Mike Matas: A next-generation digital book

Arvind Gupta: Turning trash into toys for learning

Variable Workspace Environment Survey

Please complete this survey in order to provide insights about this direction of thought with regard to variable workspace environments.

I believe the stand-up desk question is actually a three dimensional equation where one could sit or stand while working on a vertical or horizontal surface, all cross-referenced with the particular task at hand. In other words, it is not a simple either/or situation.

Nor is it a generalizable personal preference. Instead, it is a task-specific, personal situation that may have a fourth dimension: Time. Does the time to complete the task (or work on the task) affect the preference as well? I think so, but will have address that in a later survey.

Until then, thanks for your participation on this pilot survey.

A Stand-Up Desk Experiment

In order to learn more about how the application of stand-up desk would work in MCPS elementary school classrooms, I thought it would be interesting to just put one in a classroom and see what happens.

A 3rd grade classroom at Lewis & Clark was chosen and one adjustable stand-up desk was delivered.
The desk, pictured below above, came with no strings, directions, or rules. The teacher was in charge of the desk. I guess there was one string, however. Well, two really. The first is that I would be returning the desk to its proper home at or before the end of this school year, and second, I wanted to know what the students and the teacher think about the desk, and would likely blog about it here.

Students take turns using it and chronicling their thoughts about it. The images below represent the written thoughts of the students who have used the desk thus far. The first two images are those things the students listed as pros of the stand-up desk, and the next two pictures are the cons about the desk. You can click on the images to make them larger.

Maine's Kindergarten iPad 1-to-1 Initiative

Years ago, I followed the Maine schools 1-to-1 laptop project. I found it interesting on multiple levels, but also I was skeptical for several reasons. Now it is time to dust off my past thoughts and update them given the changes across education, technology, and the 21st century world in general.

In the meantime, here are a few links to get readers up to speed:

The Impact of Maine’s One-to-One Laptop Program on Middle School Teachers and Students: Phase One Summary Evidence Research Report #1

The Impact of Maine’s One-to-One Laptop Program on Middle School Teachers and Students Use of Laptop Computers and Classroom Assessment: Are Teachers Making the Connections?

Research Report #4

Article: Going One-to-One from the December 2005/January 2006 issue of Learning in the Digital Age

Personally, I have an iPad and am quite pleased with the device's potential in education. The iPad2 is even better, but ultimately, it is not the machine but the use. As an instructional technologist encouraging the effective and appropriate use of technology in education, my goals include the fearless use of technology in academic and creative endeavours in order to pursue, with reckless abandon, great teaching and learning. In other words, the tech should become invisible within the experience and the learning be conceptualized and owned independent of the device.

In the above CNN video, I tired to figure out what the students were doing with iPads. A lesson learned (from my perspective anyway) from the earlier Maine 1:1 Laptop initiative was that in order for the technology to truly impact the students within the overall longterm goals of education, it had to take a backseat to the content and message of the lessons. However, in studying the 1-to-1 results including those in the links I referenced above, I sometimes had a hard time separating out the computer from its effects.

The yardstick I am using here is not to make the project platform-independent whereby any similar tech might/should yield similar results (as I believe that is often a mistake by the uninformed that leads to 1) the rapid downfall of a project, 2) measurable results contrary to those intended, and 3) a clear path for opponents to challenge the hardware decisions and budget), but instead to focus on the learning objective and outcomes by which the device is an efficient conduit to personalization and success.

The kindergarten entry point for this integration will also be a something to watch. Not only is it a project launching from a grade level often contrary to conventional district technology expenditures, but it provides a wonderfully effective leverage point causing all grades to follow to either get with the program or risk giving the impression that a student's matriculation is actually downhill slide into mediocrity.