Andrew Busch

Here's my presentation for tomorrow's Boyne Technology Conference. I had a really hard time paring down what I wanted to say. I decided to make this more of a hands-on workshop learning how to use the free Tracker video software. I'm not making this an apple-only event. This isn't about all the neat techy things you can do in your classroom. This isn't about how to create or incorporate problem based-learning (though it does touch on it). This is about how to expand the types of fun things students get to do in math class: throwing stuff, dropping stuff, racing stuff, breaking stuff, etc. Without expensive sensors, getting reliable data from the experiments is next to impossible--having to create functions based student collected data is why "Attend to Precision" is one of the CCSS math practices. I'm sure of it.

With this tool, anyone with a way to capture video and access to a computer can do most of the experiments associated with 1st semester high school Physics courses without all the fancy instruments found in well-funded physics labs. Which means math teachers can now get in on the fun without the funding.

As always, people are interested in more detailed instructions for the DIY iPad stand, I edited the original post. I hope it's helpful.

My 126 MB PowerPoint slides stripped of the videos as a 2 MB pdf:

And here's my speaker notes for anyone interested on the topic:

I love using real data in my classes but it's usually easier said than done. I don't have any fancy pants TI-NSpire calculators with little WiFi receivers that transmit data instantaneously to all my students (if anyone wants to buy me a classroom set I would send you a thank you card and a drawing from each of my toddlers). I've tried with regular graphing calculators but it takes almost an entire class period to get the data to everyone. This means I generally don't use student created data as much as I'd like.

This year I'm doing something different. I bit the bullet and signed up for the computer cart for a couple days. On day 1, we introduced transformations using Desmos. After playing around with it for 5 mintues we explored different parent functions and their generalized forms: y=x and y=a(x-h)+k, y=x^2 and y=a(x-h)^2+k, and y=2^x and y=2^(x-h)+k. On day 2 we looked at data using Geogebra files I created beforehand (see below). Each of the files is based off the video of a basic event.
    At this point you need to know I am a complete Geogebra newbie. I had to look up how to get the spreadsheet     numbers to show up as points. If I can do it, you can do it.

Based on the student questions over these last several days, this is probably the best students have understood the concept of function translations and transformations after the initial introduction.

We began the experiment by first discussing what we wanted to do. We want to roll a ball off a cliff and predict where it's going to land. We discussed how we could set up an experiment that would do this and the class came up with the following.

Off to the physics lab! Students created ramps out of meter sticks, ring stands and masking tape. Students could test the ramps with a steel ball as long as the ball never actually hit the ground. Then, we took videos of the balls on our various mobile devices and transferred them to the laptops. We used the Tracker Video Analysis software to calculate horizontal speed of the ball as it moved along our track.

Students used quadratic equations to calculate the time in the air based on the vertical distance the ball will travel. Then, with that information, calculated the expected horizontal distance the ball will travel based on that amount of time and the speed of the ball on the ramp (basic Algebra 2 stuff or even Algebra 1 2nd semester).

Now the moment of truth. Can we predict where the ball will land with any level of accuracy? To up the stakes a bit, full credit is only earned if student groups can get the ball into a can on the first try.

They nailed it!

In a rather surprising turn of events, in the last month, our school has gone from gearing up on the possibility of going 1 to 1 with iPads at the high school to abandoning the idea completely. Of all the school-owned device options we've looked at iPads were most affordable and we thought had really good potential educational benefits. But after talking with schools who use them, we don’t think they’re worth the money. The iPads are just too limiting in what they can do. (See my last post for students’ opinions of iPads vs laptops)

Transferring media on and off is a hassle. I just spoke to a math teacher in Traverse City yesterday who is doing video assessments of his students. He loves the idea, but getting student-created content off the iPads has been an issue all year.

Mobile Safari’s lack of flash support hurts terribly. I don’t know how many people have told me flash is dead but that’s not the reality I see around me. Much of the free inquiry-based interactive content on the internet is flash. In three years that might change. In three years iPads may be a good fit for our school.

Teacher’s are unfamiliar with the tool and feel uncomfortable and unsure about how to utilize it effectively. This isn’t just a professional development issue as some suggest. Changing pedagogy simply to incorporate technology is bad practice. The technology must fill some need in the classroom or it’s just an expensive way to buy student interest. Please understand I’m a strong proponent of tech in the classroom but not if it’s forced. Sometimes paper and pencil really is a better option than Penultimate. Sometimes asking for a show of hands or using individual marker boards is better than using Poll Everywhere.

It looks like small laptops aren’t the answer either. Traverse City isn’t thrilled with their laptops. They’re too small (11 inch) to do what the teacher’s want them to do; students constantly end up scrolling back and forth across the page. 13 inch models worth getting are out of our price range as a school (you do get what you pay for).

So… that leaves us with the BYOD (bring your own device) option. I’m not thrilled with the idea more from the financial standpoint of parents. BYOD is an increase in tuition. There’s no way around it. However, it’s also financially sustainable from the school’s point of view. I wonder what these local public schools are going to do when the bond money runs out. In order to make it work, we would need to specify minimum device requirements, give parents purchasing recommendations, and get community buy-in before attempting to do anything. If technology is just an add-on or a way for us to keep up with the local public school, then I would vote against it. As an school community, we need to agree on a vision for education and the role technology plays in implementing that vision.

If you are 1:1 in your school, I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments.

I recently took a delegation from our school to tour a large public school in its second year of a one-to-one iPad initiative. The district (which will remain unnamed) currently has about 4000 iPads deployed.

My initial impression: underwhelmed.

The day started out like most other tech visits I’ve done; the administration greeted us and then we went on a tour of the building. This time, we had 3 junior students as our guides. When we walked around the school and stopped in several classrooms, on the whole, it did not seem like the iPad was integral to what was happening in the classroom. I asked the student tour-guides about it and they said most teachers don’t use the iPad very much. Surprisingly, to me anyway, they said the math teachers used it the most (for pdf versions of textbooks and video lessons—more on that later). As a math teacher, I’ve had to do quite a bit of thinking of how to incorporate individual technology into my classroom in a non-trite way. It’s doable, but takes much more effort than let’s say a physics, chemistry, geography or history classroom—all of which I can come up with substantive applications of the iPad without much effort. My guess is that this not such an iPad issue as it is a teacher/leadership issue.

Let’s talk about the teachers first. To be fair, I only walked in a couple of classrooms for 5 minutes or so at a time. Such a snapshot is not a good representative sample of what actually goes on in a classroom. With that said, many of the teachers were sitting behind their desks--that’s a no-no in a one-to-one environment. In my perusal of the classroom I saw several students off-task--some desperately trying to close out an application before I came close (panic in a sophomore is easy to spot). Of the 7 classrooms I visited, 2 had teachers engaging the class. One of them was doing a brilliant job of incorporating the Pad as a part of the ongoing classroom discussion. In another classroom some of the students were working on iPad projects but they had no defined workflow. When I asked the student how the teacher was going to collect the project (a simple research report with pictures), she didn’t know. When I prodded her and asked about turning in the work via Evernote, Edmodo, or Dropbox, the student thought the teacher was going to come around and check the iPad screen—I was so shocked I didn’t know how to comment.

After doing a bit of reflection on the poor showing in the classroom, I think the teachers are only partially to blame; the root is a lack of leadership at the administrative level. In my several hour discussion with the principal, assistant principal, tech coordinator, and several teachers, the administration wanted the iPad to be a tool in the classroom that teachers could use if they felt comfortable. It’s my experience that very little will change this way. Unless the expectation is that teachers will use this as a primary tool in the classroom, business as usual will continue to happen. If I’m already comfortable with how I teach and my students are reasonably successful, why would I substantially change my classroom?

When asked about standardized test scores, they gladly said there was no change. They had expected a dip due to a new process but were pleasantly surprised. Granted, it may be too early to tell but I think the lack of change in test scores may result from not substantially changing anything. The students have iPads but the school has not changed how learning happens in the classroom. The iPads I saw were simply really expensive notebooks/textbooks.

We also asked a question in every class we visited and with most students we talked to—we asked about whether they, the students, would prefer iPads or laptops. Every student, save for one, said they would rather have a laptop. Contrary to our notions that students won’t miss the keyboards, they do in fact miss them terribly. Apparently, after the new shiny toy syndrome wore off, the students wanted to be able to do more with the iPad than they currently could. They missed multi-tasking; they missed flash video; they missed a word processor and presentation tool that had depth to them. I didn’t expect this at all. I thought the kids would love the iPads; I was wrong.

I do wonder about whether this will change as the school continues to dig in. Granted, they are only in their second year, but if the next two years go like the first two I wouldn’t pass another bond for technology if I were in that community.

I’m going to skip over some of the obvious neglect from the tech department (wireless MDM, printing, etc) and point out some legal problems with what I saw. According to the students and administration, many of the teachers scan in their textbooks and create pdf versions for their students. The thinking goes something like this: we own textbooks for every student so it’s no big deal if we create an electronic copy for our students. My understanding of the situation is that it is a very big deal. I talked to a friend of mine who was a lawyer and is now in the education publishing field. She relates:
“Unless the school purchased a digit license along with the hard books this is a blatant copyright violation. My family's business is education publishing and we encounter this type of issue a lot. It really hurts everyone in the whole scope of the education process. We have pursued legal action in some cases. You may want to let the offender know.”
To make matters worse, the teachers are posting the pirated pdf books on the web—no password required for access. Some may rationalize this behavior by talking about how the textbook publishing industry needs to change. I agree, charging $15 per year for a high school textbook is outrageous (I pay about $60 for my math texts and use them for at least 10 years). Whether or not we like the current state of the education publishing industry, what the school is doing is illegal. If they get sued, I’m guessing it will be for several million in damages.

After some reflection, I think my disappointment stems from seeing tech integration done well. Holland Christian is a perfect example of this. When we visited Holland Christian’s campus, we were in awe. It was obvious they had a vision for who they wanted their students to be and what they wanted them to do. Once the vision was cast, technology was adopted which fit the vision—not the other way around. After touring this still-unnamed-district, I saw the harm lack of vision can do. This district thought technology was important (rightly so) and gave it to their teachers and students saying, “use it however you feel comfortable.” In my opinion, they’ve wasted lots and lots of taxpayer money.

I’m determined to learn this lesson well. It is time to take a step back and clarify our vision for education at Northern Michigan Christian School. What do we want? What do we not want? Technology is only useful when it serves the educational vision of the school.