After issues on April 14th and 15th, glitches cropped up again today (4/21) in Minnesota's high-stakes online MCA tests. This time, nearly every district in the state experienced some issues. At least one local news organization has picked up on the problems. I have feeling more will follow. (And they have - Pioneer Press - WCCO - In fact, since I started writing this post, MDE has suspended all testing until further notice)
The MN Department of Education (MDE) and the testing vendor, Pearson held a joint conference call on Monday (4/20). During the Q & A, dozens of MN districts reported various issues that caused, at minimum, frustrating delays in starting test sessions for students and at worst, lost data. What was clear was that these issues were not isolated to specific tests or geographic location of the schools and they were not usually caused by local school district network or setup problems.
So, bring on today (Tuesday 4/21) and by 8:45 this morning, Pearson and MDE acknowledged that some of the systems were in a "degraded" state resulting in delays. For about 2.5 hours in the middle of the day, the systems were reportedly working, before going back into a degraded state and eventually becoming unresponsive. (my guess is it worked during the lunch hours when few testing sessions were being held.)
If you've read my previous posts, you know that I have questions about the validity of a testing system that introduces variables of anxiety and frustration. I've conveyed that message to many people including officials at MDE and as you saw above, MDE has now suspended testing citing some of the same concerns I and many others have pointed out. Also of note is that these issues have affected testing in other states as well.
I did find it interesting that one of the responses I received from an MDE official pointed to me to a study that had been done after the 2013 Spring testing season when similar issues occurred with the previous testing vendor, American Institutes for Research (AIR). After taking a brief look, I recalled that this was used to calm the concerns over validity as the study generally indicated that there was no significant effect to students who experienced the issues on those days in April 2013. However, there are significant problems with the study and it so narrowly examined ONLY the specific issue that occurred on those days that it certainly has NO correlation to what we are experiencing now. I'll probably do a separate post about that study - and I have a general post about testing coming up too. Check back soon if you think you might be interested in either of those ramblings!
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Minnesota Online State Testing - Not Fair to Students
So, Minnesota's high-stakes online student testing (known as MCA's) kicked off on March 9th, but because of Spring breaks and the desire to have as many instructional days as possible before testing, most districts wait until later in the 8-week testing window (which is ridiculously long from a statistical point of view) to administer the tests. This week was the first "heavy" week of testing, though some started earlier. And, as many predicted, the online systems received a failing grade, but it's the students who really lose.
A talented technology coordinator from Milaca, Steve Bistrup, wrote a message to his administration about their experiences with testing thus far. Here is a sample of what he wrote - warning, it is a bit long, but I think well worth the read and sharing with others!!
Long Wait #1 During the mornings in particular, but not exclusively, students have to wait an unacceptably long time for Pearson's main "Self Registration" page to load. Staff are now having to come to work extra early to "pre-load" Pearson's main server page so that students don't have to wait the 5-20 minutes for the login page. This is extremely difficult when we potentially will be testing six sessions simultaneously. (This slowness is NOT a result of our network infrastructure or speeds... these have been ruled out conclusively by technicians and Pearson support).
Long Wait #2 Once students enter their credentials and test code there is another "randomly" long waiting period. We have seen students wait as long as 45 minutes for "the blue bar" to finally load their test questions. (Again, this is NOT a result of our caching server or internal network)
Two to four adults needed to start each session Because we are always having to restart the browser, try a different computer, empty the java cache, reset the browser, etc. until we can finally get a student logged in to the test, an unacceptable number of adults are needed in order to reduce the amount of time students are sitting in front of a spinning wheel while the person next to them is 20 minutes into their test. I can't imagine the amount of anxiety this creates in the students. It certainly creates a high degree of anxiety and frustration in those that desperately want the students to have a fair shot and do their best work. I recall one student who anxiously waited for his test to load....worried that if he had to wait too long he would miss outside recess. The teacher and I had to both reassure him to take his time once he was logged in.
Constant browser plug-ins updates and Pearson's sporadic warnings On 4/14/15 Oracle released a new version of Java. Because Apple computers and TestNAV require you to be on the latest version of Java, staff needed to stay long into the evening that night in order to update Java on every computer that students would be testing on the next morning. For Milaca this is 120 laptops and 90 lab computers. There was also a new version of Flash on this date. Pearson warned us about the Java update but not the Flash update. Luckily we caught it. I can't begin to count how many times Java and Flash have had updates since school started. Some of them Pearson informs us of...more often then not they don't.
Math Test Calculator Issues Pearson acknowledged this as a known issue during the OLPA session. We have now had the same issue during the MCA math sessions. When a student uses the built-in calculator during a math test it randomly locks up their test session. Pearson's only answer has been to "force quit the test and have the student log back into the test." *see points one and two why this is more than inconvenient. Worse, a student has to shut down and restart their testing mindset and momentum.
Server outage and support On 4/14/15 Pearson Access server crashed or "became degraded" across the entire State of Minnesota resulting in testing administrators being unable to manage test sessions. When I called I was put on hold and twice was disconnected with a busy signal. When Pearson eventually sent out a formal message the verbiage was disingenuous. The message made a point to emphasize that "TestNAV and Testing were not effected." Yes, for those kids that were currently in their test they were able to continue. However, no other session could be started or resumed resulting in entire testing sessions being missed or postponed.
Not a fair assessment for kids I have been involved with online testing since the very beginning and I can say that no testing period has been approached with more trepidation by those managing the testing. Unfortunately we have now seen those fears played out. These past two weeks have been frustrating and unfair to kids. If the testing mechanism is supposed to be as transparent as a paper booklet and as technologically easy as working a #2 Dixon Ticonderoga then this has been a colossal failure. I've watched kids put their heads down in frustration as they wait. I've seen students lose their focus as a result of the glitches. I've seen the worry on an instructors face as they watch all the preparation and build-up deflated in a matter of minutes.
Hi - I'm back! I have examples from many other districts too, but Steve says it well, so I wanted to share those experiences. (Congratulations, by the way if you've reached this part of the post!) I can say that not all schools have experienced all of the same issues, but that just goes to reinforce the idea that this is not a fair assessment for kids. In the MN Department of Education Assessment Update - released today 4/15/15 - They included the following message:
To reduce testing disruptions for students, take appropriate actions to reduce noise, such as limiting the use of alarms (not fire alarms), bells, and announcements. Districts should avoid scheduling test sessions during known interruptions, such as during lunch breaks or pre-planned fire or tornado drills.
What about the disruptions caused by all the issues Steve points out? If a district encounters those kinds of issues (NOT a result of anything they did or didn't do) can we really validate that data? Is it a fair comparison to previous years' results if the same issues were not present then? Can anyone feel good about evaluating the success of teachers, students and schools based on such inconsistent testing environments? Heaven forbid we compare districts to each other based on these results. Yet, that is exactly what happens.
The MN Department of Education publishes their "Minnesota School Report Card" on their website each year. Designed for the public to look at progress and demographic information about schools - and built to provide side-by-side comparisons. Front and center on each schools "report card" is proficiency data for the MCA tests for the past 5 years. No where does it indicate that you may be comparing a school where online testing worked flawlessly and one where students were subjected to the kinds of distractions and frustrations that Steve noted. Yes, I firmly believe there would be statistically significant differences. Not to mention you are looking at results from year to year when entirely different groups of students were tested - I'm sure there are no variables there that could influence validity! Plus (though I'll admit this is noted if you look carefully) standards have changed in all three tested areas in the past 5 years, which again, invalidates comparisons from year to year.
I'll stop now - you get the point about how unfair this situation is. Kudos to you if you made it this far! I'll probably break this up, condense it and repackage it in some messages to folks at MDE, legislators, etc. Feel free to share it with anyone you think has the attention span to read it!! And... stay tuned for more updates and even some thoughts about how to improve it.
A talented technology coordinator from Milaca, Steve Bistrup, wrote a message to his administration about their experiences with testing thus far. Here is a sample of what he wrote - warning, it is a bit long, but I think well worth the read and sharing with others!!
Long Wait #1 During the mornings in particular, but not exclusively, students have to wait an unacceptably long time for Pearson's main "Self Registration" page to load. Staff are now having to come to work extra early to "pre-load" Pearson's main server page so that students don't have to wait the 5-20 minutes for the login page. This is extremely difficult when we potentially will be testing six sessions simultaneously. (This slowness is NOT a result of our network infrastructure or speeds... these have been ruled out conclusively by technicians and Pearson support).
Long Wait #2 Once students enter their credentials and test code there is another "randomly" long waiting period. We have seen students wait as long as 45 minutes for "the blue bar" to finally load their test questions. (Again, this is NOT a result of our caching server or internal network)
Two to four adults needed to start each session Because we are always having to restart the browser, try a different computer, empty the java cache, reset the browser, etc. until we can finally get a student logged in to the test, an unacceptable number of adults are needed in order to reduce the amount of time students are sitting in front of a spinning wheel while the person next to them is 20 minutes into their test. I can't imagine the amount of anxiety this creates in the students. It certainly creates a high degree of anxiety and frustration in those that desperately want the students to have a fair shot and do their best work. I recall one student who anxiously waited for his test to load....worried that if he had to wait too long he would miss outside recess. The teacher and I had to both reassure him to take his time once he was logged in.
Constant browser plug-ins updates and Pearson's sporadic warnings On 4/14/15 Oracle released a new version of Java. Because Apple computers and TestNAV require you to be on the latest version of Java, staff needed to stay long into the evening that night in order to update Java on every computer that students would be testing on the next morning. For Milaca this is 120 laptops and 90 lab computers. There was also a new version of Flash on this date. Pearson warned us about the Java update but not the Flash update. Luckily we caught it. I can't begin to count how many times Java and Flash have had updates since school started. Some of them Pearson informs us of...more often then not they don't.
Math Test Calculator Issues Pearson acknowledged this as a known issue during the OLPA session. We have now had the same issue during the MCA math sessions. When a student uses the built-in calculator during a math test it randomly locks up their test session. Pearson's only answer has been to "force quit the test and have the student log back into the test." *see points one and two why this is more than inconvenient. Worse, a student has to shut down and restart their testing mindset and momentum.
Server outage and support On 4/14/15 Pearson Access server crashed or "became degraded" across the entire State of Minnesota resulting in testing administrators being unable to manage test sessions. When I called I was put on hold and twice was disconnected with a busy signal. When Pearson eventually sent out a formal message the verbiage was disingenuous. The message made a point to emphasize that "TestNAV and Testing were not effected." Yes, for those kids that were currently in their test they were able to continue. However, no other session could be started or resumed resulting in entire testing sessions being missed or postponed.
Not a fair assessment for kids I have been involved with online testing since the very beginning and I can say that no testing period has been approached with more trepidation by those managing the testing. Unfortunately we have now seen those fears played out. These past two weeks have been frustrating and unfair to kids. If the testing mechanism is supposed to be as transparent as a paper booklet and as technologically easy as working a #2 Dixon Ticonderoga then this has been a colossal failure. I've watched kids put their heads down in frustration as they wait. I've seen students lose their focus as a result of the glitches. I've seen the worry on an instructors face as they watch all the preparation and build-up deflated in a matter of minutes.
Hi - I'm back! I have examples from many other districts too, but Steve says it well, so I wanted to share those experiences. (Congratulations, by the way if you've reached this part of the post!) I can say that not all schools have experienced all of the same issues, but that just goes to reinforce the idea that this is not a fair assessment for kids. In the MN Department of Education Assessment Update - released today 4/15/15 - They included the following message:
To reduce testing disruptions for students, take appropriate actions to reduce noise, such as limiting the use of alarms (not fire alarms), bells, and announcements. Districts should avoid scheduling test sessions during known interruptions, such as during lunch breaks or pre-planned fire or tornado drills.
What about the disruptions caused by all the issues Steve points out? If a district encounters those kinds of issues (NOT a result of anything they did or didn't do) can we really validate that data? Is it a fair comparison to previous years' results if the same issues were not present then? Can anyone feel good about evaluating the success of teachers, students and schools based on such inconsistent testing environments? Heaven forbid we compare districts to each other based on these results. Yet, that is exactly what happens.
The MN Department of Education publishes their "Minnesota School Report Card" on their website each year. Designed for the public to look at progress and demographic information about schools - and built to provide side-by-side comparisons. Front and center on each schools "report card" is proficiency data for the MCA tests for the past 5 years. No where does it indicate that you may be comparing a school where online testing worked flawlessly and one where students were subjected to the kinds of distractions and frustrations that Steve noted. Yes, I firmly believe there would be statistically significant differences. Not to mention you are looking at results from year to year when entirely different groups of students were tested - I'm sure there are no variables there that could influence validity! Plus (though I'll admit this is noted if you look carefully) standards have changed in all three tested areas in the past 5 years, which again, invalidates comparisons from year to year.
I'll stop now - you get the point about how unfair this situation is. Kudos to you if you made it this far! I'll probably break this up, condense it and repackage it in some messages to folks at MDE, legislators, etc. Feel free to share it with anyone you think has the attention span to read it!! And... stay tuned for more updates and even some thoughts about how to improve it.
Monday, April 13, 2015
Keep Rural Broadband a Bipartisan Priority
Throughout the current Minnesota legislative session, rural broadband development has presented itself as mostly a bipartisan issue. A Republican authored bill in the House (HF593), a Democrat authored bill (SF439) in the Senate and co-authors from both sides of the aisle.
Then, HF843 arrives as an omnibus economic development bill and the Office of Broadband Development (OBD) and Border to Border (B2B) grant program are removed from the original language of the bill. An article appeared on the StarTribune website on Thursday April 9th indicating that the funding had been removed, adding comments from Representative Pat Garofalo (R - Farmington).
I fired off a number of messages to my legislators, those representing the schools I work with, members of the Job Growth and Energy Affordability Policy and Finance Committee, a few others and Representative Garofalo. My note to Rep. Garofalo is shown below. I encourage any of you with an interest in this issue to voice it now. I've received a fair amount of feedback from my messages including some that aim to calm me by saying, "...things in St. Paul aren't always pretty..." and, "Bills are commodities... we trade commodities." I understand all of that, but it doesn't mean I have to like it, and I know that if we stay silent, then no one believes it is important.
*** Below is an email message sent on Friday, April 10th, 2015 ***
Representative Garofalo:
Then, HF843 arrives as an omnibus economic development bill and the Office of Broadband Development (OBD) and Border to Border (B2B) grant program are removed from the original language of the bill. An article appeared on the StarTribune website on Thursday April 9th indicating that the funding had been removed, adding comments from Representative Pat Garofalo (R - Farmington).
I fired off a number of messages to my legislators, those representing the schools I work with, members of the Job Growth and Energy Affordability Policy and Finance Committee, a few others and Representative Garofalo. My note to Rep. Garofalo is shown below. I encourage any of you with an interest in this issue to voice it now. I've received a fair amount of feedback from my messages including some that aim to calm me by saying, "...things in St. Paul aren't always pretty..." and, "Bills are commodities... we trade commodities." I understand all of that, but it doesn't mean I have to like it, and I know that if we stay silent, then no one believes it is important.
*** Below is an email message sent on Friday, April 10th, 2015 ***
Representative Garofalo:
With all due respect, I believe any decision to defund the Office of Broadband Development (OBD) and the Border to Border (B2B) grant program will set rural Minnesota back years and maybe even decades and is a detriment to residents and businesses who wish to locate in rural areas of the state, not to mention schools, healthcare facilities and so on.
I am the Executive Director of a mostly rural cooperative of school districts. We provide technology services to our districts including wide area network support, network services, Internet access and many other instructional and professional development services. I have also been working for four years with the Kanabec Broadband Initiative and the East Central Regional Broadband Committee to bring broadband options to our rural residents. I have testified for Representative Kresha's bills, including that which would have funded the OBD and B2B program.
A Star-Tribune article indicated that you believe wireless options are cheaper. I beg to differ. We have wireless providers in our area including fixed wireless, cellular and satellite. In ALL cases the costs to consumers are significantly higher than wired (copper or fiber) services due to high equipment costs, data caps and generally high monthly fees. The service level is significantly slower than wired options - in most cases barely reaching the minimum definition of broadband at best and usually much slower - and the wireless solutions experience many more service interruptions than any wired option. I think these are easily documented facts and I challenge you to find a significant number of consumers or rural business who are satisfied with wireless services and think it is an affordable solution. Certainly, in our part of that state, they are not affordable options.
I would concede that SOME wireless solutions MAY be cheaper to deploy - at least initially, but I believe that may be offset by the fact that the equipment to drive wireless solutions has a much shorter lifespan than most equipment used in wired solutions. Additionally, the limited amount of spectrum available for wireless solutions makes it difficult to deploy in some areas of the state. It is nothing more than a "Band-Aid" fix.
I encourage you to re-examine this issue and avoid making it a political pawn. Broadband is as important to life and economic development today as electricity and water. Rural Minnesotans will be the losers if this issue dies in the session. If this issue dies, it will effectively kill years of work done by groups around the state to build capacity for public-private partnerships - the kind that the B2B program created.
Please feel free to contact me at any time to discuss. My contact information, including cell phone are below. Thank you for your time and service to the state.
Regards,
Marc Johnson
Monday, February 2, 2015
Border to Border Broadband in Minnesota?
OK... it's been a year, so it's time to once again opine on the pages of the Interweb...
Today, Minnesota's Office of Broadband Development (part of DEED) released the long-awaited list of grant recipients for their $20 million Boarder to Boarder Broadband project. An impressive list of 17 projects scattered across the state of Minnesota. First, congratulations to those behind the funded projects. If you are lucky enough to live in one of the areas that will now receive high-speed broadband, welcome to the 21st century!! You'll love it!
Next, am I disappointed that Kanabec County - and all of East Central Minnesota for that matter - was left out? Yes I am. Lots of people have been working hard for over four years to get better broadband options for our area. Another setback doesn't help, but we can learn from it and strive to present a better case next time. And I think we will.
In the meantime, I've done a little math and present the following information... not to diminish the projects that were funded, but to illustrate just how big this problem still is in the state... and to hopefully help keep the momentum going into this legislative session as we look for continued funding of this program.
So, today's announcement helps the overall broadband conversation/discussion... as long as the legislature doesn't see this as "now we've fixed that problem." It looks to me that the projects chosen were some of the smaller $$ projects among the 40 applicants. They are nicely distributed across the state, and, yes, I know why that matters! There were a couple that were larger, but the average award is just over $1 million and most of the projects serve relatively small geographical and demographical numbers. There were 40 applications totaling $44 million in requests. I know there are lots of un and under served areas that didn't apply because the maximum $5 million amount wasn't enough to make a significant difference in their area, or because they didn't have the necessary partnerships or planning in place to make it happen. So... I hope the legislature doesn't look at this and say... "Well, looks like another $20 million should do the trick and we'll be done." That can't be further from the truth.
Today, Minnesota's Office of Broadband Development (part of DEED) released the long-awaited list of grant recipients for their $20 million Boarder to Boarder Broadband project. An impressive list of 17 projects scattered across the state of Minnesota. First, congratulations to those behind the funded projects. If you are lucky enough to live in one of the areas that will now receive high-speed broadband, welcome to the 21st century!! You'll love it!
Next, am I disappointed that Kanabec County - and all of East Central Minnesota for that matter - was left out? Yes I am. Lots of people have been working hard for over four years to get better broadband options for our area. Another setback doesn't help, but we can learn from it and strive to present a better case next time. And I think we will.
In the meantime, I've done a little math and present the following information... not to diminish the projects that were funded, but to illustrate just how big this problem still is in the state... and to hopefully help keep the momentum going into this legislative session as we look for continued funding of this program.
So, today's announcement helps the overall broadband conversation/discussion... as long as the legislature doesn't see this as "now we've fixed that problem." It looks to me that the projects chosen were some of the smaller $$ projects among the 40 applicants. They are nicely distributed across the state, and, yes, I know why that matters! There were a couple that were larger, but the average award is just over $1 million and most of the projects serve relatively small geographical and demographical numbers. There were 40 applications totaling $44 million in requests. I know there are lots of un and under served areas that didn't apply because the maximum $5 million amount wasn't enough to make a significant difference in their area, or because they didn't have the necessary partnerships or planning in place to make it happen. So... I hope the legislature doesn't look at this and say... "Well, looks like another $20 million should do the trick and we'll be done." That can't be further from the truth.
The latest broadband coverage information put out by the Office of Broadband (DEED) Found here: http://mn.gov/deed/
It's a start... and great news for the people in those communities. If you live in one of those areas, please thank your state representatives and senators. Then, if they happen to be in your area for a press conference or photo-op, or just to have a community forum, please remind them that there is still about 20% of the state's population that do not have the same opportunities. It would help us all if everyone would move that message forward.
Thursday, January 30, 2014
The Community College Trap?
A colleague forwarded this article from The Atlantic and I found it interesting. I found the following two point to be of most interest to me - of course, you may find other interesting points as well. In any event, I think you will find it a good read... (And, BTW, I haven't fact-checked the statistics yet.)
- The statistics about the number of community college students who earn degrees shocked me at first. "Nationwide, barely more than a third of community-college enrollees emerge with a certificate or degree within six years." Now, my shock was lessened just a bit by understanding that many people take community college courses for continuing education or improvement of job skills without an expectation of earning a certificate or degree. However, that statistic is still interesting to me. We don't hear that from the admissions folks or other officials at the colleges.
- The second idea that I found interesting was the authors outlook on the rise of options, such as massive open online courses, or, MOOCs, designed to give students easier access to higher education. She notes that, "All it will take for students to avail themselves of this emerging opportunity is a clear sense of where they’re headed, lots of self-motivation, and good access to information about what mix of skills is likely to lead to a promising career." Further noting that those are some of the qualities many of the students community college was designed for struggle with the most.
The main point of the article is to highlight a program that gives struggling students a solid level of support through their community college experience and appears to lead to high rates of success. Now, if we could find a way to extend that kind of support to the world of online learning, we might find more success there too. Once again, you can find the entire article here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/01/how-to-escape-the-community-college-trap/355745/
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Rural Broadband and Education - Part 4
So... how does a lack of affordable broadband access in rural areas affect a typical family? Let me give you an example (based on real people and experiences)...
This "rural" family lives only a few miles outside of a community of over 3,000 people. The family is composed of two tech-savvy parents and two high school students with four smartphones, a tablet device, and two laptop computers. Statistically, a fairly average situation. Available options and approximate costs (real rates and NOT special introductory pricing) for this family to consider include:
This "rural" family lives only a few miles outside of a community of over 3,000 people. The family is composed of two tech-savvy parents and two high school students with four smartphones, a tablet device, and two laptop computers. Statistically, a fairly average situation. Available options and approximate costs (real rates and NOT special introductory pricing) for this family to consider include:
- Cellular data access available from two carriers, one offering 4G technology at about 8mbps download speed. Pricing is based on data usage (data caps) with an average of $10 per GB/mo with a $15 per GB overage charge. Additional monthly costs are incurred for each connected device and/or a shared hotspot device.
- Fixed wireless service offering speeds up to 5mbps down. Costs include equipment (about $300), setup (about $150), router (about $75) and a monthly charge of up to $100 for 5mbps speed (slower options are available at a lower monthly rate).
- Satellite service offering speeds up to 12mbps down. Costs include setup fee (about $150), equipment rental (about $10 per month) a two-year service agreement and a monthly charge of $50 (with a 10GB data cap) to $130 (with a 25GB data cap).
- DSL service from the local telephone company offering a speed of up to 1.5mbps (however, in their location it is more likely to be about 768kbps) with a monthly charge of $35 month with equipment rental and a landline (more if no phone line is included)
- Dialup service is available, but doesn't even come close to the lowest definition of broadband.
Given those options, what would your choice be and what would the conversations in your household sound like? How would you feel knowing that if you lived in town 3 miles away, you would have access to 30mbps speeds with no data cap for less than $50/mo or 7mbps with no data cap for less than $40/mo?
This family does not live "in the middle of nowhere." With the options they have, they cannot reliably stream any kind of video, be it for entertainment or educational purposes, without the risk of high cost for higher data consumption or overages. They are forced to carefully monitor their Internet usage and plan around time at work and school to update apps on mobile devices, run updates on computers, and do other bandwidth intensive activities. Most options don't provide reliable use of communications technologies such as Skype or Google+ due to high latency or slow speed. All of this forces the discussion to be about what can't be done rather than focusing on what can (or needs to) be done.
Why does this matter? We make choices when we decide to live where we do, right? Consider the increasing use of laptop computers and mobile devices in schools. How useful is your computer, tablet or smartphone when it isn't connected to a high speed, Wi-Fi network? What goes through your mind when you are away from home and staying in a hotel with poor wireless access? Students access class work online through web portals and learning management systems. Homework involves accessing information on these sites and communicating with teachers and classmates online. Interactive electronic textbooks and other online learning resources are fast becoming the norm in education. Is it fair to put students without this access at an immediate disadvantage, forcing the students and teachers to figure out accommodations? Would it be fair to all students NOT to use these technologies if they make education better?
Well, this only affects a small population, right? Overall, a majority of people in this nation have access to high-speed broadband, but that doesn't mean it is affordable. Costs can vary wildly, which adds to the divide we are creating. Providers lure customers in with artificially low (loss-leading) introductory pricing and then costs rise dramatically after a year or two. Additionally, consider that nearly 75% of the population in Kanabec County (Minnesota) lives outside of the counties communities and, therefore, has very similar options to those above. There are many other parts of this country that are similar.
Broadband access is beginning to define the haves and have-nots. It is the new digital divide. We will not stop the movement of voice, video and print resources online. Soon, land-line phones, DVDs (and Blu-ray), CDs, books, magazines and newspapers will be a thing of the past just like video tapes, records, and encyclopedias. If we don't become concerned about how to make affordable high-speed access ubiquitous, we will put a whole subset of our nation's population further behind.
Well, this only affects a small population, right? Overall, a majority of people in this nation have access to high-speed broadband, but that doesn't mean it is affordable. Costs can vary wildly, which adds to the divide we are creating. Providers lure customers in with artificially low (loss-leading) introductory pricing and then costs rise dramatically after a year or two. Additionally, consider that nearly 75% of the population in Kanabec County (Minnesota) lives outside of the counties communities and, therefore, has very similar options to those above. There are many other parts of this country that are similar.
Broadband access is beginning to define the haves and have-nots. It is the new digital divide. We will not stop the movement of voice, video and print resources online. Soon, land-line phones, DVDs (and Blu-ray), CDs, books, magazines and newspapers will be a thing of the past just like video tapes, records, and encyclopedias. If we don't become concerned about how to make affordable high-speed access ubiquitous, we will put a whole subset of our nation's population further behind.
I'll be taking a break from writing about this topic (but keep reading for other ramblings!) until after the "Boarder to Boarder Broadband: A Call to Action" conference coming up February 4-5, 2014 in St. Paul, MN. I'm hopeful that there will be concrete action items that come out of the conference that I can write about. If you are interested in attending, find more information at: https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?EventID=1360663
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Rural Broadband and Education - Part 3
Took a few days off - this takes more time than I'd like it too!
I said after the last post that this time, I would talk about how increased bandwidth changed the environment in a school. In May 2006, I took a job as the technology director for ISD 15 in St. Francis, MN. At the time, the school district of nearly 6,000 students, with six school buildings and several other service facilities was served by two T-1 circuits. That is the equivalent of about 3mbps. Now, 2006 was quite some time ago, but at the same time, the 10 school districts in ECMECC shared a gigabit fiber network and 200mbps of Internet bandwidth.
The fist thing I did in my new district was to go on a listening tour to hear from all district administrators, department chairs and program directors. I wanted to know what was great about technology in their school and what they saw as issues. You can probably guess that I heard about many more issues than I did positives. Over and again, I heard about all the things they couldn't do because the technology department told them there wasn't enough bandwidth to run the student information system, finance/payroll systems and many educational tools at the same time. The district had a subscription to a popular streaming video service but staff was told they couldn't stream the videos during class, instead having to schedule videos to download after hours. The service hardly ever was used. They were told that they should not expect to use Internet resources with a class in a computer lab as they would probably not work. Teachers complained about slow access to Internet resources and they could not use the electronic grade book and other features that were part of their student information system. Technology committee meetings, I heard, were frustrating exercises and the technology department and staff seemed constantly at odds.
Within a few months, the St. Francis district was connected to the ECMECC network and had access to as much Internet bandwidth as they could use. During the first part of the 06-07 school year, the bandwidth use climbed to nearly 10mbps - which doesn't sound like much by today's standard, but was over 3 times what they had access to only months earlier. While not all technology issues were solved by this, the conversations with staff and administration changed almost overnight. Technology planning went into full swing and the technology committee talked about what they could do. We implemented use of streaming video in the classroom and for athletic teams. Teachers began using Internet resources with their classes in labs. Projectors and whiteboards started showing up so resources could be used in classrooms. Discussion began about wireless access. Everyone was excited about technology in the school, a far cry from where they had been only a few months earlier.
I left the district only two years later, but the district is now a full member of ECMECC and has numerous technology initiatives that rival that of most school districts. For example, the district has a "bring-your-own-device" policy that sees thousands of mobile devices attached to their network every day. Students use the devices for course work and research. Technology goals set during the technology planning process are reached. The district is using interactive video conferencing to take students on virtual trips around the world to participate in interactive learning experiences. See this link for a story about IVC at St. Francis from WCCO-TV. Implementing unlimited bandwidth was a simple change that fundamentally altered the educational technology conversation throughout the district.
Up Next: This is an example of how things changed for a school district once they had no data cap (in this case related to speed). I believe data caps in place for many of the choices rural residents and business have for broadband create a similar situation where conversations are more about what can't be done than what can. We'll take a look at that issue next time. - Stay warm!
I said after the last post that this time, I would talk about how increased bandwidth changed the environment in a school. In May 2006, I took a job as the technology director for ISD 15 in St. Francis, MN. At the time, the school district of nearly 6,000 students, with six school buildings and several other service facilities was served by two T-1 circuits. That is the equivalent of about 3mbps. Now, 2006 was quite some time ago, but at the same time, the 10 school districts in ECMECC shared a gigabit fiber network and 200mbps of Internet bandwidth.
The fist thing I did in my new district was to go on a listening tour to hear from all district administrators, department chairs and program directors. I wanted to know what was great about technology in their school and what they saw as issues. You can probably guess that I heard about many more issues than I did positives. Over and again, I heard about all the things they couldn't do because the technology department told them there wasn't enough bandwidth to run the student information system, finance/payroll systems and many educational tools at the same time. The district had a subscription to a popular streaming video service but staff was told they couldn't stream the videos during class, instead having to schedule videos to download after hours. The service hardly ever was used. They were told that they should not expect to use Internet resources with a class in a computer lab as they would probably not work. Teachers complained about slow access to Internet resources and they could not use the electronic grade book and other features that were part of their student information system. Technology committee meetings, I heard, were frustrating exercises and the technology department and staff seemed constantly at odds.
Within a few months, the St. Francis district was connected to the ECMECC network and had access to as much Internet bandwidth as they could use. During the first part of the 06-07 school year, the bandwidth use climbed to nearly 10mbps - which doesn't sound like much by today's standard, but was over 3 times what they had access to only months earlier. While not all technology issues were solved by this, the conversations with staff and administration changed almost overnight. Technology planning went into full swing and the technology committee talked about what they could do. We implemented use of streaming video in the classroom and for athletic teams. Teachers began using Internet resources with their classes in labs. Projectors and whiteboards started showing up so resources could be used in classrooms. Discussion began about wireless access. Everyone was excited about technology in the school, a far cry from where they had been only a few months earlier.
I left the district only two years later, but the district is now a full member of ECMECC and has numerous technology initiatives that rival that of most school districts. For example, the district has a "bring-your-own-device" policy that sees thousands of mobile devices attached to their network every day. Students use the devices for course work and research. Technology goals set during the technology planning process are reached. The district is using interactive video conferencing to take students on virtual trips around the world to participate in interactive learning experiences. See this link for a story about IVC at St. Francis from WCCO-TV. Implementing unlimited bandwidth was a simple change that fundamentally altered the educational technology conversation throughout the district.
Up Next: This is an example of how things changed for a school district once they had no data cap (in this case related to speed). I believe data caps in place for many of the choices rural residents and business have for broadband create a similar situation where conversations are more about what can't be done than what can. We'll take a look at that issue next time. - Stay warm!
Monday, January 20, 2014
Rural Broadband and Education - Part 2
How much bandwidth is enough?
This is a graph showing the average amount of Internet bandwidth consumed in an average week by the 42,000+ students and 2,000+ instructional and administrative staff in the 14 ECMECC member school districts that I work with.
If you look closely, you can see that we are using about 1.0gbps (that's 1000 megabits per second) during peak times. Eight years ago, we served most of these same schools with 10mbps - that's 1% of what we are using now -- and is similar to the speed of a "basic" DSL or Cable connection in a non-metro community. Today, our schools use 100 times the bandwidth they did eight years ago on a daily basis. And... the number continues to climb. So, what are students and staff doing with all this bandwidth, and what is enough?
There are people who will have us believe that kids are watching videos, playing games and engaging in social media activities while in school. I would say that they are absolutely right, students, are, indeed, doing all of those things. They would say this is a waste of time and bandwidth. I would say it is the way students learn today. Recently, a letter to the editor appeared in our local paper from a writer who believed we should eliminate computers (and presumably mobile devices - though they didn't say that specifically) from our schools since they detract from what they believe is the best way to learn. At a recent meeting I attended organized by Senator Matt Schmit, a participant suggested that people in rural areas and communities don't need "that much" bandwidth since their kids will just stream movies, play games and spend all their time on "that Facebook." Once again, I contend that this is now how people access this kind of content and communicate. It would be like going back 20 years and saying some people don't need a VCR or a phone since they will just play movies and talk.
Think back 10 years... How many places could you find in your area to rent a DVD (or buy one)? Today, how many are there? While rental stores have been replaced to some degree by Netflix (mail-order) and services like Redbox, there is no disputing that the options for renting and buying physical content (DVDs) are diminishing and will likely vanish in the not-to-distant future. The same is true for music (CDs). Now, music and video content is streamed online, and it takes a robust Internet connection to get good quality. Of course, that's entertainment. What about education?
Again, take yourself back 20 years or so and think about how you "learned." Current events information may have come from newspapers, broadcast television or local radio. Remember the trip to the public library or a bookstore to find a book about something that you wanted to learn about? Remember when you needed a manual to figure out how to replace the headlight in your car? In school, you used textbooks that may have been published as long as 10 years or more prior to your use and films that were produced in years gone by.
Today, the number of daily newspapers being published in the United States is down 25% from 20 years ago and readership numbers have fallen off exponentially. Broadcast television and radio is struggling to keep viewers and listeners and has less and less unbiased "news" content. Physical books and manuals have been replaced by ebooks and videos. Heck, most encyclopedia companies don't make encyclopedias anymore (though World Book still does!). We don't access information or learn like that anymore. All of this content has shifted online and will continue to do so.
Accessing that information takes bandwidth in larger and larger amounts. There is a seemingly endless amount of rubbish on YouTube, but it is also the first place I go now when I want to know how to fix or do something. News organizations use YouTube to post content and there are just as many educational videos as cat videos (OK, maybe almost as many as cat videos!) See the Khan Academy for just one example of educational content on YouTube. Without high-speed, affordable Internet access students and families are immediately at a disadvantage. What is enough? I don't know, but I do know that a large number of Minnesotan's (and I'm sure others in the US) don't have adequate access to learn and live in the world of Internet delivered content. People living in high-density urban areas keep getting improved Internet speeds while those in rural areas pay more for less and see little speed improvement. As I said in my previous post, it is our new digital divide and we need to find a solution.
Up Next: How increased bandwidth fundamentally changed the education environment of a school district and how it could change a families life.
Sunday, January 19, 2014
Rural Broadband and Education - Part 1
Starting a multi-part series of posts about some of the issues around broadband access in rural areas and education. I've been working for several years with a variety of rural broadband initiatives including the Kanabec Broadband Initiative (KBI) and the East Central Broadband Initiative (ECBI). These groups, and others like them, continue to educate the general public about the importance of broadband, and work to bring more broadband options and affordability to rural parts of Minnesota.
It is no secret that with the proliferation of mobile devices, 1-1 initiatives and migration to cloud based services for productivity and curriculum resources, schools rely on broadband more than ever, and there is no looking back. Unfortunately, many of our students, especially those living in rural areas outside of communities, do not have adequate, affordable broadband access. This puts them at an immediate disadvantage in the new technology-laden education environment. We have a new divide to conquer. Of course, the lack of quality, affordable access in rural areas poses a number of problems from economic development to quality of life to healthcare, to name a few. My focus, however, continues to be on education.
To that end, I have participated in some community meetings recently, arranged by MN Senator Matt Schmit and sponsored by various community organizations. Senator Schmit has taken on the issue of rural broadband and spent time in November and January touring the state to hear about the needs of rural Minnesotans. I had the opportunity to attend two of the meetings in Mora and North Branch to represent the schools in the area. In both cases, I shared some of the initiatives going on in area schools and talked about how schools are limited to what they can expect from students using technology outside of the school buildings. Our schools have very high speed access and do not have speed or data usage caps. I shared that this has changed the way schools talk about technology. Our schools do not talk about what they can't do (because of low bandwidth), they talk about what they CAN do. Sadly, that is not the case with many families living in rural areas. With slow speeds, data caps and expensive overage charges, these families still talk about what they CAN'T do.
I will bring this message to the Border to Border Broadband conference on February 4th and 5th in St. Paul. Senator Schmit has invited me to participate with him on a panel to share the messages he heard around the state during his listening tour. I invite anyone interested in the rural broadband divide to attend this conference supported by the Blandin Foundation.
Up Next: I'll share some of the comments heard from the meetings around the idea of "how much bandwidth (or speed) is enough."
It is no secret that with the proliferation of mobile devices, 1-1 initiatives and migration to cloud based services for productivity and curriculum resources, schools rely on broadband more than ever, and there is no looking back. Unfortunately, many of our students, especially those living in rural areas outside of communities, do not have adequate, affordable broadband access. This puts them at an immediate disadvantage in the new technology-laden education environment. We have a new divide to conquer. Of course, the lack of quality, affordable access in rural areas poses a number of problems from economic development to quality of life to healthcare, to name a few. My focus, however, continues to be on education.
To that end, I have participated in some community meetings recently, arranged by MN Senator Matt Schmit and sponsored by various community organizations. Senator Schmit has taken on the issue of rural broadband and spent time in November and January touring the state to hear about the needs of rural Minnesotans. I had the opportunity to attend two of the meetings in Mora and North Branch to represent the schools in the area. In both cases, I shared some of the initiatives going on in area schools and talked about how schools are limited to what they can expect from students using technology outside of the school buildings. Our schools have very high speed access and do not have speed or data usage caps. I shared that this has changed the way schools talk about technology. Our schools do not talk about what they can't do (because of low bandwidth), they talk about what they CAN do. Sadly, that is not the case with many families living in rural areas. With slow speeds, data caps and expensive overage charges, these families still talk about what they CAN'T do.
I will bring this message to the Border to Border Broadband conference on February 4th and 5th in St. Paul. Senator Schmit has invited me to participate with him on a panel to share the messages he heard around the state during his listening tour. I invite anyone interested in the rural broadband divide to attend this conference supported by the Blandin Foundation.
Up Next: I'll share some of the comments heard from the meetings around the idea of "how much bandwidth (or speed) is enough."
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Successful Multi-Generational Interactive Video Conference Event
On December 10th, 2013, the Mora Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), Kanabec Broadband Initiative (KBI) KBI and East Central MN Educational Cable Cooperative (ECMECC) joined together to present an interactive video conference (IVC) event at the Eastwood Life Enrichment Center (LEC) in Mora, MN. The LEC is a facility run by the Mora HRA as an event center for the residents of the Eastwood senior living complex as well as for community meetings and events. KBI, through the generous support of the Blandin Foundation, was able to outfit the LEC with modern audio/video equipment including a video conference system and high speed, broadband, Internet access (with support from Midcontinent Communications).
Nearly 60 people assembled at the LEC to view an interactive presentation lead by the National Park Service and broadcast live from the grounds of the World War II Valor in the Pacific National Mounument at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The presentation included a short documentary about the attacks of December 7th, 1941, an eyewitness account led by Jimmy Lee who was eleven at the time and living on a farm on the northern part of the harbor (a front row seat to the events of that day) and a question/answer session with Paul Heintz of the park service and Jimmy Lee.
It was an amazing "show" and the audience was glued to the screen. Among the participants in Mora were several veterans including John Kirkhuff of Mora who was stationed at Pearl Harbor during the attacks on December 7, 1941. In the video below, John (with help from his daughter Ginny Berg) had just finished providing his own brief account of the events of that day. Take a look and enjoy. Then remember to continually thank our veterans and active forces for their service to our country!
http://goo.gl/aCdE7G
Thank you to the National Park Service, the Blandin Foundation, members of the KBI steering committee, staff at the LEC and ECMECC and all of those who were in attendance for making this a highly successful event that provided a moving experience for many, gratitude to our veterans and generated community interest in the technology that allows for such events to occur. We are already planning the next event which may be a fun (and educational) trip to another warm place later this winter.
I always enjoy seeing kids reactions when they participate in a truly interactive video conference event. I found that with adults it was no different. We can talk 'til we are blue in the face about the difference between interactive learning and passively watching a video but nothing gets the point across better than actually participating in a well planned and delivered lesson. I think 60 people walked out of the LEC that night who can now tell you how much better an interactive experience is.
Nearly 60 people assembled at the LEC to view an interactive presentation lead by the National Park Service and broadcast live from the grounds of the World War II Valor in the Pacific National Mounument at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The presentation included a short documentary about the attacks of December 7th, 1941, an eyewitness account led by Jimmy Lee who was eleven at the time and living on a farm on the northern part of the harbor (a front row seat to the events of that day) and a question/answer session with Paul Heintz of the park service and Jimmy Lee.
It was an amazing "show" and the audience was glued to the screen. Among the participants in Mora were several veterans including John Kirkhuff of Mora who was stationed at Pearl Harbor during the attacks on December 7, 1941. In the video below, John (with help from his daughter Ginny Berg) had just finished providing his own brief account of the events of that day. Take a look and enjoy. Then remember to continually thank our veterans and active forces for their service to our country!
http://goo.gl/aCdE7G
Thank you to the National Park Service, the Blandin Foundation, members of the KBI steering committee, staff at the LEC and ECMECC and all of those who were in attendance for making this a highly successful event that provided a moving experience for many, gratitude to our veterans and generated community interest in the technology that allows for such events to occur. We are already planning the next event which may be a fun (and educational) trip to another warm place later this winter.
I always enjoy seeing kids reactions when they participate in a truly interactive video conference event. I found that with adults it was no different. We can talk 'til we are blue in the face about the difference between interactive learning and passively watching a video but nothing gets the point across better than actually participating in a well planned and delivered lesson. I think 60 people walked out of the LEC that night who can now tell you how much better an interactive experience is.
Thursday, August 1, 2013
Google Chromecast - Not Ready for Education?
I had a chance today to play with one of the new Google Chromecast devices. Google bills it as, "The easiest way to enjoy online video and music on your TV." It sells for $35. When announced, I was quite excited by the price point and the promises of working with desktop computers and mobile devices. Many were thinking this might be a possible solution to displaying content from a mobile device to a projector in a classroom without the expense of an AppleTV or a sometimes flaky connection to a desktop application. Here is what we found...
It was three geeks and a superintendent evaluating the device's potential for education. We hooked it up to a projector with an HDMI input. Very simple to plug into the projector, but know that it requires a power supply or a usb connection for power. Google doesn't show that in any of the promotional materials. Next, one of the others in the room who refuses to read the manual had the device setup and working on the wireless network in a matter of minutes using an Android based tablet. Nice! Very simple!
So, we used the Android based tablet, an iPad, an iPhone and a Macbook to test the functionality. In all cases, using the most up-to-date versions of the Netflix and YouTube applications, we were able to stream content to the projector. Quality looked good and once you started the stream, you could quit the app and move on to other tasks without causing the stream to stop. (though we did have some difficulty reconnecting to the device to shut off the stream) We used the Macbook, with the Chrome browser and the required extension installed, to stream content from the browser. In this case, we experienced some buffering of the videos that we tried and the quality seemed a little lower than when using the Netflix or YouTube apps. We discovered that there is no support (at least not yet) for the Chrome browser on the Android or iOS platforms. So, mobile devices are not currently supported except for the Netflix and YouTube apps. Google documentation indicates that the Chrome browser for Windows (except RT), Mac and Linux is supported. Nonetheless, any browser based content, including Google Apps, can be displayed from a desktop computer, wirelessly.
We found it to have a nice "cool" factor, but that's about where the functionality ended and where the questions about classroom use started. Here are the issues we found that probably makes it difficult to implement in classrooms at this time.
It was three geeks and a superintendent evaluating the device's potential for education. We hooked it up to a projector with an HDMI input. Very simple to plug into the projector, but know that it requires a power supply or a usb connection for power. Google doesn't show that in any of the promotional materials. Next, one of the others in the room who refuses to read the manual had the device setup and working on the wireless network in a matter of minutes using an Android based tablet. Nice! Very simple!
So, we used the Android based tablet, an iPad, an iPhone and a Macbook to test the functionality. In all cases, using the most up-to-date versions of the Netflix and YouTube applications, we were able to stream content to the projector. Quality looked good and once you started the stream, you could quit the app and move on to other tasks without causing the stream to stop. (though we did have some difficulty reconnecting to the device to shut off the stream) We used the Macbook, with the Chrome browser and the required extension installed, to stream content from the browser. In this case, we experienced some buffering of the videos that we tried and the quality seemed a little lower than when using the Netflix or YouTube apps. We discovered that there is no support (at least not yet) for the Chrome browser on the Android or iOS platforms. So, mobile devices are not currently supported except for the Netflix and YouTube apps. Google documentation indicates that the Chrome browser for Windows (except RT), Mac and Linux is supported. Nonetheless, any browser based content, including Google Apps, can be displayed from a desktop computer, wirelessly.
We found it to have a nice "cool" factor, but that's about where the functionality ended and where the questions about classroom use started. Here are the issues we found that probably makes it difficult to implement in classrooms at this time.
- No support for mirroring from a mobile device, regardless of platform.
- No security to prevent any device from connecting to it. So, if a teacher were streaming to a Chromecast device and a student had a compatible device, they could start streaming to it effectively kicking the teacher off. No passwords needed. This could be a problem!
- No support for browser content from a mobile device.
- A few other bugs like the difficulty reconnecting to a device once a stream is started.
These could all be "fixed" by Google in the coming months, but for now, it seems like Chromecast is a nice little streaming media device best suited for household use. It works well with Netflix, YouTube, Google Play (with Pandora support coming soon I read) and with a price point lower than a Roku or AppleTV, it might be an attractive choice for home use. It is NOT, however, a mirroring device suitable for displaying the screen of a mobile device. I haven't read anything from Google indicating that it will ever support mirroring, but with Google, anything can change at any time.
If you have a different experience or discover additional functionality, please share! I really want this to be a viable classroom tool, but at this point, I don't think it is there.
Sunday, July 21, 2013
Why Internet Service Isn't Like Utilities - Especially in schools... Yet
I sometimes hear comments about Internet service being like a utility - especially electrical service. Comparisons are made to how electric service was extended to rural areas through cooperatives and subsidies. While I agree that Internet service is fast approaching that "basic need" category like electricity, water, etc., we are some ways off from it having the same ubiquity, level of service and reliability that other utilities have. It is still important to make sure that all students in all areas (urban, exurban, suburban, rural, etc.) have the same fast, reliable Internet services and this continues to require collaborative efforts and, to some extent, subsidies to keep a level playing field.
Electricity is delivered to most every home (save for those who are choosing to be off the grid) through distribution facilities in virtually the same form and with nearly the same reliability in an extremely high percentage of locations. No matter where I am, when I flick the light switch, I get around 120 volts at 60 Hz and the light comes on. Except for extreme situations, I don't worry about whether everyone on my block or connected to the same service provider is using electricity at the same time. If they are, my lights still come on with the same amount of power available to them as if I were the only one using it. Additionally, while costs for electricity do vary by geographic location, it is generally not a large discrepancy.
Internet service, on the other hand still does vary greatly. In some locations, fiber service is available with dedicated bandwidth. In others, providers overprovsion and sell 10Mbps service with actual speeds much less. Speeds in many types of service still vary according to how many people in the same area are using the service. It is still not possible to start up your computer or launch an app on your mobile device and expect a constant, predictable speed or level of reliability from Internet service.
So... Internet service is not ready to be called a basic utility yet. In schools, when community members wonder why you don't just buy the 50mbps service for $59.95 from one of the local service providers - or politicians wonder why they should fund something like telecommunications and Internet service separately (when they don't do that for electricity) from other things, we can explain that to have the reliability and level of service we need still requires a different kind of service level than is available to residents and small businesses.
Electricity is delivered to most every home (save for those who are choosing to be off the grid) through distribution facilities in virtually the same form and with nearly the same reliability in an extremely high percentage of locations. No matter where I am, when I flick the light switch, I get around 120 volts at 60 Hz and the light comes on. Except for extreme situations, I don't worry about whether everyone on my block or connected to the same service provider is using electricity at the same time. If they are, my lights still come on with the same amount of power available to them as if I were the only one using it. Additionally, while costs for electricity do vary by geographic location, it is generally not a large discrepancy.
Internet service, on the other hand still does vary greatly. In some locations, fiber service is available with dedicated bandwidth. In others, providers overprovsion and sell 10Mbps service with actual speeds much less. Speeds in many types of service still vary according to how many people in the same area are using the service. It is still not possible to start up your computer or launch an app on your mobile device and expect a constant, predictable speed or level of reliability from Internet service.
So... Internet service is not ready to be called a basic utility yet. In schools, when community members wonder why you don't just buy the 50mbps service for $59.95 from one of the local service providers - or politicians wonder why they should fund something like telecommunications and Internet service separately (when they don't do that for electricity) from other things, we can explain that to have the reliability and level of service we need still requires a different kind of service level than is available to residents and small businesses.
Saturday, July 20, 2013
We're Back!!
After a significant hiatus, I'm back at this blog. Inspired to participate in this global community by Adam Bellow during his keynote presentation at ISTE 2013. See the video below to be inspired yourself - it is great! I'll also make a concerted effort to tweet more often when interesting things (and sometimes squirrels!) come to my attention as they often do. Follow my tweets @marccjohnson. So, here we go - not sure how often I will post and not sure what I will say - we can all be surprised! Talk to you soon.
Friday, May 4, 2012
MIT Students Create Video Content for K-12
This was brought to my attention by a tech coordinator in one of my districts - thanks Jim! The project, called MIT+K12 has MIT students creating videos that answer questions students might have in the areas of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). There are currently over 30 videos available answering such questions as, "How do airplanes fly?" "How can photography be utilized for scientific experiments?" and more. This is a pilot project, so there are no guarantees that it will go on in perpetuity, and some of the videos hit the mark better than others, but it is a nice project if it can grow some legs. The videos are hosted on YouTube so if your school blocks YouTube content, you may be out of luck :-(
Monday, December 12, 2011
TIES 2011
Hanging out at the 2011 TIES conference. Record crowds again, congratulations to TIES for that! Keynote speaker, Joel Rose, from the School of One initiative in New York gave a fine presentation. He discussed the large number of teachers who feel frustrated in their work. It helped explain why many teachers have a hard time adopting new technology. If they are already frustrated, adding something new (and often without any real training) just doesn't work. Tech Coordinators and others working in school technology get frustrated too. The many hats they wear on a regular basis can be daunting. I'll talk about that at a presentation this afternoon. We'll see how that goes. I think the important thing is to remember that everyone who works in educstion is part of a team and everything we do needs to be about the kids.
Friday, December 2, 2011
A Video Worth Watching
I'm back again... I was introduced to this video and the website that the presenter operates by ECMECC's technology integration specialist, Jon Larson.
Adam Bellow is a former teacher turned educational technologist from New York. This video was presented at a conference in August 2011 and is very, very thought provoking and well done. Now we just need to act on some of the things he talks about in this presentation!
If you can find 15 minutes now or later to watch it, you shouldn't be disappointed. You may not agree with everything, but at minimum, you will think! Pay particular attention to some of the things he says about professional development! Then, when you are done, share this with administrators, curriculum directors, professional development coordinators, technology staff, teachers and anyone else who might watch it.
His website is called Edutecher. Lots of good information there. He has a mobile app as well so you can load it on your iOS or Android device. While the video above is from YouTube, if that is blocked by your school, it is also available on the Edutecher website (http://www.edutecher.net/tv.php?id=59). Enjoy!
Adam Bellow is a former teacher turned educational technologist from New York. This video was presented at a conference in August 2011 and is very, very thought provoking and well done. Now we just need to act on some of the things he talks about in this presentation!
If you can find 15 minutes now or later to watch it, you shouldn't be disappointed. You may not agree with everything, but at minimum, you will think! Pay particular attention to some of the things he says about professional development! Then, when you are done, share this with administrators, curriculum directors, professional development coordinators, technology staff, teachers and anyone else who might watch it.
His website is called Edutecher. Lots of good information there. He has a mobile app as well so you can load it on your iOS or Android device. While the video above is from YouTube, if that is blocked by your school, it is also available on the Edutecher website (http://www.edutecher.net/tv.php?id=59). Enjoy!
Monday, January 10, 2011
Can we still interact with other human beings?
I've been thinking quite a lot about human interaction and its current state in this technology rich world. When I was matriculating at the University of MN doing graduate work, I studied computer-human interaction and I've spent the better part of my adult life working with people and computers (and often both at the same time).
Today, I see people (sometimes myself included) walking around with their heads down and thumbs rapidly moving across virtual keyboards on tiny computers. How we don't have more sidewalk crashes and injuries, I'll never know. We certainly know about the risks of doing this while driving. Additionally, when I am out to eat, I am amazed at how many people I see with their faces in their smartphones when they are sitting across from or with other people. Have we lost the ability to interact face-to-face with other human beings? I hope not!
Recently, an article from the Minneapolis StarTribune was brought to my attention that addresses this issue to some degree. The author, Nathan Eklund, discusses the need to close his mental tabs before he is able to fully interact with humans after a day spent assimilated into the technology that is now part of our everyday lives. A very interesting read if you have an extra three minutes or so!
If it takes that kind of effort to actually engage in a meaningful conversation with our friends or loved ones, I'm worried!
I did also find an interesting new product introduced this weekend at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. You remember the boom boxes of the early 80's, right? It was the way people shared music at the time. People, most often kids, actually gathered together to listen to music and share experiences (of all kinds!!) Today, the kids walk around with earbuds stuck in their ears and sometimes share a playlist without any face-to-face interaction at all. Maybe this is OK, but it just doesn't seem right to me.
Enter TDK, a company I remember for their cassette tapes. They have released a 21st century version of the boombox that allows users to plug in an mp3 player or other USB device. I'm not sure it will catch on, but I'm glad to see someone still trying to support real human interaction.
Today, I see people (sometimes myself included) walking around with their heads down and thumbs rapidly moving across virtual keyboards on tiny computers. How we don't have more sidewalk crashes and injuries, I'll never know. We certainly know about the risks of doing this while driving. Additionally, when I am out to eat, I am amazed at how many people I see with their faces in their smartphones when they are sitting across from or with other people. Have we lost the ability to interact face-to-face with other human beings? I hope not!
Recently, an article from the Minneapolis StarTribune was brought to my attention that addresses this issue to some degree. The author, Nathan Eklund, discusses the need to close his mental tabs before he is able to fully interact with humans after a day spent assimilated into the technology that is now part of our everyday lives. A very interesting read if you have an extra three minutes or so!
If it takes that kind of effort to actually engage in a meaningful conversation with our friends or loved ones, I'm worried!
I did also find an interesting new product introduced this weekend at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. You remember the boom boxes of the early 80's, right? It was the way people shared music at the time. People, most often kids, actually gathered together to listen to music and share experiences (of all kinds!!) Today, the kids walk around with earbuds stuck in their ears and sometimes share a playlist without any face-to-face interaction at all. Maybe this is OK, but it just doesn't seem right to me.
Enter TDK, a company I remember for their cassette tapes. They have released a 21st century version of the boombox that allows users to plug in an mp3 player or other USB device. I'm not sure it will catch on, but I'm glad to see someone still trying to support real human interaction.
Friday, December 10, 2010
TIES 2010 Conference Reflection
High time I get back to this blog and give it a little TLC. And, there's nothing like a good education technology conference to get the "geek" blood flowing again. TIES 2010 was a very good conference this year and I commend all of the TIES staff, presenters and others who worked to put it together.
I also was very pleased that it had a decidedly education focus this year. I know that doesn't sit well with everyone, but I take this opportunity to point out that everyone working in a school needs to understand that the kids are why we are here and we all need to be concerned about the education of our children (whether ours literally, or figuratively).
Sir Ken Robinson, a best selling author and internationally recognized expert on creativity, was the keynote speaker. He advocates creating an environment in schools where students' creativity can flourish and they can find their passions. He points out that we have been stuck in a 19th century model of education. We have tweaked the process but certainly not transformed it.
I believe that technology must play a role in the transformation of education. We live in the 21st century with technology all around us. It can't be simply a tool to modify the same content we've always provided, nor can it be only a modern method for assessment. It needs to unlock a student's creativity and prepare them for a productive existence in the connected world in which they live. I also believe that we will make nary a dent in the system until we change the way we assess students. The reliance on high stakes tests that focus on 19th century skills is akin to stomping on the dreams of every child in a public school. The fact that we hold teachers accountable for students' performance on these assessments forces them to put aside any efforts to foster a child's passions and help them grow for the sake of covering what is "on the test." This may ultimately be the demise of our society. We must find a way to teach and assess 21st century skills for a global society.
All that said, take a look at the notes and materials from the many sessions at TIES 2010, and watch the following two talks by Sir Ken Robinson. I think you'll find it a thought-provoking and worthwhile experience.
Enjoy!
TIES 2010 Wiki
Sir Ken Robinson - 2006 TED Talk
Sir Ken Robinson - 2010 TED Talk
I also was very pleased that it had a decidedly education focus this year. I know that doesn't sit well with everyone, but I take this opportunity to point out that everyone working in a school needs to understand that the kids are why we are here and we all need to be concerned about the education of our children (whether ours literally, or figuratively).
Sir Ken Robinson, a best selling author and internationally recognized expert on creativity, was the keynote speaker. He advocates creating an environment in schools where students' creativity can flourish and they can find their passions. He points out that we have been stuck in a 19th century model of education. We have tweaked the process but certainly not transformed it.
I believe that technology must play a role in the transformation of education. We live in the 21st century with technology all around us. It can't be simply a tool to modify the same content we've always provided, nor can it be only a modern method for assessment. It needs to unlock a student's creativity and prepare them for a productive existence in the connected world in which they live. I also believe that we will make nary a dent in the system until we change the way we assess students. The reliance on high stakes tests that focus on 19th century skills is akin to stomping on the dreams of every child in a public school. The fact that we hold teachers accountable for students' performance on these assessments forces them to put aside any efforts to foster a child's passions and help them grow for the sake of covering what is "on the test." This may ultimately be the demise of our society. We must find a way to teach and assess 21st century skills for a global society.
All that said, take a look at the notes and materials from the many sessions at TIES 2010, and watch the following two talks by Sir Ken Robinson. I think you'll find it a thought-provoking and worthwhile experience.
Enjoy!
TIES 2010 Wiki
Sir Ken Robinson - 2006 TED Talk
Sir Ken Robinson - 2010 TED Talk
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Technology TIPS done right!
I recently received a message from a Minnesota instructional technology group list that originated with Shawn Brandt, a technology integration specialist for New Prague Area Schools. He was describing some aspects of Picasa, an online, free image management tool. In the message, he shared his website that includes well organized lists and descriptions of technology integration tools, news, a few instructional videos and best of all, tip sheets for using many of the tools. This is a very nice resource that Shawn has created, assembled and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Technology integration folks out there, take a look at this resource. This is a great example of putting wonderful resources and easy to use guidance right in front of your users' eyes. Well done! Here is a link to his "TIP Sheets" page, you can easily navigate the rest of the site from there...
http://www.np.k12.mn.us/TechIntegration/?page_id=47
Thanks for sharing this resource, Shawn!!
Marc Johnson
Technology integration folks out there, take a look at this resource. This is a great example of putting wonderful resources and easy to use guidance right in front of your users' eyes. Well done! Here is a link to his "TIP Sheets" page, you can easily navigate the rest of the site from there...
http://www.np.k12.mn.us/TechIntegration/?page_id=47
Thanks for sharing this resource, Shawn!!
Marc Johnson
Monday, September 6, 2010
YouTube vids without ads and suggestions
There is no doubt that YouTube has some pretty strange stuff. At times, very inappropriate for a classroom or any educational setting. However, there is plenty of very good, educationally sound material on YouTube as well. There are a number of reputable news outlets that utilize YouTube for posting their stories. Additionally, as we enter the mid-term election cycle, there will be a bevy of political content available as well (which could be good or bad!).
A member in the Verizon Thinkfinity Community suggested a website that will allow the user to enter the URL to a YouTube video and it will return a substitute URL (kind of like Tiny URL if you know how that works) that you can set a link to, email to yourself (or others), post to your blog (or other social networking site) and display the video without ANY of the ads or alternative content or suggestions.
It is called "Safeshare" - I've tried it and it seems to work quite well. I was able to paste the URL of a YouTube video into the box and voila' I had a new URL that opened in my browser and played the YouTube video without any of the extras - that can often be a deterrent to showing the videos in a classroom. Here is an example.
http://www.safeshare.tv/v/WvCIv5KCbeE
I have not tried this behind a firewall that blocks YouTube, so I don't know if it will bypass a filter. I am NOT an advocate of bypassing a filter anyway. However, if your school does allow YouTube, this is still a very useful utility to prevent any questionable content from accidentally being displayed when you want to use a YouTube video in your classroom, or, perhaps include it in a distance learning environment.
A member in the Verizon Thinkfinity Community suggested a website that will allow the user to enter the URL to a YouTube video and it will return a substitute URL (kind of like Tiny URL if you know how that works) that you can set a link to, email to yourself (or others), post to your blog (or other social networking site) and display the video without ANY of the ads or alternative content or suggestions.
It is called "Safeshare" - I've tried it and it seems to work quite well. I was able to paste the URL of a YouTube video into the box and voila' I had a new URL that opened in my browser and played the YouTube video without any of the extras - that can often be a deterrent to showing the videos in a classroom. Here is an example.
http://www.safeshare.tv/v/WvCIv5KCbeE
I have not tried this behind a firewall that blocks YouTube, so I don't know if it will bypass a filter. I am NOT an advocate of bypassing a filter anyway. However, if your school does allow YouTube, this is still a very useful utility to prevent any questionable content from accidentally being displayed when you want to use a YouTube video in your classroom, or, perhaps include it in a distance learning environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)