning situation (pacing of material) and when used to support collaborative learning (p. 163).

Technology is a potentially powerful tool that should be used to enhance creation, collaboration, inquiry, investigation, communication. Ideally we want to give our learners choice ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities. Technology helps us to do this more effectively. We need to make our technology purchases based on research and the research shows that we aren’t doing this.

The fact that most of our educational leaders are making technology purchases based on price, fit, or other factors that support their confirmation bias we should not be surprised when the Ed Tech industry ignores the research. They don’t need to support their product claims with evidence or research because it is clear that they can sell their products without it. All they need to do is have a well-tuned sales pitch and a good salesperson that will give these educational leaders just what they think is important or what want.

Are you part of the 11 percent that is using research to make informed decisions about your technology purchases that will enhance learning. Or are part of 89 percent that is ignoring the research and potentially ignoring the learning?

References
Kennedy, M. (2017) Role of federal funding and research findings on adoption and implementation of technology-based products and tools. Edtech Research Efficacy Symposium. Retrieved from http://symposium.curry.virginia.edu//wp-content/uploads/2017/07/The-Goals-and-Roles-of-Federal-Funding-for-EdTech-Research_FINAL-1.pdf

OECD (2015), Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en

Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon: A comparative research annotated bibliography on technology for distance education: As reported in 355 research reports, summaries and papers. North Carolina State University.

In Education EdTech, efficacy, Research, waste

Many companies no longer use degrees as employment prerequisites

Dwayne Harapnuik — September 13, 2018 — Leave a comment

“One of the ingredients in Shopify’s success has been to completely ignore academic credentials in hiring.” — Tobi Lutke

In an Ottawa Citizen story, Shopify’s CEO Tobi Lütke also states “The company values people who have built something of their own, volunteered their time and pursued new learning opportunities. Shopify isn’t the only company that is looking beyond a degree credential to see what people are able to actually do. According to a CNBC Careers article Apple, Google, IBM, Ernst & Young and many other top teir companies hire people who don’t have a four-year degree.

The ability to create or build something of their own, to contribute to a hand’s on project, to undertake innovative opportunities, or to volunteer one’s time toward a bigger purpose are some of the most important traits that employers are looking for in the new digital world. Why? If you are able to create, build, innovate on your own then you are able to show that you have the drive to learn on your own and make a difference. The ever changing nature of our digital future demands this level of self-directed learning and adaptation.

One of the best ways to students to learn how to become digital innovators who are future ready is an signifanct learning environment in which they are given choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities.

In CSLE+COVA COVA, CSLE, CSLE+COVA, degree, innovative, project, self-directed

DIY Mindset Requires a Learner’s Mindset

Dwayne Harapnuik — September 11, 2018 — Leave a comment

After a lifetime of engaging in what is commonly referred to as DIY (do it yourself) projects, I knew I was going to have to review the parts list in my DIY Teleprompter project before I could pass on an updated parts list to a colleague. Why? Unlike going to Ikea that will provide not only detailed instructions and all the necessary components for what you need to assemble, DIY projects involve finding a variety of parts that may be used for a variety of purposes and modifying those parts to serve an entirely new purpose. So when I reviewed the 15mm rod support and baseplate system for my DIY teleprompter I quickly learned that it was no longer available from Amazon. My experience of sourcing these types of projects led me to check and see if all the parts were still available. After searching for and exploring a wide assortment of alternatives I realized that the best that I could do is provide a list of parts that I would more than likely use if I were building my DIY Teleprompter from scratch today.

DIY projects by their very nature require exploring and considering a wide assortment of options in order to create or build a project that can address your unique needs. There is no right answer. There is no quick fix. There is only inquiry, exploration, and trial and error. Unfortunately, most people do not have the learner’s mindset that will enable them to do this sort of problem-solving. We quench this type of exploration and experimentation out of our students with a steady diet of recipe and regurgitation followed by standardized testing.

Fortunately, the DIY movement is strong on the Internet and there are a small number of people willing to explore, experiment and find alternative ways to do it themselves. The rebels or mavericks who are willing to look for a better way, a different way, or simply a cheaper way to solve a problem will keep the DIY movement alive. We are also seeing this type of mindset supported through the maker spaces which are taking the place of shop classes of old. We can also help to keep DIY alive by supporting the learner’s mindset that comes out of creating significant learning environments that give learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities.

In CSLE+COVA, Learner's Mindset COVA, CSLE, DIY, learners mindset, mindset, quick fix, teleprompter

Give Them Real Work…

Dwayne Harapnuik — August 28, 2018 — Leave a comment

In the Ideas.TED.com post, How can schools best prepare students for the future? Give them real work to do Ted Dintersmith makes the argument that if we enable our children to work on real-world projects with real-world partners and focus on solving those real-world problems then everyone wins. The Iowa BIG project connects students with over 100 local organizations including businesses, nonprofits, and policy groups and from this connection students spend most of their school day working on projects to improve the community. Of the over 500 graduates from the program, 97 percent who applied to college were admitted to their first choice so if we view getting into a college as a measuring stick than the program is working.

This is just one of many innovative programs that give students the opportunity to make a difference in the world by giving them choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities.

Read the full story…

In CSLE+COVA authentic learning opportunities, COVA, CSLE+COVA