Because of our background with media and technology, Jethro Jones and I have been asked to participate on the committee charged with creating a copyright policy distinct to the Canyons School District. Rest assured, this will be no insignificant task. My eyes go blurry just thinking about it.

Ironically, the ID tag given to the Copyright Compliance policy nails the overall experience perfectly:


If I could wave my magic wand, I'd create a policy that didn't require a full eight hours just to read it. That alone would likely translate into more teachers and students being willing to follow it.

What do you think? Does your school or district have the perfect copyright policy? What are its strengths and weaknesses?

I've added a comment to my recent post about online participation (or lack thereof) that deserves a little focus time on the stage:

Upon thinking further about this topic, I've decided to add a few important words to my second category of educator. Originally it read:

2. Those content to lurk but still hesitant to contribute.

I've edited it to read:

2. Those content to lurk but still hesitant (or unable, for whatever reason) to contribute.

The fact of the matter is that there exist a very large number of effective educators that are simply not able to contribute in any significantly recurrent amount to online discussion. All told, it's not that they're incapable of participating and it's not that they're unwilling. Rather, this group maintains perceived silence online because their professional priorities prohibit them from spending the time or energy required to provide plausible contribution.

As I think Jared was suggesting in his comment, this population includes some teachers. Likewise, I think that school/district administrators and other members of the school community should be included. Furthermore, any inference that the offline contributions of these professionals are insignificant is simply unjustified and honestly inappropriate.

Now think carefully about this:

• Do you think there is legitimate justification for a lack of participation in the important discussions that occur online (or are some conversations simply too important)?

---

Image source: Flickr user horizontal.integration. No clue what this picture has to do with lurking, but it sure made me smile :-)

Dave Weinberger was right: The smartest person in the room, IS the room.

One week later, and I'll admit: I'm concerned.

Scott McCleod has posted a list of ten incredibly important and equally complex questions about books, libraries, librarians, and schools.

Doug Johnson has begun to react to Scott's questions, by stepping back as a (very good) librarian himself and challenging his peers to step up to the plate.

...how we respond to folks like Scott says a lot about us. Can we explain our values and mission and realities without sounding defensive, self-serving or reactionary? Read the responses to Scott's post, put on your classroom teacher, principal, or parent hat and evaluate!

With such a provocative challenge and important list of questions, wouldn't you think that every librarian would want to respond? Unfortunately from where I sit, however, I still see three kinds of librarians (and teachers, for that matter - the same we've seen now, for years):

1. Those that read and participate in the online think-tank we call social media.
2. Those content to lurk but still hesitant (or unable, for whatever reason) to contribute.
   
   and
   
   
3. Those still stuck in the analog paradigm.

Sadly, the "professionals" behind door number 3 have likely yet to see the questions posed by Scott - and probably never will - unless some caring person prints the list out for them and tapes it next to the library copy machine, feigning violation of some abstruse portion of copyright law.

Roland Barth has said it best:

The problem of all educational institutions isn't that they are no longer what they once were. The problem is that they are precisely what they once were, while the world around them is changing in revolutionary ways.

Is it ever too late to change? Sometimes I wonder. More importantly, I continue to wonder what we can do to help current educators break out of their molds and into this century.

---

Image source: Flickr user Lester Public Library.

David Wiley:

For me, for my students, and for the informal students who looked in on or participated in the course outside my university, this “open teaching” was better than a two-for-one. It was a thousand-for-one. When the costs of “open teaching” (freely allowing people outside the university to view course materials and informally participate in the course) are so low, I ask myself a question. Do we professors, who live rather privileged lives relative to the vast majority of the planet’s population, have a moral obligation to make our teaching efforts as broadly impactful as possible, reaching out to bless the lives of as many people as we can? Especially when participatory technologies make it so inexpensive (almost free) for us to do so?

I believe the answer is yes.

As do I.

For that reason, I pose the same questions to professional developers that David has to professors above - and plan on studying the impact of open professional development environments on teachers. What follows is the first chapter in my dissertation proposal. Fun, I know.

I welcome any feedback you might be willing to give and hope you'll find the mistakes I may have overlooked.

- - -


A number of elements have combined in the educational landscape to make teaching and learning in the 21st Century exhilarating and strikingly different than ever before. Not only are students and teachers afforded different opportunities for learning in the formal classroom, there now exists a large body of learning possibilities through the access of open educational resources (OER) and additional information freely shared online (Hylén, 2005; Johnstone, 2005; Downes, 2007). The utilization of OER is rapidly gaining traction in K-16 environments worldwide (Brown and Adler, 2008).

In addition to the educational resources that might be labeled as OER, modern collaborative technologies can provide meaningful learning experiences (Parker and Chao, 2007; Boulos, 2006). Specifically, social software provides an array of powerful information and collaboration components, acting as cognitive reflection and amplification tools by assisting in the construction of meaning (Jonassen, Peck, & Wilson, 1999).

Wherein the term ‘social software’ is used in many different contexts (and the assortment of technologies covered by the term are not necessarily developed for educational purposes), Terry Anderson’s (2005) definition of “educational social software” (p. 4) is particularly relevant. Educational social software exists within the context of distance education as a growing set of “networked tools that support and encourage individuals to learn together while retaining individual control over their time, space, presence, activity, identity and relationship” (p. 4; see also Belderrain, 2006). Such pedagogical tools can provide a learning experience unparalleled in educational environments past (Dalsgaard, 2006).

To continue, in spite of the learning opportunities that students might have outside of their formal schooling with OER, educational social software, and other educational technologies, there still exists a need to improve the pedagogy found within our schools. To that end, a number of researchers have maintained that the quality of what teachers know and can do has the greatest impact on student learning (Ferguson, 1991; Ferguson and Ladd, 1996; Wenglinsky, 2000, 2002; Darling-Hammond, 2000; Muijs and Reynolds, 2000). Furthermore, Supovitz and Turner (2000) have put forth logic that is difficult to refute:

The implicit logic of focusing on professional development as a means of improving student achievement is that high quality professional development will produce superior teaching in classrooms, which will, in turn, translate into higher levels of student achievement. (p. 965)

Moreover, while some have contended that teacher professional development can lead to an increase in teacher efficacy (Ingvarson, Meiers, and Beavis, 2005), others consider the training and professional development of teachers as the keystone to educational improvement (Hawley & Valli, 1999). In any case, such experiences designed to help teachers grow, are generally created to assist teachers in the learning of new skills, knowledge, and attitudes to support students’ learning and teachers’ own performance at a high level (Miller, Smith, & Tilstone, 1998). Indeed, teacher professional development is very important.

In considering the kinds of professional learning and interactions that can occur online, Bill Ferriter (2009) has argued that technology has made it easy for educators to embrace continual professional development. While describing how he has personally utilized blogs and wikis to create a “uniquely authentic” (p. 35) learning environment, he states:

Specifically, thousands of accomplished educators are now writing blogs about teaching and learning, bringing transparency to both the art and the science of their practice. In every content area and grade level and in schools of varying sizes and from different geographical locations, educators are actively reflecting on instruction, challenging assumptions, questioning policies, offering advice, designing solutions, and learning together. (p. 35)

Through the networked connections inherent to learning with emerging social technologies, teachers are now able to reflect, collaborate, and participate in a form of professional development regardless of geographic and other constraints. Additionally, educational social software aids in the promulgation of the original vision of the Internet as a space wherein all people might participate (Schaffert, Gruber, & Westenthaler, 2006).


Beginning in September 2007, a new genre of teacher professional development was developed that allowed teachers of various levels, subject areas, and cultural backgrounds to participate in the same formal class at the same time, regardless of geographic location, and without monetary costs to participants (Draper, 2007). The classes, termed OpenPD, or Open Professional Development (OPD) were built upon several key principles, largely centered on the foundation of open education (Downes, 2007; McLoughlin & Lee, 2008) with its many dimensions and numerous interpretations (Iiyoshi and Kumar, 2008). Furthermore, the classes were dependent upon the collaborative technologies available through social software and were designed to “teach social software using social software” (Draper and Ellis, 2008; Roblyer and Edwards, 2000). Since the inception of OpenPD, a number of similar open, synchronous, professional development efforts have ensued that have relied heavily upon educational social software not only for content distribution but also for direct delivery of instruction (see for example, Jones, 2008; Couros, 2009).

According to its creators, OpenPD was chiefly designed with a number of characteristics at its definitive core (Draper, 2008):

• Open enrollment (all that desire are welcome to participate).
• Free of charge to participants.
• Combines the established tradition of sharing good ideas with fellow educators and the collaborative, interactive culture of the Internet.
• Built on the belief that everyone should have the freedom to use, customize, improve and redistribute educational resources without constraint.

With several successful iterations having been completed and a growing population of interested participants, OpenPD has given teachers a learning experience different than more traditional approaches (see Viegas-Reimers, 2003; Borko, 2004; Viegas-Reimers, 2003). Furthermore, it has advanced the field in making significant strides toward the realization of the recommendations set forth by Stuessy and Metty in 2007 that “professional development providers acknowledge the power of communication and feedback in dissolving the traditional boundaries by which they normally define themselves” (p. 746. See also Knight and Boudah, 2003; Borko, 2004).


Because professional development has been shown to improve teacher efficacy, it is vital that ways to improve the methods that are used to help teachers learn are identified. Furthermore, since few (if any) studies have been conducted that analyze the combination of open education as it applies to teacher professional development and the modern collaborative technologies of the Internet, more research is needed in this area.


The purpose of this mixed-methods experimental study is to determine the impact that OPD environments have on teacher attitudes toward technology use and their utilization specifically of social software in the classroom.

The following questions will guide the study:

1. How do teacher attitudes toward technology use in the classroom change while participating in OpenPD?
2. What impact does OpenPD have on teacher utilization of social software in the classroom?
3. What do teachers learn by participating in OPD that isn’t specifically covered by the explicit topic(s) at hand?

A substantive, thorough, and sophisticated literature review is the antecedent to any successful research endeavor (Boote and Beile, 2005). Therefore, an analysis of the literature in connection with this study will:

• Include a historical review of the origins and principles of open education and (educational) social software.
• Consist of an overview of the literature associated with teacher professional development, linked methods, and procedures.
• Contain a summary of the literature in connection with factors affecting teacher attitude.
• Discuss the concepts of communities of practice and communities of interest as they have been established in the literature.
• Highlight key understandings of educational change theory as they apply to this study.

• Anderson, T. (2005). Distance learning – social software's killer ap? ODLAA 2005 Conference. Retrieved July 11, 2009 from http://www.unisa.edu.au/odlaaconference/PPDF2s/13%20odlaa%20-%20Anderson.pdf
• Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139-153.
• Boote, D. & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher 34(6), 3-15.
• Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.
• Boulos, M. N. K., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education, BMC Medical Education, 6(41).
• Brown, J. S. & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail and learning 2.0. EDUCAUSE Review, 43(1), 16–32. Retrieved July 7, 2009, from: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0811.pdf
• Couros, A. (2009). Open, connected, social – implications for educational design. Campus-Wide Information Systems 26(3), 232-239.
• Dalsgaard, Christian (2006, July 12): Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning (EURODL). Retrieved July 2, 2009 from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2006/Christian_Dalsgaard.htm
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1).
• Downes, S. (2007). Models for sustainable open educational resources. National Research Council, Canada. Retrieved June 13, 2009, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/3/5/36781698.pdf
• Draper, D. (2007, September 6). Open professional development – A whole new level. Drape’s Takes weblog. Retrieved June 24, 2009 from http://drapestakes.blogspot.com/2007/09/open-professional-development-whole-new.html
• Draper, D. (2008, February 7). Open professional development – A definition. Drape’s Takes weblog. Retrieved July 3, 2009 from http://drapestakes.blogspot.com/2008/02/open-professional-development.html
• Draper, D. & Ellis, R. (2008). Open professional development [Video file]. Video posted to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0qsdzxz0UM
• Ferguson, R. (1991). Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why money matters. Harvard Journal on Legislation 28(2), 465–498.
• Ferguson, R.F. & Ladd, H.F. (1996). How and why money matters: An analysis of Alabama schools. In Holding Schools Accountable: Performance Based Reform in Education, Brookings Institute: Washington, DC.
• Ferriter, B. (2009). Learning with blog and wikis. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 34-38.
• Hawley, W., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials for effective professional development:A new consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 127-150). San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
• Hylén, J. (2005). Open educational resources: Opportunities and challenges. OECD-CERI. Retrieved July 3, 2009, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/1/49/35733548.doc
• Iiyoshi, T. & Kumar, V. (2008). Opening Up Education: the collective advancement of education through open technology, open content, and open knowledge, Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.
• Ingvarson, L., Meiers, M. & Beavis, A. (2005, January 29). Factors affecting the impact of professional development programs on teachers’ knowledge, practice, student outcomes & efficacy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(10).
• Johnstone, S. M. (2005). Open educational resources serve the world. Educause Review. Retrieved June 23, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/apps/eq/eqm05/eqm0533.asp
• Jonassen, D.H., Peck, K.L., & Wilson, B.G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
• Jones, J. (2008, July 30). You’re Invited! Online Show and Tell Thursday, 11:00 AM PST. INJENUITY weblog. Retrieved July 9, 2009 from http://injenuity.com/?p=262
• Knight, S. L., & Boudah, D. J. (2003). The impact of teachers’ participation in collaborative research on secondary students’ classroom behaviors, engagement. In D. Wiseman & S. Knight (Eds.), The impact of school–university collaboration and K-12 student outcomes (pp. 151–165). New York: AACTE.
• McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. (2008). Future learning landscapes: transforming pedagogy through social software. Innovate 4(5).
• Miller, C., Smith, C. & Tilstone, C. (1998). Professional development by distance education: Does distance lend enhancement? Cambridge Journal of Education 28(2), 221-230.
• Muijs, D. & Reynolds, D. (2000). School effectiveness and teacher effectiveness in mathematics. Some preliminary findings from the evaluation of the Mathematics Enhancement Programme (Primary). School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(3), 273–303.
• Parker, K. R. & Chao, J. T. (2007). Wiki as a teaching tool. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 57-72.
• Roblyer, M. D., & Edwards, J. (2000). Integrating educational technology into teaching (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Schaffert, S., Gruber, A. & Westenthaler, R. (2006). A semantic wiki for collaborative knowledge formation. In S. Reich, G. Güntner, T. Pellegrini, A. & Wahler (Eds.): Semantic Content Engineering. Austria: Trauner Verlag.
• Stuessy, C. L. & Metty, J. S. (2007). The learning research cycle: Bridging research and practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 725-750.
• Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–980.
• Viegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: an international review of the literature. Paris: IIEP-UNESCO.
• Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into the discussions about teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
• Wenglinsky, H. (2002). How schools matter: The link between teacher classroom practices and student academic performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(12).

We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birth of a new world is at hand.

Thomas Paine, February 14, 1776

In reflecting over today's version of EduBloggerCon, I'm struck by how important informal learning is to the educational experience of people - regardless of age, race, and socioeconomic status. Strange that it took an EduBloggerCon to help me see it.


Nonetheless, today's didactic experience - for me - was a very good one (and it wasn't because of the "sessions"). Rather, the experiences during which I learned most involved spur-of-the-moment conversations with a number of different people on a wide variety of topics. Today, because of the formal gathering provided by the EduBloggerCon unconference, I was able to engage in meaningful conversations (for which I was extremely grateful) with a number of people, including: Michelle Baldwin, Jon Becker, Liz Davis, Vicki Davis, Kelly Dumont, Scott Floyd, Wesley Fryer, Steve Hargadon, David Jakes, Karen Janowski, Kevin Jarrett, Doug Johnson, Lee Kolbert, Julie Lindsay, Angela Maiers, Scott Merrick, Sylvia Martinez, Scot McCleod, Beth Still, Henry Thiele, Lisa Thumann, Maggie Tsai, Jeff Utecht, Joyce Valenza, Mark Wagner, David Warlick, Paul Wood, and many others.

Because of these informal learning “sessions,” I learned a lot. Were they “conversations”? Yes. But there was more to it than that. These were conversations of intense meaning because the people involved effectively served as resources uncommon to the typical day. Clearly these conversations were better than merely “shooting the breeze” because the topics discussed had particular value to those engaged. Furthermore, while similar “conversations” take place on a daily basis online (among people with similar interests but with different cultural backgrounds), because today’s conversations were held in a seemingly traditional face-to-face setting, the emotions and passions felt by conversation participants were easily conveyed.

Which brings me to my questions:

• What will it take to provide our students daily with the kind of meaningfully rich learning experiences that typically result from informal learning?
• Can a formally constructed informal learning environment be recreated with more than sporadic frequency?
• How might we structure the learning environment in our schools to allow for more informal learning while teaching concepts assessed by federally imposed standardized tests?

In other words:

• Why can’t we make informal learning an integral part of the formal learning process?

Once we do that, the learning revolution that so many crave will become a reality, essentially marking the birth of a new world of learning for students and teachers alike.


Update: I apologize for seemingly dehumanizing the events of EduBloggerCon in this post. I wouldn't normally do so but I'm really trying to wrap my head around what it is about today's landscape that is essential to the learning processes of our students. Frankly, I see even clearer how little our students need us to feed them with information. They can get that for themselves, thank you.

Rather, students need teachers to give them what the Internet can't: love, empathy, and a physical person in the room that genuinely cares for their needs.

Original image source: Flickr user WOScholar.

Step back and slowly walk away from your social networks - cause it'll be nothin' but NECC for the next five days. Don't worry: Your regularly scheduled networked learning will return to its normal state on July 2.

Thank you for your patience.

Seth Godin:

Sometimes we spend more time than we should defending the old thing, instead of working to take advantage of the new thing.

Not that there's anything wrong with Singer sewing machines, or boring our students, or even teaching to the test. It's just that I think our patrons deserve better pedagogy, more support, and now.

Onward and upward.

I sent this in an email to my doctoral committee today. I'm getting excited.

Executive Summary:

I’m moving forward with my dissertation and would love your input/feedback. I hope to study professional development and how it impacts teacher practice. In working further with Dr. Bentley (my Chair), I have narrowed my focus to the following research questions:

• What are the characteristics of teacher professional development programs that encourage teacher use of technology within communities of practice?
• What are the characteristics of teachers that utilize social software in the classroom?
• What impact do open professional development environments have on teacher utilization of social software in the classroom?

Thanks for your help,

Darren


---


Additional Detail:


Therefore, a major component of this study will be several professional development classes that are offered this Fall in the Canyons School District:


Furthermore, because the treatment for this study will be to conduct professional development in an open environment, a brief understanding of that concept might be helpful. Similar in concept to open education efforts and even open source software, open professional development has the following characteristics (see my original description here – as this is a concept that is just emerging):

• Free of charge to participants.
• Open Enrollment - All that desire are welcome to participate.
• Combines the established tradition of sharing good ideas with fellow educators and the collaborative, interactive culture of the Internet.
• Built on the belief that everyone should have the freedom to use, customize, improve and redistribute educational resources without constraint.
• Not limited to the course we've named OpenPD. Thus more of a movement - like Open Education - than a particular class.

In further researching the characteristics of open PD environments, I would also compare and contrast a number of PD efforts that fall within the realm of being open. For example:

• OpenPD – This is a series of PD classes that I taught wherein teachers were invited to participate, regardless of their geographic location.
  http://openpd.wikispaces.com/
• K12 Online – This is a free conference wherein teachers can participate with others, receiving a level of professional development and tailored to individual teacher needs.
  http://k12onlineconference.org/
• Connectivism & Connective Knowledge – This online course has also been termed a “Massive Open Online Course,” has been used as a form of professional development by many teachers.
  http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/connectivism/

What are your thoughts, how well do you think these methods will answer my questions, and what suggestions do you have regarding these efforts?

What do you think? Have I got a leg to stand on?