In his post yesterday, Doug says he is advocating in his district to give a computing device to all students in grades 6-12. But he refuses to call it a 1:1 program.Today, I found myself reaching for a term to describe "1 to 1." While many districts are a long way away from implementing a successful 1 to 1, mainly because the teachers themselves aren't at the top level of the classroom learning activity rubric--let's be honest, you'd have to be super-human, right?--and dropping tech into the mix would just make the bad, worse, it's a horizon goal. . .that is, a goal that is worthy of aspiring to (aspirational edtech...oh wait, we've been doing that all along!).
Instead of emphasizing the device (which that name certainly does), he wants everyone to understand that the primary purpose of whatever is selected is to enable students to have 24/7 access to digital resources.
Wait, let me circle back to that idea of tech making bad, worse. I remember that I was a teacher who wanted to get better, and blending technology into instruction made me get better. I learned so much learning how to use technology with my students--cooperative learning, collaboration, learning at a distance, multimedia, hyperlinking, H.E.A.T., focus on HOTS over LOTS, problem-based learning, project-based learning, information problem solving a la Big6/Super3--that I became a better teacher.
We may not call it 1 to 1, but we do need to drop it into classrooms, and give teachers bereft of hope something to aspire to. In fact, as Tim points out, students need to be a part of that conversation, too.
Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin's blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure