I am currently attending the Microsoft Innovative Teachers' Forum in Helsinki Finland in late October. This is an amazing city steeped in history and there is some truly amazing architecture. The weather here is not as cold as I thought it would be, around 5 degrees C.
There are over 80 educators here from all around the world and the range of projects is incredible.You can read my thoughts on the conference at the Microsoft Partners in Learning site.
Have a look at the photos below, they were all taken during the day. I only saw the sun on the final day I was in Helsinki and it was quite low in the sky even at mid-day. It was mid Autumn when I was there. To view more photos go to my Flickr page.

If, like me, you have had your doubts or disagreed with Marc Prensky's article Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, you should take a look at Jamie McKenzie's latest article in which he not only disagrees with the main premises of Prensky's article but also produces research to support his opinion. Well worth a read.

www.inquiringmind.co.nz

On Monday I attended a one day workshop with Sharon Friesen from the Galileo Educational Network. If you haven’t already checked out their website then I recommend you do. Sharon’s workshop focused on inquiry-based learning. Sharon talked about the key features of inquiry: Creating Knowledge, Disciplined Inquiry and Value beyond school. For a spectacular example of the authentic work being done check out the ‘Nitsitapiisinni - Stories and Spaces: Exploring Kainai Plants and Culture’ project undertaken with First Nation students in Canada.

Well I haven't blogged so much in months - lots of inspiration and the luxury of time! Went to Sharon Friesen's workshop on curriculum. It reminded me of something else our students need. We need to design work for our students that fosters an inquiring mind in our students. Considering the name of my website this was a surprising thing for me to leave out as it certainly would be close to the top of my list.

The other areas she mentioned as needing emphasis, all of which I totally agree with, are:creating knowledge, solving problems and creating products that go somewhere, do something, make a difference.

Jeremy Kedian asked a good question today - "Are we planning for teaching or planning for learning?" His questions on the nature of learning were very thought-provoking. He asked 'What is the purpose of schooling?" and Julia Atkin asked a similar question "Why school? What is your educative purpose?" We need to be asking these questions as we move into a new curriculum. Schools need to find out what their own values and beliefs about learning are before they move into the new curriculum.

More on Ulearn - Helen Baxter's keynote this morning Renaissance 2.0 - Educating the new Leonardos. You can see the mindmap of her presentation on Mindmeister. She made some interesting points about developing the 'can do' attitude'.

I get her point about students not needing to carry knowledge around in their heads as they will be able to find the info they need on their cellphones or whatever, but I do think there will still be some things we actually need to know just to be able to carry on a conversation. We can't be stopping the conversation every couple of minutes - "Hold on I just have to Google that". So students need some knowledge, understanding of concepts and the skills and strategies to find out what they don't know. They will of course also need critical and creative thinking skills and the ability to communicate, and a whole range of other things.

What we as educators need to do is have conversations about what knowledge, understanding, skills etc our students need. This will differ from school to school (and indeed from student to students) so it is great the new curriculum is giving schools explicit permission to develop their own curriculums. Of course some schools have been doing this for a while but for many this is a new concept.

I'm going to spend some time looking through Helens' Mindmeister mind map. Maybe somewhere in there I will find the answer to her question "How do we educate students for jobs we don't even know exist?" I do know however, that if we give students the things I talked about in the previous paragraphs including the 'can do attitude' and a dollop of passion, then we will have made a good start in the right direction.

I'm sitting at the Ulearn07 conference in Auckland. The conference started off with a great keynote from Ewan McIntosh. He made a great comment about not supporting the digital natives/digital immigrants concept which I definitely agree with. I certainly don't fit with Marc Prensky's idea of a digital native, not having been born in the right decade, but I have been using computers for over 20 years and I'm more at home with computers & technology than many teenagers I know.

The points that especially resonated with me were:

Thin slicing - the once-over lightly mentality.

Audience - students used to do their work for their teachers and maybe their classmates and parents, now they can have a potential audience of 1 billion people through the web.

Creativity - Ewan talked about the avenues for creativity that web 2.0 opens up. I liked the idea of the use of Flickr for story telling. Do a search for 5 frames on Flickr where people tell stories in 5 photos. This has amazing potential and I can't wait to try it with some kids.

Authentic goals - Asking the question - what is the purpose of this work? For me I think this is the first question we should be asking before we teach anything and we should be getting our students to ask the same question.

I also particularly liked the his statement "It's not about the teach, it's about the tech".

After this great start I'm looking forward to the rest of the conference.

Great discussions have been happening on the NZCompEd listserv about Creative Commons and open source software. Check out this slide show which arrived on the listserv via the Cool Cat Teacher Blog.

The Kopu Digital Opportinities project, of which I am facilitator, will not be getting rid of their laptops as some schools in the USA are doing: "Seeing No Progress, Some Schools Drop Laptops". This article demonstrates a sentiment best expressed in a quote from Jamie McKenzie's article: "When schools put the cart before the horse - buying technology for the sake of technology without asking critical questions about purpose, use and the classroom impact of such tools - they are inviting disappointment." www.fno.org/jan02/overequipped.html

In addition to not providing adequate PD for teachers, I believe these schools also made a mistake in providing one-to-one laptops. As I mentioned in the Computer Ratios section of my Inquiring Mind website I believe a 1:5 or 1:6 ratio in the classroom is best, made up to 1:2 when needed by mobile laptop pods. I also believe a combination of desktops and laptops works best in the classroom, giving the benefits of both while minimizing their negative aspects.

Too many computers can cause technical difficulties and frustration for teachers and students. Teaching teachers and students how to cope with minor problems so they do not interfere with teaching is very important. Professional development in the use of the computers to support teaching and learning is essential.

At Opoutere School we have been part of the Kopu Digital Opportunities Project for two and a half years and have been using a combination of desktops and wireless laptops in the classroom with good success. We have a ratio of about 1:3, which we increase to 1:2 or better by borrowing laptops from other rooms when needed. We are planning to purchase a mobile pod of mobile laptops to share amongst the classes so borrowing from other classes will no longer be necessary.

Although there have been a few technical issues it is nothing we can't cope with. Each class has students who have been trained to look after the computers and can deal with most issues that arise.

Laptops seem to have a life of about 3 years before they need to be replaced or at least need replacement batteries (and often power cords and CD/DVD players), so there needs to a plan in place for their replacement. We are investigating leasing which may be a useful option. We are also switching to child-friendly laptops which have toughened screens and reinforced edges to minimize damage.

The combination of using inquiry-based learning, aided by internet-capable computers, has resulted in greatly increased motivation and engagement levels from our students (long after the novelty has worn off) and improvements in their information literacy skills, along with many other benefits. We have no intention of throwing out our laptops any time soon.

Cambodia Pt 2
The Microsoft Innovative Teachers' Regional conference in Cambodia was a very interesting experience. The conference was a great opportunity to mix with teachers from other countries and share experiences. It was amazing how many areas of commonality we had. It was also interesting to see how advanced New Zealand is in terms of ICT use in classrooms.

I only visited one school in Cambodia but it was an unusual one. The school was floating on a barge on a lake (Tonle Sap) and the pupils mainly came from the floating village on the lake. They even had a floating basketball court and floating playground. Most of the pupils only attended school for half a day so they could work the rest of the time.

Education is free in Cambodia but only very basic facilities and equipment are provided. The teacher's desk was dominated by a large donation box and all the desks were inscribed with the name of the person who donated them. They had a blackboard, maps on the wall, a few teacher textbooks and a few exercise books but very little else. There was no electricity and certainly no technology. The students were all very friendly.

Teachers earn about $US40-50 per month but the Cambodian government has promised to increase this amount by 15% p.a. and has committed a large amount of its budget to education.

My time in Cambodia was certainly very educational, for both the conference and the experience of the country itself. It is not somewhere to which I would like to return, but I'm glad I had the opportunity to visit.

Don't forget to check out my Inquiring Mind website which is regularly updated.

Singapore Sightseeing

While in Singapore I had a short time for sightseeing and shopping. I loved the markets there, very vibrant and much more 'alive' than the many shopping malls. I did enjoy visiting Sim Lim Square where every imaginable piece of technology was available. The prices seemed to get cheaper the higher we went in the building.

We were in Singapore during Chinese new year celebrations and were fortunate to see one the major parades down Orchard Road. This was truly a spectacular event. People were sitting 3 deep on the road and had paid for this privilege. Those of us who had not paid got to stand at the back but still got a great view, if a little hot and crowded. The crowd was very well behaved but considering the armed police doing crowd-control this was not surprising.

We took a tour of the sites in a double decker bus which gave us a good view. The tour guides spent a lot of time telling us about how Singaporeans believe in racial harmony. Got to see the famous Raffles hotel but decided against a Raffles gin-sling for $21.

There were some real contrasts between the old and new parts of Singapore, the skyscrapers with the older buildings. Also between the markets and the huge shopping malls. Certainly an interesting place to visit.

Cambodia

Cambodia was a land of great contrasts. The divide between the haves and have-nots was very visible. We visited Siem Reap and though we were only there for a few days we were able to visit quite a few places. Tuk tuk was the preferred method of transport and the drivers were incredibly friendly and helpful, as were all the Cambodians we had contact with. The tuk tuk were powered by motorcycles and bicycles and motorcycles were the main mode of transport.

The markets were incredible places. We first visited the tourist market where bargaining was definitely the order of the day, I'm sure they artificially inflate the cost just so they can make the tourists feel like they have a bargain. Things were incredibly cheap with silk ties for $US1 and $US2 and t-shirts around $US2. Silk was sold for $USA4 a huge piece and silver jewellery sold by weight.

The markets where the locals shopped were an experience not to be missed. The smells are something I'm in no hurry to repeat. You could buy anything there, including petrol in whisky bottles, motorbikes alongside the fruit, cigarettes that were being made on the stall and cockroaches and grasshoppers by the basketful.

The sight of the meat and chicken lying in the hot sun, covered in flies was hard to take (and smell) as was the sight of live chickens tied together in bunches of four waiting to have their heads chopped off in the street. There were also large containers of fish flapping around in containers with little or no water. All in all an unforgettable experience.

Singapore
I recently had the good fortune to be selected to attend the Microsoft Regional Innovative Teachers' Conference in Siem Reap, Cambodia. On the way to Cambodia I went to Singapore visiting two schools there: Xingnan Primary and River Valley High. Xingnan Primary is experimenting with new modes of delivery for effective and engaged learning. They include the use of podcasts, video broadcasts, real-time or pre-recorded interviews/ programmes, and movie-making. They have a room permanently set up for blue-screen photography and broadcasting.

River Valley High is a Backpack.net school where the students are using laptops and tablet computers to improve outcomes for students. The picture on the left shows a Chinese language class where the tablets were being used for calligraphy. The students worked together in pairs on their tasks.

The school was conducting a lot of research into whether the use of ICT was having an effect on outcomes for students.

More photos from Singapore can be found on Flickr using the keywords Singapore, Xingnan and Rivervalley.

My final research report is now available online. If you have trouble opening it, try saving it to your computer first, then opening it. The condensed version of my research is available as an attachment on my e-fellow's blog. This will be available next year as an online flipbook and on CD but in the meantime I have attached a Word version.

I have also attached a copy of my Digital Opportunities case study to my blog. This involves the same case study as my e-fellowship research but examined the use of KnowledgeNET to develop home-school partnerships when students were involved in inquiry-based learning.

Don't forget to check out my Inquiring Mind website which is continually being updated.

Thinking about thinking

I have been thinking a lot about thinking lately. This has been sparked by three things, the first was attending a seminar by Robert Swartz on critical thinking skills. The second was reading Kieran Egan's book: 'The Educated Mind: Cognitive tools shape our understanding', especially chapter one 'Three old ideas and a new one'. The third and probably most influential was reading an article by Yoram Harpaz 'Approaches to Teaching Thinking: Towards a conceptual mapping of the field'. If you are interested in teaching thinking in your classroom then check out the new Thinking page on my Inquiring Mind site.

I've just finished presenting the interim results of my e-fellows research at the Ulearn conference in Christchurch. I have updated my website Inquiring Mind with my latest findings. I will be adding to this as I work on my research report.

Here are some useful sites and references from my presentation:
Filamentality: www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/fil/
Wikis: www.wikispaces.com/t/x/teachers100K
Exemplars: www.tki.org.nz/r/assessment/exemplars/eng/
Rubrics: http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php
Galileo site: www.galileo.org/inquiry-what.html
Opoutere Schools' KnowledgeNet (and the case study groups' work): www.opoutere.schoolsonline.co.nz/ (View the work in the public pages or use the login and password: exgroup2 to view all the pages)
Herron's 4 levels of inquiry: http://edweb.sdsu.edu/wip/four_levels.htm
Galileo's inquiry rubric www.galileo.org/research/publications/rubric.pdf#search=%2rubric%22

References for the quotes I used (I thoroughly recommend the first book):
Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for the constructivist classroom. Virginia: Association for Curriculum Supervision and Development.
Bruner, J. (1971). The relevance of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. NY: Norton
Hirsch, S. (1999). Children's Relevance Criteria and Information Seeking on Electronic Resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(14), p. 1265-1283.
Wehlage, G., Newman, F. & Secada W. (1996). Standards for authentic achievement and pedagogy. In Newman F. M & Assoc. (Eds.) Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Interesting to note what is now blocked by Schoolzone's filtering system. All blogs, including this one, are deemed unsuitable. Sure it can be unblocked by the administrator, but in many schools that is a difficult process. Blogs are an excellent educational tool if used wisely and to block them all seems a little over the top.
I also wonder why when the new filtering categories were introduced they were all blocked by default - surely it could have been left to administrators to decide which of the new categories they wanted to block.
Update: I e-mailed Schoolzone and got them to unblock this blog which they did on the same day. I still think that blocking all blogs by default is taking it a bit too far.

My website on inquiry learning www.inquiringmind.co.nz is now up and running. It contains my thoughts on inquiry learning and will also be where I share the results of my e-fellowship research.

Guided Inquiry
I was prompted to write this after reading the Random Access Mazar blog on inquiry learning. I too have been trying to wade my way through the multiple definitions of inquiry. It does seem that everyone you talk to has a different definition. One of the main conclusions I have come to is the need for guided inquiry, especially for students new to the inquiry process. I work mainly with primary school students from age 7 to 12 and leaving the inquiry completely in their hands when they have had little or no previous experience of the inquiry process would be a recipe for disaster. The same would apply to older students new to the inquiry process.
As Vygotsky(1978) tells us, there is a need to scaffold learning, to work with students in the zone of proximal development “the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers". As pointed out in the Random Access Mazar blog "Inquiry-based learning methods (as described to me thus far) appear to undervalue the resource that the instructor really is to the student." This need not be the case. Herron’s Four Levels of Inquiry (thanks to Artichoke for pointing me in the direction of this one.) give a nice overview of how levels of teacher intervention can vary according to the task and needs of the students.
I think Jacqueline and Martin Brooks (1993) make a very good point on this issue when they state:
Posing problems of emerging relevance is a guiding principle of constructivist pedagogy. However, relevance does not have to be pre-existing for the student. Not all students arrive at the classroom door interested in learning about verb constructs, motion and mechanics, biological cycles, or historical timelines, but most students can be helped to construct understandings of the importance of these topics. Relevance can emerge through teacher mediation. (p35)

Bruner (1971) also comments on this issue:

It is just as mistaken to sacrifice the adult to the child as to sacrifice the child to the adult. It is sentimentalism to assume that the teaching of life can be fitted always to the child’s interests just as it is empty formalism to force the child to parrot the formulas of adult society. Interests can be created and stipulated (p. 117).”

There is also a tendency for schools to try and impose a “one size fits all” model of inquiry on their staff and students. While I see nothing wrong with schools or other educational institutions developing their own models of inquiry provided it is done collaboratively with staff (and in some cases students), teachers do have to formulate a flexible model of inquiry that works for them and their students. As Joan Vinall-Cox points out in her blog “No theory is applicable in all situations in the classroom, and theories that undermine the personal practical knowledge of teachers, are destructive” If the school model is flexible enough it will be able to be adapted by teachers to suit their teaching style and by students to suit the task.
Inquiry learning can and does work in classrooms, I know because I’ve done it. When it is carried out effectively it results in engaged and motivated students who construct knowledge and understanding of concepts related to topics of interest and/or relevance to them.

References
Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1993) In search of understanding: The case for the constructivist classroom. Virginia: Association for Curriculum Supervision and Development.
Bruner, J. (1971). The relevance of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. NY: Norton
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes.

Student Ownership

Student Ownership of Inquiry Learning
When considering the matter of student ownership of the inquiry the ideal situation is where students have full ownership of the initial question, idea, problem and/or issue. This was emphasised by Sharon Friesen of the Galileo Foundation (http://www.galileo.org/) in her keynote at the 2006 Learning@school conference and I totally agree that this is what we should be aiming for. However the reality in the primary school classroom is that many students don’t have the skills to come up with rich questions until these skills have been taught. (See the comments attached to this blog) Also, how do we achieve this ownership in the classroom and still cover the topics we consider are important for students, but for which they show little interest? How for that matter do we work on topics they don’t even know exist?
Resourcing can also be a problem with completely student-generated inquiry. Setting students, especially younger children, loose to search in the books and on the internet until they have the necessary information literacy skills to do this effectively would result in a lot of surfing and not a lot of results. They are also going to waste a lot of time on sites that are not suitable for their age, reading skills and/or developmental level. Try telling your students they can’t start the inquiry for 2 weeks while you wait for the National Library books to arrive and you have had a chance to find some websites suitable for them to use. This is not to say that the web and National Library are the only sources of information but they are often important sources.
So what is the answer to this? Last week I attended a Regional ICTPD cluster meeting and found a few ideas. Mark Treadwell spoke of resourcing difficulties and the use of guided inquiry where students discuss a topic and are guided into an investigation. In his article Education in the 21st Century Part 1 www.teachers.work.co.nz/archive_Nov_2004.htm Mark talks about Teacher Initiated Learning Experiences, Shared Teacher-Student Initiated Learning Experiences and Student Initiated Learning Experiences. Barbara Reid clarified this further for me by referring to Shared, Guided and Independent Inquiry. We use this model when teaching reading and written language, why not inquiry?
In a guided inquiry for instance the teacher may display thought-provoking photos and then, when discussion ensues, guide the students to develop a rich question arising from that photo. Because the teacher has displayed the original photos they will have already been able to find some suitable resources. Students will of course also be able to find some of their own resources in addition to those supplied by the teacher but they will have a good resource base to start from. Students should have some degree of ownership as they have been part of the process of developing the inquiry focus. Eventually students would have sufficient skills to complete independent inquiries and this should be the aim.
One way I have approached this is by starting a discussion on a broad topic that my knowledge of my students tells me they have an interest in, and is one I know I can resource. This is the immersion or knowledge attack stage of inquiry. I then encourage students to come up with their own question(s) for inquiry, with help from me to guide them in framing a rich question.
Students also often need some background in the topic before they can frame a rich question. I have often started with a teacher guided inquiry then branched off onto an independent student-directed inquiry which arose from that topic. For example, we were looking at Antarctica and the discussion, directed by me, got round to what there is to do and see in Antarctica. The students investigated this and came up with their ideas on what a tourist visiting Antarctica should go and see. While doing this some students started to have doubts about whether tourists should be allowed to go to Antarctica at all and this led into a separate inquiry topic of which they had full ownership.
More illumination on this matter came from reading Jacqueline Brooks’ book ‘In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms’ which seemed to offer some answers evidenced in this quote:
“One common criticism of constructivism is that, as a pedagogical framework, it subordinates the curriculum to the interests of the child. Critics contend that the constructivist approach stimulates learning only around concepts in which the students have a pre-kindled interest. Such criticisms miss the mark. Posing problems of emerging relevance is a guiding principle of constructivist pedagogy. However, relevance does not have to be pre-existing for the student. Not all students arrive at the classroom door interested in learning about verb constructs, motion and mechanics, biological cycles, or historical timelines, but most students can be helped to construct understandings of the importance of these topics. Relevance can emerge through teacher mediation. In discussing Dewey’s notion that education ought to take into account students’ interests, Bruner (1971) writes:
. . . a point of departure is not an itinerary. It is just as mistaken to sacrifice the adult to the child as to sacrifice the child to the adult. It is sentimentalism to assume that the teaching of life can be fitted always to the child’s interests just as it is empty formalism to force the child to parrot the formulas of adult society. Interests can be created and stipulated (p. 117).”
(Brooks, 1999, p.35)
Brooks goes on to explain some of the ways we can kindle that interest thus giving students ownership of their inquiry. This fits well with the ideas I discussed previously about guided inquiry. It also fits well with the immersion or knowledge attack stage of an inquiry. This book is well worth reading, I can certainly recommend it. The Galileo Network Inquiry Rubric has criteria for authenticity and student ownership of an inquiry topic which is also well worth a look. www.galileo.org/research/publications/rubric.pdf
References
Brooks, Jacqueline Grennon. (1999). In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, VA, USA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Bruner, J. (1971). The Relevance of Education. N. Y.: Norton.

(Tech) Angels and ?
This year I have had opportunity to talk to a large number of teachers as part of my e-fellows research. One recurring theme has been computer technicians. There seem to be two categories of tech people in schools. One sort are indispensable - they are often teachers, have a teaching background or at the very least have an understanding of learning and the needs of teachers and students. They spend many hours, often unpaid and often unthanked, keeping computers running in classrooms. They help to make computers work for teachers and students. If teachers have a problem they go out of their way to find solutions. They understand that sometimes students will change computer settings but empower teachers by showing them how to fix the most common of these changes. They take these problems as an inevitable side effect of giving freedoms, but know that the benefits in terms of learning far outweigh any difficulties.

The other sort of technician would rather have no teachers or students getting in the way of the smooth running of their computers. They lockdown systems so tightly that no-one can change anything. They grump and groan when problems occur and take weeks to fix them. They complain constantly about students and teachers who create more work for them.
If the school has internet filtering software they have so many filters in place students and teachers can’t find anything. If teachers want sites added to the exceptions list they take weeks to consider this and more weeks before they do something about it - usually after the unit it was needed for has finished.

These people don’t give teachers any rights at all over their computers and certainly don’t show them how to do anything - that would take away from their power. They don’t take the time to explain the reasons behind their decisions and certainly don’t want to discuss them.
The result of this is we end up with computers sitting idle because they are so locked down they are useless. Teachers who were a little reluctant to use computers use these incidents as an excuse not to use them. Teachers who want to use them tear their hair out trying to get anything done. The technicians are happy - computers that aren’t being used don’t have problems. The students however are missing out and we shouldn’t let this happen.

Now I know these are two extremes but most technicians fall on a continuum somewhere between the two. If your tech person is nearer the first end of the spectrum, be thankful and, more importantly - thank them. If yours falls nearer the other end, challenge them, speak to the people who have influence and force changes. Yes there will be some problems when computers are freed up but the sky will not fall in and teachers may actually be able to use computers the way they were intended - to facilitate learning.

If you have any horror stories about the second type of technician I would love to hear them - e-mail me at jkellow@xtra.co.nz or write a comment on my blog if you want to share it with others. If you have one of the first sort I’d love to hear about that too - these people need to be recognised.