From creation to consumption

I was engaged in conversation last night with one of my best friends in the world, Roger Wagner – the inventor of Hyperstudio (http://www.hyperstudio.com).  One of the things we talked about was the shift in educational technology use from computers as tools of creation to computers as tools of consumption.  Programs from technology in education conferences used to be filled with sessions on everything from Logo programming to how to help students create interactive multimedia.

Since the onset of NCLB, all that has changed.  Our knee-jerk reaction to high-stakes testing has stripped creativity and curiosity from the the curriculum, and replaced it with just enough of the right content to get students to pass tests.  Because it is not blindingly obvious how students knowing the intricacies of programming, or the ability to create multimedia projects, will improve test scores, these topics have fallen by the wayside, leaving the beautiful minds of our youth in tatters.

As for (currently) non-tested subjects (e.g., engineering,) classroom exploration is non-existent, providing no incentive for students to learn something about areas of study that can lead to very exciting careers!

Next week I speak at the International Space Development Conference (ISDC) and the International Space Society has just released the new roadmap for space exploration (http://www.nss.org/settlement/roadmap/).  This is an amazingly bold document that anticipates a time when there might be more humans living in space than currently live on Earth.

Of course, without a large number of scientists and engineers, none of the proposed milestones will be reached.  It took 400,000 people working full time to make the Apollo missions a success – and that was just to allow short trips to the moon.  Any of the new space objectives will require even more than that – yet students entering college today have known nothing but NCLB’s test-driven mandates, and they arrive at college bereft of curiosity and creativity.

One of the handouts for my session at ISDC is an “incomplete” manual for an interplanetary spacecraft that has about 50 topics for students to explore in finishing the document.  (I will post the document online for all to have very soon.)  My purpose in creating this document is that it represents a standalone activity that can lead to an interest in students in topics ranging from life sciences, to physics and engineering.

We have a tremendous amount to do as we repair the damage of NCLB and prepare ourselves, and our students, for a delightful and exciting future.

Floors and ceilings

Education in the United States is about to undergo significant change with the adoption of the next generation science standards. Rather than focus on specific content associated with each grade level, these standards address three things:

• How scientists and engineers think and solve problems
• Disciplinary core ideas, and,
• Crosscutting concepts that link science and engineering to other disciplines including those addressed by the Common Core standards.

This transformation is important in my view because of floors and ceilings.

For too many years, we have been limiting the development of student knowledge by teaching in ways that revealed the answers to the kids. Every time you tell the student a solution to a problem, you have put a ceiling on this knowledge, and students have no incentive to go further. On the other hand, when subjects are approached through inquiry, we provide a floor for their learning and they can move up from there.

This is the core idea behind our Knights of Knowledge project (knightsofknowledge.me)

Of course, this transition is not easy to make.  Teachers who would never give a child a book of crossword puzzles with the answers filled in, still give students textbooks with the “answers” to all the content area explored in a course.  While directed instruction will always have its place, it is important to know when to stop sharing information with students, and when to send them off on learning adventures of their own.

Tragedy at Sandy Hook

Last week we all experienced a tremendous tragedy when a gunman took the lives of so many people in a gun attack at the Sandy Hook School in Newtown, Connecticut. I was enraged when I heard the news, but could not write a blog on the topic at the time. That has changed.

On the day of the incident, White House spokesman Jay Carney said “today is not the day to discuss gun control.”

That is pure bunk. Friday would have been a perfect day for the President to do more than offer condolences. He could (and should) have called for immediate legislation to regulate guns and the make sanctions against gun-produced crimes extremely severe.

I’ve heard all the arguments against gun control: “If guns are outlawed then only outlaws will have guns;” “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” These platitudes make nice sound bytes for the NRA, but they don’t sound so convincing when juxtaposed against a photograph of a six-year-old girl laying dead in a pool of her own blood.

Why our President is reluctant to take on the NRA is beyond me. He isn’t running for office again, and doesn’t need their support. If the issue is the Second Amendment, maybe he should read it again – in its entirety. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Note the “well regulated militia part.” If you really want to shoot weapons at people, join the armed services and hope for war. Don’t spray classrooms full of bullets, killing many young people, destroying families, and bringing sadness to the entire country.

Yes, I”m aware that In 2008, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision concerning the Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia, and to use that firearm arm for traditionally lawful purposes. This ruling flies in the face of the Second Amendment as written, but what do I know – I only have a PhD and am able to read without moving my lips. Maybe an attorney can explain this too me. I’m sure the Supremes would argue that the mass murder of children was not a “traditionally lawful purpose,” and argue that their ruling was just (even though it conflicts with the very clear language of the second amendment.)

In the spirit of full disclosure, I used to shoot on a regular basis (and even have some marksmanship medals in a box somewhere). But my rules were clear – I either shot at paper targets or at dinner. I am not against game hunting – only against the ease with which your typical nutcake can get weapons and use them against innocents.

So, what would I do if I could?

First, I would make any fire-arm-related shooting of a person (by non-police or militia) a federal offense with a mandatory sentence of life without parole. Then, I would track down the place or manufacturer from whom the gun was purchased and impose a mandatory fine of one-million dollars per shooting event to be paid to the families of those who were maimed or killed as a result. Say the perpetrator had a mental breakdown, fine – then the incarceration starts in a mental hospital and moves to a prison later, with no chance of parole.

My guess is that, if this was the law of the land, we would see firearm-based attacks drop by a tremendous amount.

If it kept even one child alive, it would be worth it. Children don’t belong in caskets, and our President’s failure to speak out on this issue makes me sick. We have a right to expect more from him.

A plan for economic development…

Today, Apple CEO Tim Cook said the company plans to build some Mac computers in the U.S. for the first time in about a decade, investing $100 million in 2013 in an effort that could serve as a high-profile test of American manufacturing competitiveness.

This is a brilliant move and it leads to a great idea on how to move our economic recovery into high gear.

Imagine the US government saying they will only purchase U.S.-made products. If the populace wants to buy computers, for example, made in Taiwan, that is fine, but when it comes to purchases made with our tax dollars, the name and U.S. location of the factory where the products are made needs to be on the first page of every bid. No U.S. factory results in automatic rejection of the bid, independent of price.

Now some might argue that making computers in the U.S. means they will cost more. Perhaps they will, and perhaps they won’t. But even if they do, the salaries are being paid to American workers who pay taxes and support our economy with their own purchases.

Of course, such a move might be hard to implement right away, so I’d suggest a three-year rollout that looks like this:

Year 1 – products must be assembled in the U.S.
Year 2 – at least 50% of all components used in the products must be made here as well.
Year 3 – everything, including all components, must be made in the U.S.

I can imagine the cries of outrage from those invested in making things outside the country, but we need to help our trading partners know we are going through hard times and need to protect and rebuild our own economy at this time. That shouldn’t be too hard to grasp.

Is there precedent for this? Sure. Look at Brazil (a country already undergoing strong economic growth) where the government is planning to use tablets in schools, a project which could require about 900,000 tablets by early 2013. President Dilma has made it clear that government-purchased tablets for schools need to be made in Brazil. This has resulted in a flurry of new manufacturing facilities being built, including those for Apple’s iPad.

While it is true that the U.S. does not have plans to purchase a million tablets in preparation for a true country-wide rollout in education (another topic for another time), the purchasing power of our government is still strong enough to have a tremendous impact.

If we want to kick-start a serious economic recovery in the U.S., we need to start by putting our workers first. What could be more American than that?

The blue marble turns forty

Today marks the fortieth year of the famous “blue marble” photograph of Earth taken by the crew of Apollo 17.

Earth seen from space on December 7, 1972.

This iconic photograph has inspired millions of people over the years. By seeing the Earth hanging in space, we suddenly became aware if just how fragile our existence is. While environmental concerns were not new in the ’70′s, this picture put them under a magnifying glass, as have numerous images of our planet taken since this iconic photo was first released.

It is interesting to see that programs designed to look beyond our planet can sometimes give us an even better view of our own challenges and opportunities. Apollo 17, after all, was headed to the Moon. It was great they thought to look back.

Happy birthday, Blue Marble – and may we have many, many, more.

My granddaughter doesn’t walk

My five-year-old granddaughter, Bianca, doesn’t walk. Fortunately this is not because of any medical problem, but because she is such a joyous person. She runs; she skips; she hops; she dances – but walking is a method of locomotion pretty foreign to her.

And, she is not alone. Her classmates have the same symptoms – they are full of energy and enthusiasm and joy. I’m sure there was a time when I behaved the same way, but I don’t remember it. One of my goals is to be sure she always finds the kind of joy in her life that spills out through the locomotive methods she has today.

My office is in her school, so I get to see her almost every day. If I drop by her class, I am reluctant to walk in. She might say, “Not now, grandpa, I’m busy!” And busy she is. She is busy learning in a supportive environment that honors the integrity and mystery of childhood.

How wonderful it would be of this was the norm for students worldwide! Do you still have some skip in your step? If not, how might you rekindle the joy seen in the faces of young students?

Today’s tablets have history backwards

A recent study by the Pew Internet and American Life project (www.pewinternet.org) shows that 25% of US adults own a tablet computer. This amazingly rapid penetration of tablet computing suggests that devices are a solid trend, not a fad. But how, exactly, are these devices being used. As I’ve said before, they function more as tools of consumption than as tools of creation.

This is a perversion of the ideas behind the invention of the concept of tablet computing by Alan Kay. Alan, in the early 1970′s, maintained that there would be great utility in a computer for children the size and weight of a typical notebook – a computer he called the “Dynabook.” He not only thought about the hardware, he thought about the underlying software, and how this software would be used and created by the end users. In describing his “personal computer for children of all ages,” (history-computer.com/Library/Kay72.pdf ) he shows the influence of MIT Professor Seymour Papert on his thinking – the idea that children are constructors of their own knowledge, and that a personal computer would be a perfect platform to explore this Piagetain ideal.

In the early 1970′s the technology was not yet advanced enough to build such a tablet device. Page-sized liquid crystal dot matrix displays did not exist. The touch screen I invented in 1973 worked well enough to use in such a device, but we ended up using it on a traditional computer monitor instead. In fact, the Dynabook prototype became the Alto computer, the first personal computer to incorporate a graphical user interface – also developed in 1973 if memory serves. The Alto was the size of a two-drawer filing cabinet – hardly the portable device we had hoped for, but it worked splendidly, and became a powerful development platform as well as inspiration for the kinds of applications and user interface that resulted in the Apple Macintosh.

As for the underlying programming language, Alan was a fan of object-oriented languages and oversaw the development of Smalltalk. The central idea was that, like Logo, Smalltalk had a low floor and no ceiling. With it, children – or anyone else for that matter – could create programs of any desired complexity.

The main point is that, from an historical perspective, it was tablet first, personal computer second – largely because the tablet couldn’t be built at that time.

And so we fast-forward to the present where we see very powerful and beautiful tablets, clearly inspired by the work done in the 1970′s (which makes the Apple v. Samsung case quite confusing to understand.) My concern is not with the tablets themselves, but with how they are being used. They are clearly not set up with anything ike the original vision of children being able to create their own programs. There is no Smalltalk, or Logo (from MIT) – or more modern interpretations such as Squeak and Scratch for these devices. Furthermore, Apple has made it clear that the ability of kids to create their own programs on an iPad is not to be allowed (at least so far.) Instead, the tablets are for hunting and gathering information. Period.

Imagine how amazing these devices would be when kids are finally able to do what Alan Kay thought they should do in the 1970′s – build their own programs on these devices. I do see some glimmers of hope on the Android platform, and the next year will bear watching. Until that time, the dream of the 70′s has been interrupted.

Revisiting the Knights of Knowledge

Years ago, in an attempt to build bridges for educators interested in inquiry, Norma and I created a fictional ancient organization called the Knights of Knowledge. This group was founded in antiquity and included Socrates, Phythagoras, Archimedes, Newton, Galileo, Madame Curie, Pablo Picasso, Stravinsky, Georgia O’Keefe, Roger Bannister, and numerous others up to modern times. Those selected for this secret organization had two characteristics: They asked, and answered, interesting questions. Second, each answer led to even more interesting questions.

Our reason for creating this fictional society was based on the observation that children love the idea of being involed in something secret and special. And so they are told that the ancient Knights of Knowledge needs new members, and its leader has created a sub‐group called the Special Agents. Students are invited to join the Special Agents and are given short video‐based assignments consisting of a compelling question which forms the basis of an in‐depth research project related to the curriculum. Each video clip is only a minute or so in length – just long enough to set the stage for the challenge and for asking the question. From then on, the student is on her own to find answers and build a report, before generating follow‐on questions. For example, the question might relate to the observation that some trees change colors in the Fall and then drop their leaves, yet other trees keep their leaves all year long. It might relate to the observation that we measure time in units of sixty, not one hundred. Just about any subject at any grade and and content area is ripe for the generation of questions that can be used to stimulate student research. Our observation was that, once a question was posed, it led to other questions generated by students as they completed their project.

When students are researching topics on their own, there is a huge opportunity for them to develop passion for the subject area – a passion that does not appear in a traditional textbook approach to instruction.

When this idea was introduced in 2004, there was little interest. Now, with the Common Core Standards and Next Generation Science Standards, the time is ripe to revisit this topic. Why? Because the new standards are less focused on specific pieces of information and more focused on processes and the transferability of knowledge between domains of study.

It is time for us to revisit this topic, and that is exactly what we are doing. Teachers need all the help they can get, and the Knights of Knowledge materials can be a key element in providing support and encouragement for the transformations we need to make in light of these new standards.

One of our original low-resolution videos showing a sample activity starter is posted on YouTube. Give it a try with your students and see how they do! We will be working to create materials and would love to hear from you regarding content areas where projects like this make great sense.

Tablets as Disruptive Technologies

In 2010 I was quite enamored in the idea of “netbook” computers – low-powered laptops that not only had low price tags and long battery life, but also performed most tasks quite well, especially if the user was taking advantage of open source software ranging from Unix as the operating system, to Openoffice.org as the office suite. To prove the point, I wrote an entire book (When the Best is Free) on a netbook without any problems at all. It was so clear to me that this was the next big device that I predicted that every student would soon have a netbook, especially since they were cheaper than textbooks. In fact, since the introduction of this device, the cost of an average collection of textbooks was far greater than the cost of a netbook computer. The future of this new device was clear (at least to me.)

I was wrong – very wrong. The revolution did not unfold as I foresaw it. Netbooks became (and remain) a niche market and I think this is because of the emergence of a truly disruptive technology – the tablet. Led by the and famously successful release of the Apple iPad, and followed by Android-based devices from many other vendors (e.g., Samsung, Lenovo, Toshiba, Sony, Asus, Acer and others) tablets have caused netbooks to fade from view.

This phenomenon is quite interesting. First, as with most disruptive technologies, the tablet was not as powerful as the netbook. Furthermore, it generally cost more to buy, had less storage, and operated on a completely different premise. While the netbook had a clear evolutionary path from traditional laptops, the tablet did not. Devoid of traditional keyboards, the tablet operated with “soft keys” displayed on a multi-touch display. Gestures (pinches, swipes, etc.) previously seen in science fiction (e.g., Minority Report, Star Trek, Next Generation) became commonplace. These new ways of interacting with computer displays were readily adapted and traditional mouse movements were no longer needed.

So where did tablet computers come from? The origins of tablets had more to do with the evolution of advanced MP3 players (the Apple iTouch as an example) than with the evolution of computers. At the time of its introduction, the tablet had the potential to be a high-tech fad – like the Apple Newton from 1993. Instead, even with its limitations, the tablet became an overnight success. One could argue that this was a logical outgrowth of the popularity of smartphones (such as those based on the Android and iOS operating systems) but I think the tablet is generally seen in a different light. With screens ranging from 7” to 10”, tablets provide enough real estate to support web browsing and some limited text editing. While many people may find the light weight and long battery life of tablets to be compelling, and web-based tools (plus a few downloaded apps) to meet their day-to-day needs, most will find that they will still need a powerful laptop for the creation of documents, and rely on tablets for casual work on the road. The long battery life is one clear advantage, but another advantage of tablets is rarely mentioned. Because traditional clamshell laptops use a separate keyboard, users have to be sitting down, typically at a desk or table, in order to use the device. Tablets, on the other hand, can be used while standing. By holding the tablet in one hand, the other can provide the gestures needed to navigate applications. This plus reduced weight are quite compelling for some. Personally, if I had all my presentations running from my tablet, I would leave my laptop at home when I travel for speaking engagements.  My tablet computer fits in the seat back of an airplane, and allows me to watch several movies with enough power left over to run a 60-minute presentation without recharging.

Tablets also seem to meet the needs of a large number of people who never need the power of a real laptop  For them the tablet makes a great deal of sense, even though many high-end tablets cost as much as fully featured laptops. Of course, as tablets evolve, the prices will drop and the capabilities will increase, further cementing their role in creating a true disruption in personal computing.

All of which raises the question of what happens next. As tablets continue their evolutionary path, there will someday be another technology introduced that will have the same impact on tablets as tablets had on netbooks. Such is the nature of technological development.

Do we really want to have a STEM curriculum?

At an event in Chicago this month, a rich and diverse group of experts was convened by Bill Cllinton to explore and develop concrete plans to improve STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) education.  During this event, President Clinton signed autographs in which he wrote “Explore and Discover!” – a wonderful expression that applies to science, but not to engineering.  I’d be more convinced that engineering matters to him had he written “Invent and Build.”

Yes, there were representatives there from the Maker community, as well as some genuine engineers, but as far as most schools are concerned, STEM still means science and mathematics.  And this problem is not restricted to the US; I find it in other countries as well. Perhaps it is because engineering graduates have chosen to not become school teachers, and the job falls to folks in other fields.  But the  confusion around the difference between science and engineering continues.  Many teachers have no idea how to build anything from scratch.  I had a teacher come into my office a few weeks ago.  He saw a soldering iron on my desk and thought it was a microphone.  And, unless you are convulsed with laughter at the previous sentence, you may want to ask when was the last time you designed and built something from scratch yourself.

Here are some ways to see how much you like to think like engineers.  Do you have instructables.com bookmarked on your browser?  Do you subscribe the Make Magazine?  Do you know how to fix a leaky faucet?  And more fundamentally, do you even care how to  do things like this?

The practical side of education has historically been the role of the career and technical education schools.  The academic schools have focused on headwork, as though this was enough.  I argue that it is not nearly enough.

Personally, I’m working on some student projects in robotics because it introduced programming and building real things – two skills often left out of the academic school curriculum.

Now I have absolutely nothing against science and mathematics – I have degrees or minors in all four STEM fields, and respect them all.  But I also do not get them confused.  This confusion will hurt us!

We will continue to hear more about STEM until we are sick of it.  It seems to me we should get serious about all four of these fields before that happens.