Does an iPad replace other computers ?

I have bantered the idea of using my iPad only for the month of February.  If I am going to be immersed in supporting iPads with our teachers, I need to make the mind shift to use it for everything.

Currently my iPad is used less than maximum; however, I have access to a MacbookPro for work and a PC at home.

The question rises for schools - what if I only have an iPad?  Should we buy desktops or even laptops anymore?

I haven't quite decided myself if I will take on this challenge as there are challenges that I know will arise.
- What if I want to print?  Do I send it to a colleague? (not fair to them)  Do I try to get the district to have a new printer that accepts AirPrint?
- Can I create everything I need to on an iPad? - (Pages on iPad can't export to ePub)
- Will I be as efficient?  To search in First Class, it takes more steps on an iPad...

I am thinking that I should try this, but allow 30 minutes a day access to another computer.

Any thoughts or advice?

iBook Author - Where is the real power?

I was very excited to hear the foreshadowed Apple announcement changing the textbook world.

http://www.apple.com/education/#video-textbooks

This has the potential to change learning resources in the same way that the printing press did almost 600 years ago.  The printed word became accessible to a broader audience.  Now the multimedia world will become accessible to a broader audience.

We already have access to the individual pieces of information and media; however, there hasn't been a crisp way to staple all the resources together.  Now there is

I have already read some criticism that the power of the multi billion dollar textbook industry will still remain with the publishing giants.  While I can see that as try for content rich textbooks that have every detail for entire courses, I see greater potential outside of the publishing companies.

I see the real power being brought to the students and teachers.  As a teacher I can now create custom content for the course I want to teach.  (Unfortunately, this is still living in the old paradigm of teacher experts but better than a business as the expert).  The most amazing power will be what students can create.

A huge frustration for me is when teachers create an awesome wiki with their students, then ask how to erase it all at the end of the course.  Why do we make students start their learning journey at the beginning.  All current innovation is built on previous innovations.  Why should 'textbooks' of the future delete those previous learnings?  Wouldn't it be better to create a 'textbook' resource with a class, then have the next class spring board to adapt old learning and explore new learning.

Please don't waste previous student's learning.  Acknowledge and honour the previous learning and move forward.  Textbooks are dead resources from a snapshot in time.   The content in a textbook is not the value; the process of learning and engaging with the content is the value.   Living iBooks can and should develop a life of their own

DuoLingo

I spend a lot of time on the web and searching out solutions for my educator colleagues. I watched a TED talk this afternoon that really amazed me.

http://bit.ly/TEDduolingo

I believe that Duolingo - http://duolingo.com/ has the potential to change language learning. The age of internet collaboration now allows 750 000 000 users to collaborate. The talk describes how 100 000 worked on the pyramids and to put a man on the moon. What if we could have 750 million working instead. Imagine the possibilities.

This just gets my creative juices going. In our school district we have 5000 teachers. If we each were able to provide 10 seconds per day, that is almost 14 hours toward a task.

What could we do with an extra 14 hours of work each day?

Where do we put our energy?

I listened to a TED video today.  It is focused on the basic question ?Given $50 billion to spend, which would you solve first, AIDS or global warming? Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg comes up with surprising answers.  

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities.html

Taking this to our role in teaching and learning.  There are many problems.  Rather than prioritize problems, we should look at prioritizing solutions.  Bjorn worked with economists to determine the cost/benefit of solutions.  In terms of technology, what technologies would have the best cost / benefit ratio.  If we can help more students by doing X than helping less students with Y, which choice should we make.

I don't have the answers to the cost / benefit of providing 1 to 1 laptop initiatives.  Rather than that specific problem I think we should ask ourselves if we are making the best choices with not only technology, but how we spend our time teaching and learning.

Is there a way to show that the cost / benefit of providing school and home computers with internet access to all students is more beneficial than providing targeted support to only students that need it (after they are already falling behind in their learning and then identified to receive support.)

My statement is not which one is better, rather that decisions around the world seem to be made all in the name of 'putting learners first.'  

Do we really know what uses of technology if any are more beneficial?

As a Teacher and Learner ...

As I continue as a learner, I learn more about my teacher.  I have always put myself in positions to share my knowledge.  I consider myself somewhat introverted; however, in a teaching role I seem the exact opposite.

Also in a teaching role, I force myself to be knowlegable.  This concept is odd in terms of teaching with technology.  I chose to leave my position at Frank Hurt as the Tech Facilitator because I was expected to be the expert in everything.  It just isn't possible. 

Oddly enough 3 years later, I ended up at the district level where again I am expected to 'know everything.'  The biggest difference is that I no longer try to actually know 'everything.'  Now I have a network of people and sources to point teachers to help themselves.  

With the growth of technologies, it is impossible to know everything.  I have been teaching lifeguarding for 18 years and have always taught principle oriented.  In lifesaving and first aid, you can practice procedures to deal with knowns and expecteds but rarely to accidents happen in identical ways.  I hadn't realized it until recently that teaching (especially with technology) has changed to be much more principle oriented.  

It is now no longer about knowing the answers but being willing to try and explore.  I am not an expert in most technologies; however, I can figure them out based on other existing knowledge.

I am much happier facilitating than delivering information.  I think the rich conversations during exploration and learning are worth more than the information that may have very little to do with their future life.

Kevin

Web 2.0 is not the Future of Education

In response to http://injenuity.com/archives/207#comment-1109

Jen,

An interesting conversation. I have to say I found your initial post provoking; however, I understand where you are coming from.

Our District Motto is "Keeping Learners at the Centre."

I don't know that Web2.0 is the right catch all but I will work within that category. I believe students today are different than even 10 years ago. If we want to keep them at the centre, we need to change as they and society changes. I do a lot of professional development workshops and get quite annoyed being asked to teach a software title. I reflect back to the requester to tell tell me what their learning goals are and ask how this will integrate to the curriculum.

A quote from Brigham Young University that I just love is "The goal of teaching is to teach our students to be learners. The content is what they practice with. "

With the world changing in ways such as a online community being compared to being a country with its size and other features. Students are different and have opportunities to learn differently. A few years back (probably 10 now) Bernajean Porter worked with our Ministry of Education to define technology use in three ways - Literacy - Adaptive and Transformative.

At some point we all need the literacy level (skills), then we can move to doing what we already do (PPT) to doing things not possible before. Transformative is where I want to see most of the time spent. Voice Thread was an example discussed earlier. If we just record ourselves that is just literacy, if we use it to practice a speech that might be adaptive, but if we use it to , that could have been done before . Using Voice Thread for a global (or local) conversation with voice, text, files, annotations was not possible.

Students and Teachers don't need to learn every Web2.0 application; however, we do need to prepare students to learn and use the tools that they will need throughout their life. (I actually don't use Voice Thread myself but I can see the potential.) I love working with wikispaces.com. It doesn't matter if you use Wikispaces or PB Wiki or any other tool. What I am teaching is becoming creators of information and publishing to a limited (or global audience.) I would hope that spending time learning to write with a wiki would transfer to other wikis, blogs, voice threads, and even podcasts.

I love using technology. I see so much potential. I totally agree that learning should be central.

I question where the balance is between "I am teaching them to learn so technology is a lower priority" and "I am teaching them to learn with technology"
Kevin