I am, at this moment, the epitome of the blogger.  I’m in my pj’s.  I’m in Educon recovery mode.  Apparently, some of my Twitter friends are as well.  I’ve seen a number of people talking about being in pj’s or being exhausted, etc.  This was my 3rd Educon.  It’s my second as a K-12 educator.  I’m really starting to feel like I’m a part of this group of people.  Last year, I wrote about how a few people felt excluded or left out.  I didn’t see or feel any of that this year even though many of the same people were there.  Interestingly, I started off my conference yesterday with a discussion about being mainstream vs. being on the margins.

Educon always makes you think.  From the opening panel, which this year had the fabulous photographer Zoe Strauss on it, to the very last session, which for me was about implementing Chromebooks, the whole conference is all about forcing your brain to run on all cylinders.  Instead of saying what I learned, I’m going to pose some questions that have come up for me.

The theme of the conference was about sustaining innovation.  In the panel and in many sessions, we kept talking about how to define innovation.  I still don’t know what the answer is for our schools or for education, so that’s a looming question.

What does it mean to be mainstream? Is it a bad thing? What about being on the margins?  Do we need to bring those people into the mainstream or can they exist on the margins and we can just accept that?

What components of “traditional” education are worth keeping and what can go?  Do we have to get rid of some of those things in order to make room for innovation work?

How can K-12 institutions and Higher Ed work together? Can we/should we make more transparent our practices?  Where can we build partnerships that are authentic and useful and mutually beneficial?

When are we going to teach computing/computer science in a way that isn’t so “nerdy”?  And when are we going to see more women stepping up to be involved in CS education?

We are all agonizing over what the “next device” is, and so what we should invest our money in.  Are we selling out to Apple and Google by using their devices and apps? And should we be worried about that?  Should we have just one device in our schools? Or can we have multiple?

And just to point you to some resources and interesting things:

ds106–a course and a community, one way of bridging the gap between K-12 and Higher Ed

modkit–an online programming tool for microcontrollers like arduino

A keynote about Chromebooks

For more, search for Educon.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Penguin, brrrr

Image by lorda via Flickr

While Educon is primarily a series of conversations about the impact of technology on education (and vice versa?), like any conference, there’s an undercurrent of conversation about other things.  They’re not primary issues necessarily, but they crop up as people mill about and talk to each other.  While one could ignore the subtext, I think it’s important to address them.

The first subtext had to do with popularity, with A-lists and closed circles and cliques.  I noted this immediately, before reading the conversation at George Couros’s recent blog post.   Whether Educon organizers or attendees like it or not, there are people who are better known than others.  I noted 20 or so folks whom I recognized from blogs and Twitter who all seemed to know each other.  And clearly, people wanted to get a piece of many of them.  Over the years, I’ve been in in-groups, outcast groups, alternative groups, and in some circumstances even in A-list groups.  When you find yourself part of the “popular” crowd, sometimes you don’t even know it.  Sometimes you don’t find out you were in that crowd until you go to your 20th reunion and someone points that out.  And you think, “Damn, why was I so miserable then?”

My sense was that educators, and attendees of Educon in particular, did not want to see this whole high-school drama play out.  People that mentioned it to me–and surprisingly many did–seemed downright surprised.  And, from some of the comments on George’s posts, it’s clear that some actually felt hurt and felt not invited.   I think George’s point in the post was basically, we all have something to say, something teach someone.  Don’t compare yourself to the guy or girl who gets 300 comments on every blog post.  I’ve gotten exactly one comment on the last three blog posts, but here I am, still writing.  Would I like to be a voice lots of people turn to?  Sure.  But my worth, my value to my kids, to my colleagues, to the world at large, is not tied up in whether that happens or not.  Or in whether Will Richardson remembers me.  I had some really interesting conversations with people I’d never met before.  Some are well known.  Some not.  Doesn’t matter.  I learned something from all of them.

But I get that it’s an uncomfortable feeling to feel like you’re not welcome.  I certainly didn’t think that anyone at Educon intentionally put out the unwelcome mat.   All I have to say is try going to the MLA without a job or Ph.D. or job from the “right” place, and then talk to me about feeling unwelcome.  I don’t think Educon is ever going to be like that.  No one glanced at my nametag, saw my place of employment and walked away as fast as possible.

The other related subtext was really more on the surface, because it had its own session.  Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach ran a panel discussion on gender diversity in ed tech.  She blogged it here. I have to admit that when I walked in and saw many of the A-listers mentioned above (many of them men) sitting at the front, I had a moment of pause.  At first I thought they were just being annoying because I didn’t know they were part of a panel.   I know, a little defensive.   But the conversation was great.  There was, I thought, a good mix of men and women at our table.  And I thought everyone really was interested in the topic and interested in trying to solve the problem.

I want to add to some of the things Sheryl and her commenters have said.  I think one issue is not so much that men treat women a certain way or that women are excluded just because they’re women, but that women are excluded because they behave like women.  Let me explain a bit.  I think society tells women to behave a certain way–submissive, not “bitchy”, service-oriented, putting others first, etc.  Some women have been lucky enough to be raised by parents that encourage more assertive behaviors, but sometimes, society breaks them of that.  I have seen in myself sometimes, behavior I recognize as “female,” meaning it compromises any position of power I might have.  And while I have, as some women at Sheryl’s blog have said, felt like “one of the boys,” at some point, I decided I wanted to be me, girl parts included, but I have sometimes brought along the not-so-good parts of that.  It’s a real internal conflict.  And to go with that internal conflict are often external ones–issues around child care, household responsibilities, even parent care.  In other words, it’s complicated.

Educon is a new conference.  The edcamps that have cropped up largely in response to it are really new.  The way we’ve been thinking about education and technology is also really new.  Other fields have been dealing with these subtexts for years.  The fact that they’ve come up for this cohort of people is a good thing.  It’s out there.  We can talk (blog) about it, and maybe make things better.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Educon 2.3 is over.   Last year was my first year attending.  I enjoyed it more this year than I did last.  In part, this had to do with my being firmly entrenched in K-12.  Though I got a lot out of the sessions last year, this year, they meant a lot more and I felt like I could take back some of the things I learned and apply them.  I could also bring some of my own experiences and expertise to the conversation.  Despite not being in K-12 for that long, I’m recognizing that my previous experience as a college-level teacher has not only helped me but is also valuable experience to share.

Some of my favorite sessions included Shifted Learning, a conversation about communities of learners, which looked at concepts such as PLN, PLC, and guild.  We used a lot gaming terminology and gaming experiences to frame our conversation, so I felt right at home.

Another of my favorite sessions was Diversify your Rolodex, a conversation about the lack of women as leaders in educational technology.  It was a fascinating conversation, one we keep visiting in the world of blogs, twitter, technology more broadly.  We keep asking where are the women?  I think they’re here.  I’m here, but I think they’re not here as prolifically as men are.  That’s not something that specifically came up in our conversation, but it’s a phenomenon I’ve noticed before.  The male “thought leaders” in this field (in many fields) tweet more and blog more than many of the women out there.  So they’re more likely to be noticed.  Those same men often comment on each other’s posts, retweet each other, retweet each other’s work, etc.  So again, more attention to those particular people.  I don’t think anyone has done a full on study of this, but they have for political blogs and I suspect similar patterns hold true.  The thing is, it takes some work to pay attention to people you don’t know and/or who are very different from you racially, gender-wise, etc.  I probably am more likely to tweet or comment on posts by middle-age moms than I am other things.  But I try to get outside my own demographic.  So, I’d say to those of you out there who are considered “thought leaders” in ed tech.  Make a point of looking beyond your usual suspects.  See what you find.

I also got a lot out of a panel on The Future of the Book and about Is the Internet Making us Stupid, where I argued that we shouldn’t adapt to our tools, but build the tools we need through Computer Science.   Of course!

Besides all the great scheduled conversations, I had many wonderful spontaneous conversations.  I met a lot of new colleagues, including finally meeting Audrey Watters of Hack Education and ReadWriteWeb.  I also got to catch up with old friends from UMW.  I’m looking forward to future conferences to share more with new and old friends alike.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This past weekend, I attended Educon 2.2 in Philly, hosted by Chris Lehmann and the Science Leadership Academy.  I don’t have time for a huge post, so let me just make a couple of observations.  As far as I could tell, both by the sessions I attended and the overall list, there were very few presentations where people talked at you or went through a step-by-step how to.  The conversations that occurred, and they were conversations, were about big issues: what is professional development, what is the role of play in learning and how do we incorporate more into our teaching, what will schools of the future look like.  And it wasn’t presenters telling us what they thought about all of those things.  Instead, they had us talk to each other about them, recognizing that we all have ideas and expertise to share.  The more the session was about us talking to each other, the more I liked it.  I liked hearing from other people and meeting other people.  I made some very nice and quite unexpected connections.

I had this weird sensation for much of the time as I shifted roles from teacher of teachers to teacher to parent.  I had some interesting conversations around getting parents involved beyond bake sales.  My frustration over the lack of transparency in my kids’ classrooms found a voice and a sympathetic ear.  I spent a lot of time with some colleagues from University of Mary Washington and we were marveling at how similar the conversations that were occurring were to those that occur around teaching in higher ed.  We also noted that more faculty should be knowledgeable about K-12 education beyond their own children’s.

If you’re involved in education at all, this is a conference I urge you to attend next year.  It is lively, informative and inspirational.  I couldn’t have picked a better way to spend my time this weekend.